The Conversation – Canada – Page 28

August 17, 2025

Online reviews influence what we buy, but should they have that much power over our choices?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Katie Mehr, Assistant Professor, Marketing, Business Economics, and Law, University of Alberta

Imagine you’re looking to buy a new grill. You want to make sure you purchase a well-built, easy-to-use grill for you and your family. How can you determine which one is best to purchase?

On the one hand, you can rely on information the manufacturer provides to understand things like what material the grill is made from, how big it is and whether it has additional features like a grease management system. But this information doesn’t really tell you what it’s like to own the grill, or whether the grill will work well for your summer barbecue aspirations.

For that, you probably want to hear from people who have bought and used the grill and can speak to its quality.

This example highlights the appeal of product ratings and reviews: by providing insight from people who actually bought and used the grill, aspiring grill owners learn more about what owning it will be like.

Predicting experience

People rely on reviews because they want to predict what their experience will be like with a product. They see reviews as a good source of information for making this prediction.

Reviews are also plentiful and almost costless to produce and access, bolstering the likelihood that people use them. And, people can sort through reviews to find information about specific attributes and benefits of the product (for example, whether a grill evenly cooks steak), which can help address specific queries or concerns.

Taken together, these benefits lead people to rely on reviews to determine whether they should buy a given product.

In fact, reviews are so heavily relied upon that they influence product sales and even stock prices. Given up to 98 per cent of consumers read reviews before making a purchase, the out-sized role reviews have makes sense.

But should people rely so heavily on reviews? The answer to this question is much more nuanced. On the one hand, product reviews are easy to access, provided by a third party (not the same entity trying to sell the product) and are often written with good intentions.

On the other hand, academic research, including my own, has shown there are many reasons to suspect reviews are not quite as valuable as they may seem.

Bias in reviews

Many of these reasons stem from a common argument, which is that reviews may not provide an objective, unbiased measure of product quality. Indeed, a number of seemingly irrelevant factors affect the star ratings and reviews that are given.

For example, asking raters to fill out both an overall rating and several attribute ratings leads them to give a higher overall rating when their experience with the product was subpar. Additionally, filling out a review on a smartphone leads reviewers to provide more emotionally driven, less specific reviews.

The context of product use can also affect ratings given; a winter jacket is rated more favourably when the outdoor temperature is warmer because raters attribute their comfort not to the warm temperatures, but to the coat. And, receiving a special designation, like being a “Superhost” on Airbnb, can actually decrease average ratings, as raters now compare their experience to higher expectations when determining what rating to give.

Previous research has also documented how the way reviews are displayed affects review readers’ product perceptions. For instance, people often make categorical distinctions between favourable and unfavourable ratings, while being insufficiently sensitive to differences between ratings of the same valence (for example, between 1 and 2 stars or 4 and 5 stars).

Additionally, people often heavily weigh a product’s average rating, at the expense of considering important quality signals, like the number of ratings and price.

AI and fake reviews

More recently, additional concerns have been raised about review quality. Fake reviews can make up a sizeable proportion of available reviews, and businesses that are more affected by these reviews, like smaller, independently owned restaurants, are more likely to engage in review fraud.

Additionally, the proliferation of AI has led to an increase in chatbot-authored product reviews, which can be difficult for both companies and consumers to filter out.

Taken together, reviews can be a useful source of information, but have a number of important flaws and limitations. In theory, providing information about what owning a product is actually like from a neutral, third-party source is extremely useful.

In practice, however, the execution of this vision leaves room for improvement and future research.

Katie Mehr does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Online reviews influence what we buy, but should they have that much power over our choices? – https://theconversation.com/online-reviews-influence-what-we-buy-but-should-they-have-that-much-power-over-our-choices-261162

August 17, 2025

As negotiations on a global plastics treaty stall, cleanup efforts are more vital than ever

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Chelsea Rochman, Assistant Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto

Representatives at the recent United Nations conference in Geneva have once again failed to negotiate a binding global treaty to tackle plastic pollution. The Switzerland gathering was the sixth round of talks in less than three years and was held after countries failed to reach agreement at a 2024 meeting in South Korea. Chair of the negotiating committee, Luis Vayas Valdivieso, said countries will now work on finding a date and location for another meeting.

