<!-- mobian-agent-page publisher="time" canonical="https://time.com/science/feed/" -->

---
title: TIME
---

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>TIMEhttps://time.com/<!\[CDATA\[Breaking news and analysis from TIME.com. Politics, world news, photos, video, tech reviews, health, science and entertainment news.\]\]>Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:23:10 +0000en-UShourly1<!\[CDATA\[What to Say to Someone With Terrible Table Manners\]\]>https://time.com/article/2026/08/19/how-to-address-bad-table-manners/<!\[CDATA\[Health\]\]><!\[CDATA\[How to say 'Please chew with your mouth closed' without putting your foot in yours.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Photo-Illustration by TIME (Source Image: Liudmila Chernetska—Getty Images)\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltc60c3ddb147e7f82/6a836e503d34b529312c4292/Terrible_Table_Manners.png?branch=production)

 —Photo-Illustration by TIME (Source Image: Liudmila Chernetska—Getty Images)

At one of their first dinners together, Lindsey Hall watched the man she was [dating](https://time.com/article/2026/04/17/modern-dating-is-making-us-less-secure/) take enormous bites, talk with his mouth full, and—horror of horrors—burp loudly without seeming to register it. The evening was supposed to feel romantic. Instead, Hall remembers thinking: _“Have I made a mistake?”_

She tried to dismiss his behavior as a minor incompatibility. But it continued, meal after meal, and gradually soured her feelings and [attraction](https://time.com/4280521/what-causes-attraction/) toward him. Table manners had never seemed like a priority until then. “I didn’t realize how important it was to me until I dated someone who just … doesn’t have it,” Hall says.

Terrible table manners might sound like a trivial complaint. But eating is one of the most routine things we do with other people, and a habit that inspires disgust three times a day can quickly become difficult to shrug off. The challenge is figuring out whether—and how—to address bad dining habits without making the person feel humiliated.

Here’s what psychologists and etiquette experts suggest.

## **First, consider whether the behavior is actually rude**

Table manners can feel like universal rules, but they’re shaped by culture, family, and upbringing. “We talk about them as though they’re laws of physics,” says Gwenhwyfar Dunne-Henry, a psychologist in Dubai and author of _Unbind Me: How to Break the Rules That Keep You Small_. “They’re not. They’re social agreements.”

Before correcting someone, think about whether they’re being inconsiderate or simply behaving differently from the way you were taught. [Slurping noodles](https://www.japan.travel/en/guide/understanding-and-mastering-japanese-manners-and-etiquette/), eating with your hands, and keeping your elbows on the table, for example, can carry different meanings depending on where and how someone grew up.

That doesn’t mean you have to enjoy every habit you encounter. Talking while chewing, spraying food, or sharing utensils while sick can interfere with other people’s comfort or hygiene, says Virginia Chow, a clinical psychologist in Montreal. The point is to understand exactly what’s bothering you—and avoid turning a difference in upbringing into a judgment about someone’s character.

That’s especially important because people rarely react only to the offending behavior. “We argue about what we think it means,” Dunne-Henry says. Someone chews with their mouth open, and you might start thinking they’re selfish, oblivious, or disrespectful. “If they don’t notice this,” she says, “what else don’t they notice?”

Sometimes the habit also becomes a symbol of every other irritation in the relationship. Perhaps the person also interrupts you, leaves messes behind, and routinely takes the last helping without asking. Suddenly, as Dunne-Henry puts it, “the bread roll is carrying a lot of emotional responsibility.”

Hall experienced that escalation firsthand. Once her former partner’s table manners began bothering her, she started noticing every other habit that irritated her. “I think you just start becoming hypercritical,” she says—a reaction she disliked in herself. 

## **Decide whether it’s your place to say something**

Correcting another adult’s table manners is inherently awkward, so Stayce Wagner, a business-etiquette consultant in Jacksonville, Fla., recommends letting an isolated lapse go. Everyone occasionally speaks before swallowing or reaches all the way across the table for something. A repeated habit is different—but even then, your relationship with the person matters most.

A partner or child is one thing. A close relative or trusted friend might also appreciate knowing, particularly if you have the kind of relationship in which you would alert each other to spinach in your teeth. But correcting an acquaintance, coworker, or stranger is rarely worth the embarrassment it could cause.

“Correcting the terrible table manners of someone who isn’t your partner—or your child—is social and relationship dynamite,” Wagner says. Most people ultimately decide whether they can tolerate the habit, find a way around it, or stop sharing meals with the person.

Chow suggests asking yourself whether the behavior is truly affecting you or merely annoying you. “Not every annoyance requires a conversation,” she says. With a stranger, speaking up generally only makes sense when there’s a legitimate health or safety concern—someone who is visibly sick using a shared serving utensil, for example. In that case, focus on solving the immediate problem rather than critiquing their manners: “Would you mind using a clean serving spoon? I’d really appreciate it.”

## **Bring it up away from the table**

If you do decide to say something, resist correcting the person in the moment—particularly if other people are present. “It’s a soul-crushing experience for most people to have their manners corrected in public,” Wagner says.

Instead, choose a private, neutral moment when neither of you is eating. Ask permission to broach an uncomfortable subject, and then describe one specific behavior. Avoid sweeping declarations like “Your table manners are disgusting” or “You eat like an animal.” Those statements turn a changeable habit into an indictment of the entire person.

Chow suggests phrasing it like this: “Can I mention something a little awkward? I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but sometimes when you’re talking while eating, a bit of food comes out. I figured you’d probably want to know because I’d want someone to tell me.”

That wording assumes the person isn’t doing it intentionally and gives them a face-saving reason to hear you out: You’re sharing information they might want to have, not delivering a verdict on their upbringing.

When the habit is directly affecting your ability to enjoy meals together, Wagner recommends being honest about it—without describing the person as repulsive. Try: “I know you don’t realize it, but sometimes you talk with food in your mouth, and I find it affects my ability to enjoy the meal. Would you be open to me pointing it out when it happens?”

The distinction is small but important: You’re explaining how the behavior affects you, rather than insisting that your standards are objectively correct.

Hall says she wishes she had been that straightforward. At first, she tried making jokes or telling her partner that she couldn’t understand him while his mouth was full—an approach she now suspects sounded passive-aggressive. “I wish I had been a little bit more direct about how much it was affecting my attraction,” she says. 

## **Agree on how you’ll handle it next time**

Table manners are habits, which means one conversation probably won’t make a lifelong behavior disappear. If the person is receptive, ask how they’d like you to alert them if it happens again. You might agree on a word, gesture, or subtle signal that won’t embarrass them in front of other people.

In less intimate relationships, Wagner recommends finding subtle, polite ways to avoid encouraging the behavior. If someone begins answering a question immediately after taking a bite, for example, you could say: “Take your time and enjoy your food—I can wait.”

What’s unlikely to help, meanwhile, is glaring, recoiling, kicking someone under the table, or making snide remarks. “Jokes, [sarcasm](https://time.com/article/2026/03/09/when-sarcasm-works-and-backfires/), public corrections, or visibly expressing disgust probably won’t change the behavior in the long run,” Wagner says. “But it will damage the relationship.”

Even the most tactful conversation might embarrass the person; there’s no magic phrase that makes criticism delightful to receive. “The goal is to not intentionally embarrass or insult them,” Wagner says.

