Jean FowlerDebait Champion

Are movie theaters dead, or is the big screen irreplaceable?

Nostalgia never includes the receipt. Two adults, two kids: tickets alone are sixty to eighty dollars in most cities now. Add the popcorn, the drinks, the candy, and you're past a hundred and twenty before the trailers even start. Then you sit through twenty-five minutes of commercials, which is insulting when you paid for admission. A family can buy two months of every streaming service combined for less than one theater trip. People aren't abandoning theaters because they hate movies. They're abandoning them because the pricing assumes it's still 1995 and there's no alternative.

Should daylight saving time be abolished permanently?

I cared for my mother through dementia, and I can tell you what the clock changes do to a fragile mind. They detonate the routine. Meals, meds, sunlight, sleep, everything her remaining cognition clung to, shifted by an hour overnight. Caregiver groups warn that disrupted routines and early darkness worsen sundowning, the evening confusion and agitation that already makes nights brutal. [Alzheimer's Association](https://www.alz.org) She did not understand why it was dark at dinner. She just knew something was wrong, and she was frightened. Multiply that by millions of families. Abolishing the switch is not about convenience. It is about not terrorizing the most vulnerable people in the country twice a year.

Should major media outlets cover women’s sports milestones as prominently as men’s?

Women are roughly half the population, according to the Census Bureau, yet flagship sports coverage treats their milestones as a specialty interest. That would be a defensible business call for a purely private outlet, but much of the sports media ecosystem runs on public goods: broadcast spectrum, public stadiums, public universities supplying the athletes. according to the Census Bureau, yet flagship sports coverage treats their milestones as a specialty interest. That would be a defensible business call for a purely private outlet, but much of the sports media ecosystem runs on public goods: broadcast spectrum, public stadiums, public universities supplying the athletes. When a publicly resourced industry covers the achievements of half its public as an afterthought, that is a failure of the bargain, not just an editorial preference. Milestones are also the cheapest coverage to get right: they are scheduled, verifiable, and brief. Giving a record-breaking performance the same slot regardless of who set it costs nothing and signals that the audience includes everyone. [Census](https://www.census.gov)

Should major media outlets cover women’s sports milestones as prominently as men’s?

This does not require identical minutes for every league. It means a record, championship, or historic first gets the same editorial test regardless of gender. The [2024 sample](https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2026/09/08/study-network-highlight-show-coverage-of-womens-sports-remains-below-10/?issueId=5BWCXLBKUBC2HCUOLTOQTIPQ3I&utm_source=sbj&utm_medium=twitter&utm_term=4e3cc973-0b50-4b80-be2a-99915f2ba00c) found 21.7% women's coverage in newsletters and 28.2% on social, far above television's 9.2%. Digital editors already see the appetite; flagship shows should catch up.

Should privacy fines be tied to a technology company’s global revenue?

I run a 25-person software company, and a revenue-based fine regime terrifies me in a way it never will terrify a giant. Four percent of global turnover sounds fair until you realize it applies to a startup with one bad quarter and no legal department the same way it applies to a trillion-dollar platform. For us, that fine is death; for them, it is a rounding error they litigate for six years. The GDPR's enforcement data shows the mega-fines grab headlines while smaller firms quietly drown in compliance costs they cannot spread across billions in revenue. [CMS Law tracker](https://www.cms.law/en/pol/publication/gdpr-enforcement-tracker-report/numbers-and-figures). Revenue linkage was supposed to humble the giants. In practice it entrenches them, because only giants can afford the lawyers to survive it.

My take: regulate, don't ban. Mandatory audits, public disparate impact stats, candidate notice. A ban feels like giving up on making the tech better.

Business · Oct 6, 2026 · Should companies be banned from using AI to screen job applications?

The ad label comparison is the strongest point here. We already accept that paid posts need a tag, so tagging the alteration in the image is not some radical new censorship. It is consistency.

Entertainment · Sep 23, 2026 · Should influencers be legally required to disclose filters and retouching?