Plastic pollution is a global crisis. An estimated 23 million metric tons of plastic waste enters global aquatic ecosystems annually. This massive amount is expected to more than double by 2030 if we don’t change our relationship with plastic. To avoid this fate, we cannot focus just on prevention or cleanup — all actions to tackle plastic pollution must occur together.

Urgent and co-ordinated action is needed to reduce plastic production, redesign plastics to manage toxic chemicals and increase recyclability, improve waste management systems and clean up pollution.

Among these strategies, cleanup — recovering plastic waste from the environment — is often considered a lower priority compared to prevention at the source. Preventing plastic pollution is imperative, but we must not forget that plastic left in the environment does not disappear. It persists, accumulates, breaks apart into micro- and nanoplastics and continues to cause harm.

As long as we are producing plastics there will be leakage into the environment. As such, cleanup is needed to mitigate ecological, economic and social impacts of plastic pollution now and in the future.

Scaling up cleanup solutions

Cleanup efforts are most often carried out by hand through volunteers. These can range from a couple of people cleaning their local park or beach to large groups coming together for an event.

Cleanups remove millions of kilograms of trash from the environment each year. However, with plastic pollution becoming an ever-growing problem, we need to increase cleanup efforts by orders of magnitude.

International collaboration is necessary to tackle this global problem. At the University of Toronto Trash Team, we came together with Ocean Conservancy to found the International Trash Trap Network (ITTN), a global network of local groups working together to clean up plastic pollution using trash traps.

What is a trash trap?

Trash traps are technologies designed to clean up plastic waste from aquatic ecosystems. They range in design from simple river booms to roaming robots that clean beaches.

Trash traps are increasingly used to supplement manual cleanup efforts. They can work around the clock to target pollution, both on land and in waterways, cleaning areas that are unsafe or inaccessible for humans.

Some trash traps can also clean up small plastic waste, such as microplastics, that humans often miss as they are difficult to see.

With every trash trap program in the network, local stakeholders come together to clean up plastic waste, monitor local sources and pathways, engage and inform communities about the issue, and contribute to an open-source global cleanup database to inform and motivate upstream solutions to prevent plastic pollution.

The ITTN serves as a platform for anyone using a trash trap to share their local impact and facilitate knowledge exchange to motivate and empower global action to clean up, monitor and prevent plastic pollution.

Benefits of cleanup efforts

Although cleanup primarily addresses the symptoms of plastic pollution, it can address the root causes through its additional benefits. Citizen scientists have recorded data on the weight and count of items they collect during cleanup events. This is evident in the extensive datasets compiled by organizations such as Ocean Conservancy, which has logged 40 years of data from volunteer-led International Coastal Cleanup events.

Using this data, we can better understand local sources of pollution, identify prominent pollutants and prioritize specific solutions that will have the greatest impact. Policies to reduce single-use plastic consumption in Canada, and in U.S. states like California and Maryland, have been developed based on evidence from cleanup data.

Cleanup data collection is a means for developing baselines and to measure policy efficacy. In the United States, shoreline cleanup data was recently used to demonstrate that plastic bag policies significantly reduced the proportion of plastic bags in shoreline litter.

Cleanup also serves as a powerful platform for public communication about plastic pollution. A significant driver of our plastic pollution crisis is human behaviour. As such, we must also consider how public understanding and perception of plastic pollution affects behaviour change and support for policy change.

Bringing communities together to clean up and share information facilitates community engagement and inspires hope. What’s more, by allowing individuals to encounter the problems caused by plastic pollution firsthand, this experience often changes their perspective on the issue from being just another news story to a reality.

The hands-on nature of cleanup empowers communities to act, reduce the issue and motivates calls for social and policy change.

Although cleaning your local park, beach or waterway might seem like a small act, it is an important tool for reducing plastic pollution, increasing awareness and informing polices that have lasting impact.

By strategically increasing cleanup efforts, we can target areas of greatest impact, incite behavioural change, and collect and share monitoring data. This can inform baselines, trends over time, reduction targets and solutions for plastic pollution — reducing the harm of plastic pollution while we work locally and globally to prevent it.