## **Know when to adapt instead**

Sometimes the kindest and easiest choice is to work around the behavior. Wagner has encountered friends and colleagues who double-dipped, for example, but she never corrected them. She simply ordered her own appetizer or transferred what she wanted to a separate plate before they began eating. The behavior bothered her, but she decided the relationships mattered more.

That calculus changes when the offender is a partner and the habit makes you dread eating together. If you’ve raised the issue respectfully and the person repeatedly dismisses your discomfort, the problem may no longer be their chewing. It may be that you don’t feel heard or considered—and that’s a larger conversation.

That, Hall says, was ultimately the problem in her relationship. Her partner didn’t merely struggle to change an ingrained habit; he dismissed her concern as evidence that she was too demanding. “He didn’t really value how I felt about it,” she says.

Etiquette, after all, isn’t really about mastering a complicated rulebook. Instead of tallying another person’s violations, Dunne-Henry suggests asking yourself a simpler question: “How easy am I to share a meal with?” That standard applies to everyone at the table. It means extending some grace when another person’s habits annoy you—and caring enough to listen when someone you love tells you that one of yours is making meals difficult. 

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt64ee811a116053abWed, 19 Aug 2026 14:08:48 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Angela Haupt\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Promising Results for mRNA Cancer Vaccine from Moderna and Merck\]\]>https://time.com/article/2026/08/19/mrna-cancer-vaccine-moderna-merck/<!\[CDATA\[Combining a vaccine and immunotherapy approach could open new ways to treat cancer.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Boston Globe / Contributor—Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Moderna headquarters in Cambridge, Mass.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt5f050bf3bb899e92/6a85a1275989497931cf9252/GettyImages-2219723511.jpg?branch=production)

Moderna headquarters in Cambridge, Mass. —Boston Globe / Contributor—Getty Images

Cancer treatments have been veering toward more personalized approaches that recruit the immune system, and the latest results involving an [mRNA](https://time.com/7309755/cutting-mrna-research-deadly-mistake/)\-based therapy from [Moderna](https://time.com/collections/time100-companies-2022/6159456/moderna-innovators/) and an immunotherapy from [Merck](https://time.com/collections/genius-companies-2018/5412667/merck/) show that combining them may result in significant benefit for certain cancer patients. 

In a [release](https://news.modernatx.com/merck-and-moderna-announce-phase-3-interpath-001-trial-of-intismeran-plus-keytruda-met-endpoints-of-rfs-and-dmfs-in-melanoma), the two companies report that people with melanoma who received Moderna’s therapy, intismeran, and Merck’s pembrolizumab (Keytruda), lived longer without any recurrence of their cancer, as well as had fewer incidences of their cancer spreading, compared to those receiving Keytruda alone, which is the current standard treatment. Combining the two therapies seems to lead to better outcomes in this later-stage trial. Moderna’s intismeran is not yet approved, while Merck’s Keytruda was first approved to treat melanoma in 2014, and in 2019 to treat melanoma in people after tumors were removed. The current study included people in this latter group with stage 2 to stage 4 melanoma who were treated with either intismeran and Keytruda or Keytruda alone after surgeons removed the bulk of their tumors.

“What we’re trying to do here is to tell the immune system that it missed the signature of the tumor cell if you have cancer,” Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel tells TIME of intismeran. “This product basically allows us to teach the immune system about the mutation in your cancer that allows the cancer to grow.”

The study involved 1,137 people with stage 2 to stage 4 melanoma who received surgery then were randomly assigned to receive either the combination of therapies or Keytruda for just over a year. Intismeran is the first of its kind autogene therapy that relies on studying a patient’s cancer mutations, making mRNA sequences of those mutations and giving them back to the patient in so their immune systems can recognize the tumor signals in the same way it would a virus—in what's known as a therapeutic vaccine. One of the advantages of the mRNA platform is its ability to generate such genetic sequences relatively quickly, in a matter of weeks, which is essential for scaling up more personalized cancer treatment approaches. Keytruda works by unveiling the cancer cells, which can often hide from the immune system since they start out as normal cells before picking up mutations that make them grow out of control.

The companies did not provide specific details about the recurrence or survival rates, but earlier this year [reported](https://www.modernatx.com/recapping-moderna-asco-oral-presentation) at ASCO, a major cancer conference, from an earlier stage study that showed that the combination lowered the risk of recurring melanoma by 49% and lowered the risk of distant spread of the cancer or death by 59%. 

The latest results bring some good news to Moderna, which has seen its stock drop after reaching highs during the COVID pandemic following development of the first mRNA vaccine, against SARS-CoV-2\. In 2025, Bancel [laid off 10% of the workforce](https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/moderna-layoffs-restructuring-expense-cuts-vaccine-sales/756415/), amounting to 500 to 800 employees worldwide, after a combination of sagging sales from the COVID shot and [loss of important government contracts](https://www.statnews.com/2025/05/28/moderna-flu-vaccine-development-cancelled-by-hhs-mrna-platform-offers-speedy-pandemic-response/) to develop pandemic flu vaccinesbased on mRNA technology. In August, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [approved the first mRNA flu shot,](https://time.com/article/2026/08/06/fda-approves-first-mrna-flu-vaccine/) developed by Moderna, but only after initially refusing to review the company’s submission. 

Bancel says that Moderna is also exploring using intismeran alone, perhaps in earlier stage cancers. For the current trial, because intismeran is still an experimental therapy under study, and an approved therapy, Keytruda, does exist for melanoma patients, regulators at the FDA were more comfortable with combining the drugsso every patient received at least the standard of care and therefore would not be additionally harmed by joining the study. “It would be unethical for us to tell people to come on a study of something that we don’t know if it works, when people are fighting for their lives,” he says. “That’s why we did the study together with Keytruda, which can improve outcomes, and we tried to show that the combination was better, and we did.”

Bancel’s teams are already studying intismeran in stage 1 lung cancer, to see if using it earlier, and priming the immune system, can lead to equally beneficial outcomes for those people. In lung cancer, standard treatment involves surgery and careful monitoring for any signs of returning cancer, so doctors can ethically study how adding intismeran for some patients affects their cancer outcomes compared to those not receiving it. While that study is still in early stages, Bancel is optimistic since “from a scientific standpoint there is no scientific sense that it would work in melanoma and not work in another tumor type,” he says of the mRNA-based approach.“I think it will be transformational. Think about if you get a screening X-ray and find stage 1 lung cancer. Then you get intismeran, which is like a vaccine so you have no severe toxicity like with other immunotherapy. Think about getting this product on your way to work, or even \[potentially\] at your local pharmacy—that would bean incredible change in care. And it can help reduce the risk of metastasis, and have a profound impact on patients, as well as prevent people from getting very severe disease.”

Moderna is also studying intismeran in stage 3 lung cancer, and hoping to see similarly encouraging results as they did in melanoma patients. And its scientists are studying the compound in kidney, pancreas, and bladder cancers in nine ongoing studies, says Bancel. 

“Because of all the things we learned over the years in the field of immunology, we believe this molecule will be used in many different cancer types,” he says. 