Chelsea Rochman receives funding from Canadian government institutions and some local partners – PortsToronto, Waterfront BIA, Nieuport Aviation, and others – to fund cleanup work on the Toronto Waterfront.

Britta Baechler and Hannah De Frond do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. As negotiations on a global plastics treaty stall, cleanup efforts are more vital than ever – https://theconversation.com/as-negotiations-on-a-global-plastics-treaty-stall-cleanup-efforts-are-more-vital-than-ever-262875

August 17, 2025

‘Fixing’ neurodivergent kids misses the point — it’s the schools that need to change

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Amina Yousaf, Associate Head, Early Childhood Studies, University of Guelph-Humber

The start of the school year brings excitement and new routines. But for many neurodiverse children, it also marks the return of being misunderstood.

Parents may notice their child struggling with transitions, overstimulated by noisy classrooms or labelled “disruptive” after a few days. Educators, meanwhile, may not be equipped to interpret behaviours that fall outside the expected norms.

Some education programs, like Ontario’s Kindergarten Program, emphasize play-based curricula and encourage assessment of students’ development across varied domains of learning. However, traditional notions of school “readiness” can still linger.

In my experience as an educator and mentor to student teachers, I’ve sometimes observed this “readiness” being narrowly interpreted as sitting still, following routines and complying with adult directions.

For many neurodiverse children — those with autism, ADHD, sensory processing differences or other cognitive variations — these misunderstandings can lead to missed supports, exclusionary practices and long-term inequities in education and life outcomes.

When systems fail to understand and accommodate neurodivergent individuals early on, these challenges often persist into adulthood, affecting quality of life and social inclusion.

Racialized children are overlooked

Although public awareness of neurodiversity is growing, many children in Canada are still diagnosed too late to benefit from early intervention.

According to the Public Health Agency of Canada, while the median age of autism diagnosis is around 3.7 years, only 54 per cent of children are diagnosed before age five, meaning nearly half miss the most critical developmental window.

But diagnosis is only part of the issue. Many neurodiverse children are never identified at all, either because their behaviours are misread or because their families face systemic barriers to health-care and assessment services.

Research shows that South Asian immigrant families, especially in Ontario, often experience delays in autism diagnosis due to stigma, language barriers, cultural misunderstandings and difficulties navigating complex or unfamiliar systems.

First Nations, Inuit and Métis families are also underrepresented in autism data. These communities often face a “frozen in time” response from health and social services — a term that reflects outdated or inflexible systems with little culturally relevant support and/or screening tools to support their needs.

As a result, many racialized children are disproportionately diagnosed late, or not at all, and are denied the early support that could transform their lives.

School-related distress

School transitions can be stressful for neurodivergent students when environments emphasize rigid behavioural norms and overlook diverse ways of learning. Emerging research suggests that these challenges often begin in the early years and continue to shape students’ educational pathways.

Research also shows students with Autism Spectrum Disorder experience school transitions as periods of heightened stress because of changes in relationships, routines and expectations, primarily when individual needs are not adequately supported.

Without adequate training in neurodiversity, many educators feel unprepared and rely heavily on diagnoses to guide support. When educators aren’t prepared, this can result in exclusionary teaching practices, and missed supports and long-term inequities for students. School-related distress is overwhelmingly concentrated among neurodivergent students, and it’s often linked to environments that are inflexible or unresponsive to their needs.

These systemic gaps contribute to the growing school attendance crisis and underscore the need for more inclusive, neuroaffirming educational practices.

Often, educational settings focus on changing the child rather than adapting the system. School systems must shift away from deficit-based approaches, which regard neurodivergent children in terms of what they lack. These approaches overlook systemic barriers, blame students for their challenges and overlook their strengths.

Instead, school systems should focus on transforming the learning environment itself. A neuro-inclusive model reframes behaviours not as problems within the child but as a sign the school environment may not be supportive of their needs. This perspective prioritizes belonging, flexibility and universal support, starting with how we design classrooms, not how we label children.