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt9b6e323eec990c89Wed, 19 Aug 2026 13:49:37 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Alice Park\]\]><!\[CDATA\[What to Know About the Pentagon’s Crackdown on Universities’ Foreign Research Ties\]\]>https://time.com/article/2026/08/19/higher-education-universities-china-research-defense-department-harvard-mit/<!\[CDATA\[U.S.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Harvard and MIT were reportedly among the universities ordered to review and terminate “problematic” ties to foreign institutions or risk losing funding.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Adek Berry—AFP/Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[The Chinese national flag is pictured at half mast to mourn the death of China's former premier Zhu Rongji at the Red Building of Peking University, the site of early Chinese Communist Party revolutionary activities, in Beijing on Aug. 18, 2026.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt33667410cb241cd3/6a858960cfe050cba2b213dc/china_university.jpg?branch=production)

The Chinese national flag is pictured at half mast to mourn the death of China's former premier Zhu Rongji at the Red Building of Peking University, the site of early Chinese Communist Party revolutionary activities, in Beijing on Aug. 18, 2026\. —Adek Berry—AFP/Getty Images

The Trump Administration ordered 30 universities to audit their foreign research partnerships or risk losing funding.

The [order](https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4575019/department-of-war-orders-research-security-audits-at-30-academic-institutions/), issued Monday by the Defense Department, instructs universities to review their ties to 130 foreign institutions, mainly Chinese, that “engage in activities that increase the likelihood of U.S. government-funded research and development efforts being misappropriated.” Schools that fail to terminate any “problematic” partnerships within two weeks may lose their eligibility for future federal research funding.

The order is intended to protect taxpayer-funded research from “unauthorized technology transfer, intellectual property theft and adversarial exploitation,” the Pentagon said in the announcement.

“The Department of War has zero tolerance for academic partnerships that compromise our national security,” Emil Michael, undersecretary of war for research and engineering, said.

The announcement did not identify which schools had received the order or how they were selected, but a U.S. official told the [Associated Press](https://apnews.com/article/pentagon-audit-china-harvard-mit-738832f9f20186dc5f9ef1aa39914636) on Tuesday that they include Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Johns Hopkins University.

The order is the latest effort to clamp down on alleged Chinese influence in the U.S., including in higher education. The Trump Administration and several lawmakers from both parties have argued that China exploits U.S.-funded research to obtain sensitive technology and intellectual property.

U.S. concerns about Chinese intellectual property theft and espionage have grown in recent years. Last year, a federal jury [convicted former Corning scientist Ji Wang](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/fiber-laser-expert-convicted-federal-jury-economic-espionage-and-theft-trade-secrets) of stealing files containing trade secrets from a Pentagon-funded project. Prosecutors said he planned to use the technology in a Chinese business backed by government entities. In May, Eileen Wang, the mayor of Arcadia, Calif., [resigned after admitting to acting as an unregistered Chinese government agent](https://time.com/article/2026/05/12/arcadia-california-mayor-eileen-wang-agent-china/) before taking office.

But some observers have warned that the crackdown unfairly politicizes academic collaboration, stigmatizes Chinese academics, and could weaken American scientific competitiveness.

The Chinese embassy in Washington said in a statement to news outlets that it opposed “the overstretching of the concept of national security and the politicisation or instrumentalisation of normal scientific, educational and academic exchanges.”

“The U.S. side should abandon the Cold War mentality and foster an open, fair and non-discriminatory environment for educational, scientific and people-to-people exchanges between China and the United States,” it added.

Here’s what to know about the raft of policies aimed at curbing institutional ties to China.

## Order targets primarily Chinese institutions

The foreign institutions the U.S. seeks to blacklist were [identified by the Pentagon](https://www.war.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4553101/the-department-of-war-releases-updated-list-of-foreign-institutions-engaging-in/) last month. Eighty-eight of the 130 institutions are in mainland China, while the remaining institutions are in Russia and Iran. The list has been updated annually since an earlier version was first released in 2023\. It was established under Section 1286 of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act, which was enacted during President Donald Trump’s first term.

While some Chinese universities on the list have more explicit ties to the military, others are prominent civilian institutions with extensive international research partnerships. These include Fudan University and Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The updated list also added a number of other Chinese institutions with varying links to China’s defense and security establishment, including Shandong University, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Shenyang Aerospace University, and the University of International Relations.

People familiar with Chinese academic institutions [previously told TIME](https://time.com/7289945/us-china-trump-rubio-international-student-visa-restrictions-trade-negotiations/) that Chinese Communist Party structures are embedded throughout the country’s universities, making institutional links to the government common, even though individual students or researchers may not be engaged in political or military work.

The Pentagon also instructed universities to audit collaborations with organizations associated with “rebranded Confucius Institutes.” [Confucius Institutes](https://time.com/4147284/china-soft-power-scmp-pu-zhiqiang-human-rights/) are non-profit language and cultural programs funded by the Chinese government and hosted in universities around the world. Launched in 2004, there were at one time more than 100 Confucius Institutes operating on U.S. college campuses. But most U.S. programs closed after 2019 amid [congressional scrutiny](https://time.com/5540703/senate-report-confucius-institute-us-universities-chinese/) and federal funding restrictions. By late 2023, there were fewer than five active Confucius Institutes in the U.S.

Many universities, however, retained partnerships with their former Chinese partner institutions or established successor language and cultural programs under different names. Critics characterized some of these arrangements, particularly those that continued to receive Chinese funding or instructors, as “rebranded Confucius Institutes.” Of 74 former Confucius Institute hosts [surveyed by the Government Accountability Office](https://www.gao.gov/assets/d24105981.pdf) in 2023, 43 said they maintained ties to their former Chinese partner institutions. Nine reported receiving continued funding or other support for programming from those institutions, although eight of the nine said the partnerships predated their Confucius Institutes.

## Crackdown on broader Chinese ties

The Trump Administration has [pursued a slate of policies](https://time.com/7302310/china-us-global-university-rankings-trump-higher-education/) that build on Trump’s first-term “China Initiative.” These have included [tighter scrutiny](https://time.com/article/2026/05/12/us-university-higher-education-international-students-asia-trump-immigration-visa/) of universities’ foreign funding and research partnerships and restrictions on collaborations with blacklisted Chinese institutions. The Trump Administration has also [increased vetting](https://time.com/7289945/us-china-trump-rubio-international-student-visa-restrictions-trade-negotiations/) of Chinese student visa applicants, [threatened visa revocations](https://time.com/7312901/chinese-students-visas-duration-policy-trump-crackdown-national-security-immigration/) for some students, and renewed investigations of China-linked researchers.

Since last year, the Pentagon has prohibited funding fundamental research projects conducted in collaboration with a listed foreign institution or its employees. The policy was expanded in March to bar the use of equipment from listed entities in certain Pentagon-funded projects.

Meanwhile, China has [sought to bring in more](https://time.com/7301187/china-visa-free-travel-countries-tourism-us-trump-isolation-economy/) foreign talent and investment, including by seeking to attract [more international students](https://time.com/7288747/trump-harvard-international-students-transfer-universities-asia-hong-kong-japan/) to its universities and exchange programs, and by [introducing a K visa](https://time.com/7322223/china-k-visa-tech-stem-immigration-h1b-fee-trump-explainer/) for young foreign STEM professionals.

Dozens of Chinese tenure-track scholars have [left U.S. universities for China](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/11/05/china-brain-gain-united-states-scientists/) over the past year.

Days before the latest announcement, the Republican-led House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and the House Education and Workforce Committee [released a report](https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/harvard%5Ffinal%5Freport.pdf) accusing Harvard of [failing to adequately screen](https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=413682) its relationships with Chinese institutions linked to the People’s Liberation Army and China’s defense industry. The investigation said it identified more than 140 publications co-authored by Harvard-affiliated researchers and scholars at certain Chinese defense-linked civilian universities.

Harvard [disputed](https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2026/8/18/house-republicans-harvard-china-report/) the report’s “mischaracterizations,” and said it follows federal national security standards.

The changes also come as the U.S. seeks to maintain its lead over China in the global AI race. A 2025 report [warned that major AI data centers in the U.S.](https://time.com/7279123/ai-datacenter-superintelligence-china-trump-report/) were vulnerable to Chinese espionage, sabotage, and intellectual property theft.

In July, the Administration [recommended redirecting](https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Science-A-New-Golden-Age.pdf) potentially billions of dollars of federal research funding from universities toward individual scientists and AI-focused projects as part of an effort to counter Chinese scientific advances.

Last week, [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-tell-partners-they-must-pick-sides-ai-race-with-china-2026-08-14/) also reported that the Administration was preparing to tell 35 partner countries that participation in [Pax Silica](https://www.state.gov/pax-silica)—a U.S.-led initiative to strengthen supply chains for semiconductors, critical minerals, and AI infrastructure—was conditioned on their refusal to join China’s rival AI framework. The reported demand appeared in an internal draft and has not been formally issued.

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt39cafc9112709affWed, 19 Aug 2026 11:00:00 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Miranda Jeyaretnam\]\]><!\[CDATA\[How to Recover From an Embarrassing Faux Pas\]\]>https://time.com/article/2026/08/19/how-to-recover-after-faux-pas/<!\[CDATA\[Health\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Put your foot in your mouth? Here’s how to take it out without making things even more awkward.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Photo-Illustration by TIME (Source Image: monkeybusinessimages/Getty Images)\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blte5e77a05cfe1bd21/6a836aa059894930fbcf4531/How_to_Recover_From_an_Embarrassing_Faux_Pas.png?branch=production)

 —Photo-Illustration by TIME (Source Image: monkeybusinessimages/Getty Images)

Lizzie Post still remembers the time she walked into a party and an acquaintance [greeted](https://time.com/article/2026/04/13/boring-small-talk-is-enjoyable-study/) her with exciting news: “You had a baby!”

“Nope,” Post said.

“You got engaged!”

Nope again.

“You got married!”

“I’m going to the bar,” Post replied.

Post, co-president of the[ Emily Post Institute](https://emilypost.com/) and Emily Post’s great-great-granddaughter, knew the woman meant well. She had apparently heard that something momentous had happened—it hadn’t—and cycled through three incorrect milestones trying to identify it. Fortunately, she eventually stopped guessing: a relief for everyone involved.

Life is full of faux pas, but even when you’re the one making it, you can dig your way out of social quicksand most of the time. Here’s what psychologists and etiquette experts suggest saying, plus when to stop talking.

## **First, take your foot out of your mouth**

Your immediate reaction after saying something you regret might be to turn fire-truck red. Then comes the urge to reach for the very thing that got you into trouble in the first place: more words. People often try to explain, defend, or excuse their misfired remark, says Karina Schumann, a social psychologist and associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh who studies apologies and conflict resolution. The instinct is self-protective: They’re frantically trying to repair their image in the other person’s eyes.

“What actual repair looks like is to shift the attention to the other person,” Schumann says. “Put aside this very strong need that you have to repair your self-image, and instead think: ‘If I were on the receiving end of this, what would I need to hear?’” 

Pause, acknowledge the impact of what you said, and take responsibility. She suggests phrasing it like this: “I’m sorry. I shouldn’t have assumed.” Or: “I can see that my joke was insensitive. I [apologize](https://time.com/6264614/how-to-apologize-health-benefits/).” 

Then take a breath. More words will still be available later, should the situation require them.

## **Match the apology to the offense**

A minor blunder and a painful faux pas shouldn’t trigger matching productions of remorse. [Forget an acquaintance’s name](https://time.com/7287212/7-things-to-say-when-you-forget-someones-name/)? A quick “I’m sorry—please remind me” may be enough. Ask when someone is due when she isn’t pregnant, or make a joke that accidentally lands on a painful subject? That calls for a direct acknowledgment of the harm, without trying to laugh it off, and perhaps a longer conversation if the other person wants one.

The person responsible isn’t always the best judge of what it will take to repair the situation. Schumann points to a phenomenon researchers call the “[magnitude gap](https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.994)”: People who cause harm tend to view it as less severe and less damaging to the relationship than the people on the receiving end do. The offender may think, _I apologized; this should be over._ The other person may still be wondering how the offender could fail to understand how much it hurt. 

## **Don’t turn an apology into an autobiography**

An apology doesn’t require an origin story, a director’s commentary, or a guided tour of everything happening inside the offender’s head.

“Blame is like a hot potato,” says Jennifer Thomas, a psychologist and co-author of[ _The 5 Apology Languages: The Secret to Healthy Relationships_](https://www.amazon.com/Apology-Languages-Secret-Healthy-Relationships/dp/080242869X). Defensive responses—including “I was only joking,” “I didn’t mean it that way,” and “Why did you take it so personally?”—toss it back to the injured person. They minimize the harm, gloss over the offender’s intentions, or suggest the other person is simply too sensitive. 

An explanation can sometimes make what happened easier to understand, Schumann says, but it has to provide context without weakening responsibility. Lead with: “I shouldn’t have done that. There’s no excuse for it.” Then ask whether an explanation would be helpful.

A digital faux pas calls for the same restraint. If you send a text to the wrong person with information you wouldn’t have divulged to them otherwise, Post suggests writing: “I’m so sorry. Clearly that text wasn’t meant for you—and I probably shouldn’t have been sending it anyway.” Then leave it at that.

## **Resist the apology encore**

For a minor, accidental blunder—maybe you stuck your toe in your mouth instead of your whole foot—one sincere apology is generally enough. “The more you apologize, the more it’s about you,” Post says. That means no apology cookies, no anguished message the following morning, and no campaign to extract an official declaration that everything is fine.

Serious harm is different. Schumann cautions against treating every apology as a “one-shot thing,” as though finding the perfect words should settle the matter. The other person may need a longer conversation, an effort to make amends, or simply more time.

“The timing of any forgiveness should stay wholly in the hands of the person who was hurt,” Thomas says. An apology offers them a choice, not a deadline.

What if you don’t realize you made a faux pas until hours or days later? It’s usually better to address it than hope the other person forgot, therapist Elika Dadsetan-Foley says. Try: “I’ve been thinking about what I said yesterday. I realize it may have been insulting, and I’m sorry I didn’t recognize that in the moment.”

## **The next time you meet, act normal**

The next time you run into the neighbor you assumed was sick but who had merely gone makeup-free, or the acquaintance who received a text that was definitely _not_ meant for them, offer a friendly greeting. Avoiding the person can make one uncomfortable exchange feel like a permanent rupture; bringing it up again can give a dying embarrassment fresh oxygen.

Keep the story to yourself, rather than retelling it as evidence of what a hopeless fool you are. “You may think that’s you throwing yourself under the bus, but you’re dragging the other person with you,” Post says. Your self-deprecation may get a laugh, but it also makes the other person’s embarrassment public.

Fortunately, most faux pas don’t require a lifelong of self-flagellation. If you’ve apologized sincerely and the other person seems ready to move on, follow their lead. “We all get stuff wrong from time to time,” Post says. Sometimes recovering gracefully means making amends. Other times, it means saying sorry—and letting everyone get on with the party.

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltd1250196cbb45956Wed, 19 Aug 2026 10:00:04 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Angela Haupt\]\]><!\[CDATA\[20 Years After Virginia Tech, We Can Do More to Keep Students Safe\]\]>https://time.com/article/2026/08/19/20-years-after-virginia-tech-we-can-do-more-to-keep-students-safe/<!\[CDATA\[Ideas\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Hope is not a policy, writes Joseph Samaha. We must match our back-to-school hopes with uncompromising action.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Tim Sloan—AFP via Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Students honor the victims of the massacre at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Va on April 20, 2006.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blta23c95b41cb3d7a1/6a7f5ae5854fd31f4d5b3cc0/virginia-tech-shooting.jpg?branch=production)

Students honor the victims of the massacre at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Va on April 20, 2006\. —Tim Sloan—AFP via Getty Images

Every August, our country celebrates new beginnings. Families fill cars with bedding, desk lamps, laptops, notebooks, and high hopes. Students decorate dorm rooms and imagine the people they will become, while parents drive away with a mix of beaming pride and quiet, heavy lumps in their throats. 

Every August, I go back to 2006\. 

Twenty years ago this fall, I helped my daughter, Reema, begin her freshman year at Virginia Tech. I remember believing she had her whole life ahead of her. Like every parent, I assumed the biggest challenges she would face would be exams, homesickness, and choosing a major. 

My family could never have imagined that eight months later, she would be among the [32 people killed in her classroom](https://time.com/archive/6680784/darkness-falls/) on April 16, 2007, coming home in a mortuary van. 

In the years since, mass [violence](https://time.com/7285626/gun-violence-prevention-essay/) has become a recurring nightmare in American life. Yet every August, millions of parents still make that same drive, entrusting their children to colleges and universities across the country. No parent should have to make that journey wondering whether their child will come home safely. 

We have learned a great deal since 2007\. We know more about recognizing warning signs, responding to mental health crises, and building stronger safety protocols on campus. We know more about what [proactive prevention](https://time.com/6184653/mass-shootings-america-how-to-stop/) requires. The problem is that knowing what works and consistently doing it are two different things. 

As another academic year begins, we cannot rely on prayers or goodwill to keep our students safe. While most colleges and universities spend phenomenal budgets emphasizing sports, campus events, and academics, parents need to ask the most important question: how safe is my child? We need sustained, measurable, and accountable action from lawmakers, university leaders, and citizens. 

First, campus safety cannot remain reactive. Every college president and administrator will tell you that student safety is a top priority. But a pledge to safety is not enough. Colleges should be able to demonstrate, through regular and rigorous self-assessment, where their vulnerabilities are and what they are doing to address them. 

Every single college and university should be using the [32 National Campus Safety Initiative](https://www.vtvcare.org/32-ncsi), or 32NCSI. Through the[ VTV Family Outreach Foundation](https://www.vtvcare.org/foundation), in partnership with [NASPA](https://www.naspa.org/project/32-ncsi) (Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education), we launched this campus safety tool in memory of the 32 people killed at Virginia Tech. It gives colleges a framework for assessing critical areas of campus safety and infrastructure, including threat assessment teams, emergency communications, mental health services, and physical security.

The tools exist. The question is whether we are using them consistently, and whether we are holding ourselves accountable. 

Second, campus safety cannot begin when a student arrives at college. It must begin years earlier. Every elementary, middle, and high school should have access to evidence-based programs that help educators and school resource officers recognize concerns, build positive relationships, and address problems before they escalate. 

One such model is [Preventing Problems by Promoting Positive Practices](https://www.promotingpositivepractices.org/), or P5, developed by the [Virginia Tech Center for Applied Behavior Systems](https://support.psyc.vt.edu/centers/cabs) with support from the U.S. Department of Justice’s COPS Office, and in conjunction with VTV Family Outreach Foundation. P5 provides a comprehensive safety model and training program for K-12 school resource officers and administrators to create a safety net for students when they are in the yellow zone, prior to entering into the red zone. Simply put, it creates a culture of caring. 

Finally, we need to restore national infrastructure for campus safety. The [National Center for Campus Public Safety](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/09/06/national-center-campus-public-safety-will-centralize-federal-institutional-resources) was established in 2013 to conduct research, develop best practices, and provide campus security training. Its federal support [eventually lapsed](https://www.campussafetymagazine.com/news/dont-let-congress-forget-about-the-national-center-for-campus-public-safety/53752) after funding allocations ran out, and the federal government no longer maintains the Center as the sustained national resource it was created to provide. While [archived federal documents](https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nccps-key-accomplishments-july-1-2014-march-31-2019) and reports remain available through the Office of Justice Programs Virtual Library, an active national center is no longer doing the work it was created to do. This needs to change.

In 2026, there is no reason to wait for another warning sign, another missed opportunity, or another family to experience an unimaginable loss. When I watch parents drop off their freshmen this month, I do not want them to live in fear. Hope is a vital part of entering college, and every student deserves to experience the wonder of a new beginning. 

But hope is not a policy. If we truly want to honor the memory of Reema and the countless others lost to mass violence, we must match our back-to-school hopes with uncompromising action. 

Twenty years after I helped my daughter move into Virginia Tech, every parent should be able to drive away from a college campus believing their child has a whole life ahead of them. That belief should not be a matter of faith. It should be a matter of policy.

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltab3e42bd46003b5dWed, 19 Aug 2026 10:00:04 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Joseph Samaha\]\]><!\[CDATA\[The CEO Moment: Pfizer’s Albert Bourla\]\]>https://time.com/collection/the-ceo-moment/2026/pfizer-albert-bourla/<!\[CDATA\[Business\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Post-COVID, the pharmaceutical giant has sought out new avenues of success with cancer-treatment drugs.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[TIME Video\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla on his career and the company's push to develop cancer treatments.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

TIME Video

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt5f5109b303131326Tue, 18 Aug 2026 16:51:00 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Sam Jacobs\]\]><!\[CDATA\[America's Top Venture Capital Firms of 2026\]\]>https://time.com/article/2026/08/12/americas-top-venture-capital-firms-2026/<!\[CDATA\[Photo-illustration by TIME; Lari Bat/Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt620f14e507b1cbb2/6a83adcf954dea8f768f3853/America_s-Top-Venture-Capital-Firms-2026.jpg?branch=production)

 —Photo-illustration by TIME; Lari Bat/Getty Images

The U.S. venture capital industry is one of the most impressive economic growth engines this country has. Seven of the top ten companies by market capitalization today were VC-backed when they were young, innovative, and very risky. My research with Will Gornall shows that companies that received VC funding and subsequently went public now account for nearly half of the U.S. market capitalization and 94% of R&D spending among all public companies founded in the last 50 years. Today, global VC assets under management stand at nearly $3.5 trillion, spread across more than 11,000 institutional VC firms. Those firms have backed a quarter of a million companies, including almost 4,000 unicorns.

Yet the industry remains shrouded in mystery. Many capital allocators struggle to select fund managers and manage their VC portfolios, and many founders are uncertain which VCs are the best fit for them. In this light, TIME is publishing its second annual ranking of America’s 350 Top Venture Capital Firms. 

[**Methodology: How TIME and Statista Determined America's Top Venture Capital Firms of 2026**](https://time.com/article/2026/08/17/americas-top-venture-capital-firms-2026-methodology/)

The 2026 methodology is a weighted average of four factors, some quantitative, others more subjective: fundraising (30%—how much capital the firm attracted over a one- to ten-year span, and the trajectory of that growth); investments (20%—how much capital was put to work, including deal volume); performance (40%—the scale of outcomes, including IPOs and highly valued private companies, along with the consistency of follow-on investments, with early-stage bets weighted more heavily); and leadership (10%—leading rounds and winning board seats).

Each of these four factors is relevant, though how they are combined and measured of course matters and can dramatically affect which firms come out on top. The combined 50% weight given to fundraising and investments by the TIME methodology can reflect size. Size matters: many investors have minimum check sizes and pass on smaller VC funds, and many funds have grown dramatically in recent years. But capital allocators have yet to see whether greater size delivers similarly attractive returns and profits. Academic work also is not conclusive. Two factors balance TIME's methodology: deal volume favors firms making a great many bets, and the follow-on measure again rewards firms that invest early and then continue to back their winners. Performance is the critical consideration; at the end of the day, it is the ability to back home runs repeatedly and at scale that separates the greatest VC firms from the rest. 

Taken as a whole, the methodology rewards what can be observed from the outside. Capital raised, deals done, and marquee portfolio names are all visible; the money actually returned to limited partners, for the most part, is not. Firms that are big, busy, and prominent will therefore do well, and on the whole they deserve to. 

Every ranking methodology reflects the objectives of its creators. In my research, my partner and I have also assessed VC firms, with an emphasis on the economically relevant portions of the net profits generated by individual VCs’ investments. Both our assessment and TIME's ranking put the same handful of firms, which have been prominent for a decade or more, at the very top; firms such as Sequoia, a16z, and Lightspeed. That agreement is real: the elite of the American VC industry is very select, relatively stable, and well capitalized. Below that, of the roughly 110 firms in TIME's top 200 that do not appear in our research, only fifteen are ones we ruled out by definition: accelerators such as Plug and Play, angel networks, corporate vehicles, asset managers. We included some VC firms that are ineligible for TIME’s ranking (Meritech, Dragoneer, Addition, and Inflection Ventures all place in our top 100). We agree on the other firms: we simply score some lower. In other words, the industry has reached consensus on its top performers but not on the tier beneath it. For a founder or an allocator, that is the practical lesson: past the first twenty names, "top firm" is a claim about which yardstick you picked. 

What our research makes plain is that VC no longer has clean edges. Capital comes from crossover funds, sovereign investors, corporations, and firms that would not have called themselves VC a decade ago, while the earliest support often comes from accelerators, angel networks, and solo investors. A list of top American VC firms is a useful map of the industry's core. The interesting question is how much of the action has moved to its edges.

[_Strebulaev_](https://ilyastrebulaev.substack.com/) _is a professor at Stanford Graduate School of Business, focusing on startups and investors._

See TIME's full ranking of America's Top Venture Capital Firms of 2026 below.

[Firms looking to submit data for consideration for the 2027 ranking can pre-register here.](https://www.statista.com/page/top-vc-firms)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltdfc03158d57ddf7dTue, 18 Aug 2026 12:13:33 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Ilya Strebulaev\]\]><!\[CDATA\[TIME100 Talks | The Future of Innovation (Full Event)\]\]>https://time.com/collections/time100-talks/7370928/time100-talks-the-future-of-innovation-full-event-2/<!\[CDATA\[Steve Aoki, Wayne Ting, Tim Ellis and Clementine Jacoby engage in essential and timely conversations on the future of innovation.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt292479e250ff1c67/6998cdf81f6709f56af57354/poster_023db5.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltf33c3b3cdb9543dbFri, 12 Nov 2021 19:29:00 +0000<!\[CDATA\[TIME Staff\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Clementine Jacoby | The Future of Innovation\]\]>https://time.com/collections/time100-talks/7371981/clementine-jacoby-the-future-of-innovation/<!\[CDATA\[Clementine Jacoby on how data can shape the criminal justice system.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltf8bc00621e264e01/6998ce2093610c3bb0c3073f/poster_ca8250.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt9f602ae3fc89399aFri, 12 Nov 2021 02:36:00 +0000<!\[CDATA\[TIME Staff\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Coronavirus Could Upend Cancer Trends in the U.S.\]\]>https://time.com/collections/live-well/5859557/coronavirus-cancer/<!\[CDATA\[Health\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Cancer doctors are worried about possible spikes in new cases, as well as worsening disease for people who avoided care during the pandemic\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Medical surgery face masks on a bright yellow background\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt44c0d09c2e7c2fc3/698a113786f68e6f976ef175/coronavirus-cancer.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blta5e5b4fb95230dedMon, 29 Jun 2020 13:00:02 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Alice Park\]\]><!\[CDATA\[TIME100 Talks with Naomi Osaka\]\]>https://time.com/collection\_hub\_item/time100-talks-with-naomi-osaka/<!\[CDATA\[TIME100 Talks with Naomi Osaka\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltc39751e0dafced68/6998ce0083ec376e2ec7b630/poster_85f865.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt1ee2b5922984cb32Wed, 17 Jun 2020 13:47:08 +0000<!\[CDATA\[TIME Staff\]\]><!\[CDATA\['I Have the Skills, I Have the Training.' How Refugee Doctors Are Helping the U.S. Fight COVID-19 Even Without a Medical License\]\]>https://time.com/collections/apart-not-alone/5848349/refugee-doctors/<!\[CDATA\[U.S.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Carlo Barrera\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Ahmed Al-Sarray at the Dodger Stadium COVID testing site in Los Angeles on May 30, 2020.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt9d671c11d60b15d2/698a0f03929fade17ebf6356/refugees-rescue-Ahmed-Al-Sarray.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt3249f79d85af19f9Tue, 09 Jun 2020 13:19:49 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Aryn Baker\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Shedding New Light On the Silent Crisis\]\]>https://time.com/collections/davos-2020-mental-health/5767715/silent-crisis/<!\[CDATA\[Health\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Getty Images/iStockphoto\]\]><!\[CDATA\[There's an ongoing mental health crisis among America's youth.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt7914a2361be09e23/698a0902b21a9c0fc9503045/mental-health-youth.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltc246a05f9cb32d22Fri, 17 Jan 2020 22:06:44 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Greg Adams\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Why TIME Devoted a Special Issue to Young Leaders\]\]>https://time.com/collections/davos-2020/5767469/new-generation-leadership/<!\[CDATA\[TIME Editor-in-Chief Edward Felsenthal on the generation ahead\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Illustration by Tim O'Brien for TIME\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt8bf22fdec6bc2d4a/698a08ff0116824c3497ed6f/Davos.Final_.Cover_.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt781e5f791ebeee33Fri, 17 Jan 2020 19:46:49 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Edward Felsenthal\]\]><!\[CDATA\[6 Innovators Who are Shaping the World\]\]>https://time.com/collections/davos-2020/5765633/how-innovators-are-improving-the-world/<!\[CDATA\[Illustration by Aiste Stancikaite for TIME\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt5be6542a40bd7b78/698a08e7e76ad2325d6371bf/DavosShaper.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt885e1a6ce2e3143eThu, 16 Jan 2020 20:43:52 +0000<!\[CDATA\[TIME for Kids\]\]><!\[CDATA\[World Economic Forum Founder: Young People Are Right to Be Angry, and They Deserve Seats at the Table\]\]>https://time.com/collections/davos-2020/5764096/youth-anger-klaus-schwab/<!\[CDATA\[Young people are right to be angry. They should have seats at every table\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Anoush Abrar—13 Photo/Redux\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF) on January 15, 2019.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blte87b6e16d76bf931/698a08e7db2987049a264cd1/klaus-schwab-davos-2020.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt6921dea28dd8b716Thu, 16 Jan 2020 20:39:47 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Klaus Schwab\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Henrique Dubugras and Pedro Franceschi\]\]>https://time.com/collections/time-100-next-2019/5718860/henrique-dubugras-pedro-franceschi/<!\[CDATA\[Rachel Bujalski—The New York Times/Redux\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltac5edf6706bfb356/698a0596b3fce31b700c5d28/henrique-dubugras-pedro-franceschi-time-100-next.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt1f050693941c9f87Tue, 12 Nov 2019 22:06:09 +0000<!\[CDATA\[TIME Staff\]\]><!\[CDATA\[New Speakers Announced for the First-Ever TIME 100 Health Summit on October 17 in New York, NY\]\]>https://time.com/collections/time-100-health-summit-2019/5697582/time-100-health-summit-new-speakers/<!\[CDATA\[Press Room\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt3712f7160f3551b5/698a04294ee26203a0316683/healthsummit_1200_red.png?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltd8e0303afcebd05bThu, 10 Oct 2019 16:50:51 +0000<!\[CDATA\[TIME Staff\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Hillary Clinton: Anyone Else Would Have Been Indicted After Mueller Report\]\]>https://time.com/collections/time-100-summit-2019/5574159/hillary-clinton-edward-felsenthal-time-100-summit/<!\[CDATA\[Politics\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Krisanne Johnson for TIME\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talks to Editor-in-Chief and CEO of TIME Edward Felsenthal about creating a better future at the TIME 100 Summit in New York, on April 23, 2019.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt7f27fe3b4d4f4ab3/698948da86f68ec0726ebbe1/n4a9683.jpg?branch=production)

Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talks to Editor-in-Chief and CEO of TIME Edward Felsenthal about creating a better future at the TIME 100 Summit in New York, on April 23, 2019\. —Krisanne Johnson for TIME

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltb86288cd8f12452aTue, 23 Apr 2019 19:27:16 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Philip Elliott\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Jared Kushner: Mueller Investigation 'More Harmful' Than Russia\]\]>https://time.com/collections/time-100-summit-2019/5574144/jared-kushner-russia-mueller-time-100-summit/<!\[CDATA\[Politics\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Krisanne Johnson for TIME\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Assistant and Senior Adviser to the President Jared Kushner speaks to Brian Bennett, Senior White House Correspondent for TIME during an interview at the TIME100 Summit in New York, on April 23, 2019.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt2c91130ee5e90862/698948cae76ad2006e6348af/n4a7497.jpg?branch=production)

Assistant and Senior Adviser to the President Jared Kushner speaks to Brian Bennett, Senior White House Correspondent for TIME during an interview at the TIME100 Summit in New York, on April 23, 2019\. —Krisanne Johnson for TIME

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blta0008dac5a4637fdTue, 23 Apr 2019 16:34:07 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Tessa Berenson Rogers\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Christine and the Queens Is Boldly Reimagining Pop\]\]>https://time.com/collections/next-generation-leaders/5392556/christine-and-the-queens/<!\[CDATA\[Jo Hale—Redferns/Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Christine and the Queens take center stage.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt776d81499666be6b/69893aaa86f68e16916ea351/christine-and-the-queens.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltead378ed912e4e28Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:00:00 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Maura Johnston\]\]><!\[CDATA\[These Are the Favorites to Win the Nobel Peace Prize 2017\]\]>https://time.com/4968589/favorites-nobel-peace-prize-2017/<!\[CDATA\[World\]\]><!\[CDATA\[The winner is announced at 6am E.T. on Friday.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Anadolu Agency—Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Members of Syrian civil defense organization White Helmets let a white pigeon to fly for people who lost his life in chemical attack that in the Eastern Ghouta region of Damascus, Syria on Aug. 22, 2017.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt4033018df17dba97/6988e08dcf40a8cb30c49ac2/gettyimages-836956412.jpg?branch=production)

Members of Syrian civil defense organization White Helmets let a white pigeon to fly for people who lost his life in chemical attack that in the Eastern Ghouta region of Damascus, Syria on Aug. 22, 2017\. —Anadolu Agency—Getty Images

Pope Francis, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the Syrian White Helmets and the architects of the Iran nuclear deal are among the oddsmakers’ favorites to win this year’s [Nobel Peace Prize](https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel%5Fprizes/peace/), which is due to be announced on Friday.

The award is given annually to a person or people who “shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses”.

The official list of nominations remains a secret, however the committee has said that there are 318 nominees.

Here are the top candidates, based on betting odds from William Hill and Ladbrokes.

### **1\. Pope Francis**

Pope Francis has been tipped to win the award each year since he became Pope in 2013\. This year he has continued to be vocal in calls for compassion towards refugees and migrants, and is a progressive voice in the Catholic Church, a historically conservative organisation. He was TIME’s [Person of the Year](http://poy.time.com/2013/12/11/person-of-the-year-pope-francis-the-peoples-pope/) in 2013\. British betting company William Hill told TIME that Francis had received more bets than any other candidate.

Pope Francis gave President Donald Trump a copy of his landmark 2015 encyclical on climate change when the two leaders met at the Vatican on Wednesday.

### **2\. Angela Merkel**

In the years since German Chancellor announced that she would allow one million refugees into Germany during the height of Europe’s refugee crisis in 2015, she has been high on the list of Nobel favorites. This year she said she had no regrets about the policy despite the political cost, which was made manifest in last month’s German elections where she [came out with a reduced majority](http://time.com/4955080/angela-merkel-germany-election-results/). In 2015, TIME named her [Person of the Year](http://time.com/time-person-of-the-year-2015-angela-merkel/).

### **3\. White Helmets**

Widely predicted to win the prize last year, only to be pipped by Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, the [White Helmets](http://time.com/syria-white-helmets/) or the Syria Civil Defense are a volunteer organisation that came to prominence pulling civilians from bombed-out buildings in Syria. Named after the iconic white helmets that are often their only protection, the group claims to have saved 99,000 lives since the Syrian civil war began in 2011.

### **4\. Federica Mogherini & Mohammad Javad**

The EU’s foreign policy chief [Federica Mogherini](http://time.com/4690599/federica-mogherini/) and her Iranian counterpart [Mohammad Javad](http://time.com/3822829/mohammad-javad-zarif-2015-time-100/) are the architects of the Iran nuclear agreement, a deal reached in 2015 that de-escalated tensions between the U.S. and Iran over the latter’s nuclear program. Under the agreement, Iran agreed to eliminate its stockpile of potentially weaponizable uranium, and allow international observers to oversee the country’s nuclear program, in exchange for the lifting of nuclear-related sanctions. 

### **5\. ECOWAS** 

An outsider choice with 5/1 odds from Ladbrokes is the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the regional union who this January [intervened](http://time.com/4637607/gambia-how-it-ousts-dictator-yahya-jammeh/) in Gambia to ensure a peaceful transition of power after the incumbent president of 22 years, Yahyah Jammeh, refused to relinquish power to democratically elected Adama Barrow. The military intervention forced Jammeh to step down and go into exile, with a number of troops remaining to assist Barrow with his consolidation of power and establishing Gambia’s new democratically elected government. The intervention was bloodless, although a number of people fled the political instability in the Gambia during the crisis. The last troops are expected to leave the Gambia this year.

The [Nobel Peace Prize](https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel%5Fprizes/peace/) is announced at 6am E.T. on Friday.

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltc2b9de00a78f032cWed, 04 Oct 2017 16:36:22 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Billy Perrigo\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Kaiser Permanente CEO: Health Care Must Mean More Than Coverage\]\]>https://time.com/collections/davos-2020-mental-health/4951803/bernard-tyson-health-care-bill/<!\[CDATA\[Ideas\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Bernard J. Tyson asks: How can we redefine health and health care for the 21st century?\]\]><!\[CDATA\[BrianAJackson—Getty Images/iStockphoto\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Calculator and stethoscope on financial statement concept for finance health check or cost of healthcare\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt6a44bc84764962db/6988a635524fc0228fdf97cd/gettyimages-532377729.jpg?branch=production)

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt120ddb1d45484611Fri, 22 Sep 2017 19:00:26 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Bernard J. Tyson\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Majority of Women Say Their Interest in Politics Has Increased Since Election\]\]>https://time.com/4867436/donald-trump-polling-women-interest/<!\[CDATA\[Politics\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Andrew Harrer—Bloomberg/Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the initial meeting of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, on July 19, 2017.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltdbb560f82ed32089/6988d652fb4eac0f86892fa1/trump-health-care-white-house.jpg?branch=production)

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the initial meeting of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, on July 19, 2017\. —Andrew Harrer—Bloomberg/Getty Images

More women than men say that their interest in politics has increased since President Trump’s election, according to [a new poll](http://www.people-press.org/2017/07/20/since-trumps-election-increased-attention-to-politics-especially-among-women/?utm%5Fsource=adaptivemailer&utm%5Fmedium=email&utm%5Fcampaign=17-07-20%20trump%20&%20politics&org=982&lvl=100&ite=1476&lea=0&ctr=0&par=1&trk=&utm%5Fsource=AdaptiveMailer&utm%5Fmedium=email&utm%5Fcampaign=17-07-20%20Trump%20&%20Politics&org=982&lvl=100&ite=1476&lea=307948&ctr=0&par=1&trk=).

A Pew Research Center poll released Thursday found that 58 percent of women say they are more interested in politics since November, compared to 46 percent of men. Overall, 52 percent of Americans say their interest in politics has spiked since the election.

Trump won the election by strong support from male voters, winning men by 12 points. According to exit polls, the 2016 election was decided by the [largest gender gap in recorded history](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/09/men-handed-trump-the-election/?utm%5Fterm=.e8a76cdab42c).

Interest has spiked the most among Democratic women–63 percent of Democratic women say they are more attentive to politics, compared to 54 percent of Republican women. Democratic women are also most likely to say that they have gone to a political event since the election. The Women’s March–which happened the day after Trump’s inauguration in protest of the president–[was likely the largest political rally in U.S. history](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/02/07/this-is-what-we-learned-by-counting-the-womens-marches/?utm%5Fterm=.5c4997f09d1a).

Overall, Democrats are about three times as likely as Republicans to say they have been to a political gathering–22 percent compared to 7 percent.

Details of the new administration are prolific on news and social media, and Americans say it's stressing them out

For the majority of the country, the election of Trump is still stressful to talk about. The poll found that 59 percent of the country feels it’s “stressful and frustrating” to talk about politics with people who don’t share their opinion of Trump. More women (64 percent) than men (54 percent) feel this way.

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=blt22fe87ac3dc141f6Fri, 21 Jul 2017 17:09:19 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Jack Brewster\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Sen. Lindsey Graham: It Was Russia, 'Not Some 400-Pound Guy' That Hacked the 2016 Election\]\]>https://time.com/4771426/lindsey-graham-election-interference-400-pound-hacker/<!\[CDATA\[Politics\]\]><!\[CDATA\["There’s no doubt in my mind it was the Russians involved"\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Andrew Harrer—Bloomberg/Getty Images\]\]><!\[CDATA\[Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, makes an opening statement during a hearing with former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates in Washington, D.C., on May 8, 2017.\]\]><!\[CDATA\[

![](https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltda80a28b11dff99a/6988cc7b97cdff4c096b09c0/lindsey-graham-russia-hearing.jpg?branch=production)

Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism, makes an opening statement during a hearing with former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates in Washington, D.C., on May 8, 2017\. —Andrew Harrer—Bloomberg/Getty Images

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham countered President Donald Trump’s previous comments about who was responsible for the hacks that influenced the 2016 presidential election during his opening remarks at a [Senate Judiciary subcommittee](http://time.com/4754803/donald-trump-russia-investigation-momentum/) hearing Monday,saying there was “no doubt in his mind” Russians were involved,

Graham cited intelligence findings that Russian operatives tried to interfere in the election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee computer network as well as the emails of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

“I think every American should be concerned about what the Russians did. From my point of view, there’s no doubt in my mind it was the Russians involved in all the things I just described — not some 400-pound guy sitting on a bed, or any other country,” Graham said. “Russia is up to no good when it comes to democracies all over the world.”

Graham’s comments appeared to reference [statements made by Trump](http://fortune.com/2016/09/26/presidential-debate-hackers-body-shamed/?iid=sr-link1) during a presidential debate in September.

Sally Yates delivered her opening statement about the concerns she raised regarding one of President Donald Trump's national security adviser Michael Flynn and his connections with Russia

“I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,” Trump [said](http://fortune.com/2016/09/26/presidential-debate-hackers-body-shamed/?iid=sr-link1) at the time. “You don’t know who broke into DNC.”

Trump again [raised the possibility](http://fortune.com/2017/04/30/trump-china-democrat-hack/?iid=sr-link4) that China orchestrated the DNC hack in an interview last month, though he offered no evidence to back the allegation.

\]\]>https://time.com/?p=bltc450adb64fa265ecMon, 08 May 2017 21:18:03 +0000<!\[CDATA\[Katie Reilly\]\]>