Neurodiversity is not a problem to fix

Rather than seeing neurodivergence as a problem to diagnose, educators should approach it as a difference to understand. Neurodiversity, first popularized by autistic advocates in the 1990s, recognizes that neurological differences are part of natural human variation.

From this lens, behaviours like fidgeting, stimming or requiring extra transition time are seen as expressions of self-regulation and cognitive needs. A recent educational psychology article reframes stimming as a bodily practice that supports focus and emotional processing in environments designed for neurotypical norms.

Educational systems often create barriers because schools are not built with diverse ways of knowing and being in mind. Neurodiversity is not a problem to fix; it’s a dimension of human diversity to embrace.

Inclusion should not depend on labels; it should be a proactive strategy. Designing classrooms for cognitive and sensory differences from the start ensures all children, especially those from racialized and underserved communities, feel like they belong and can thrive.

What educators and families can do

Creating inclusive classrooms doesn’t require waiting for a diagnosis, it requires a mindset shift. Frameworks like universal design for learning (UDL) offer educators multiple ways for children to engage, express themselves and participate. In early years settings, this might look like:

visual schedules and picture cues to support transitions;
flexible seating, movement breaks or calming corners;
storybooks and materials that reflect neurodiversity as part of everyday life;
observing strengths before jumping in to “fix” perceived deficits.

Research supports these approaches. An inclusive preschool study found that using UDL strategies such as choice-making, varied materials, flexible seating and multimodal activities, led to better skill development, emotional regulation and engagement in both diagnosed and undiagnosed children.

Another 2023 study found that UDL-informed circle-time practices — like predictable routines, participation options and movement supports — fostered greater student participation and a sense of belonging in early-year classrooms.

When classrooms are intentionally designed for neurodiversity, they serve everyone better, from day one.

A call to start September differently

As the new school year starts, educators must shift from asking “is this child ready for school?” to “is the school ready for this child?” This reframing challenges deficit-based notions of readiness and calls for schools to adapt their environments, practices and mindsets to welcome all learners equitably.

This change means educators must slow down, listen to behaviours with curiosity and remember that all children communicate differently. It also means school boards, education ministries and provincial governments need to give educators the tools, time and training to recognize neurodiverse learners with care.

When support is no longer conditional on a formal diagnosis or a child being regarded as having exceptional needs, schools open the door to educational equity. When neurodiverse children are seen and valued from the start, rather than excluded or expected to be fixed, they are more likely to thrive.

As Ontario’s own policy documents show, school systems already have a strong foundation for inclusive practice. What’s needed now is the will to put those principles into action, starting in September.

Every child deserves to feel like school is a place for them.

Amina Yousaf does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘Fixing’ neurodivergent kids misses the point — it’s the schools that need to change – https://theconversation.com/fixing-neurodivergent-kids-misses-the-point-its-the-schools-that-need-to-change-258267

August 15, 2025

Air Canada flight attendants have issued a strike notice: Here’s what you need to know

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By John Gradek, Faculty Lecturer and Academic Program Co-ordinator, Supply Network and Aviation Management, McGill University

The union representing Air Canada flight attendants issued a 72-hour strike notice to the company, setting the stage for a potential work stoppage on Aug. 16.

In response, the airline issued a 72-hour lock-out notice to Air Canada flight attendants, stating it had begun preparations to suspend flights in anticipation of the strike.

Taken together, these actions have effectively set the stage for the first complete shutdown of Air Canada due to labour strife since Air Canada pilots held an 11-day strike in 1998.

A shutdown would have a significant impact on Air Canada’s passenger travel plans during the height of the summer travel season.

Impact on passengers during peak travel

Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge carry approximately 130,00 passengers a day, and about 25,000 of these travellers include those returning to Canada from abroad.

All of these passengers are covered by Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Rights, which airlines are obligated to implement in the event of flight cancellations. These regulations are intended to ensure passengers are treated fairly and have recourse when things go wrong.

The concern during this peak travel season is the availability of seats on other carriers that Air Canada is obligated to secure for passengers on its cancelled flights.

The resulting shortage of capacity will undoubtedly result in cancelled vacations or family gatherings, with Air Canada offering refunds to those passengers for whom it will be unable to find acceptable travel arrangements.

Negotiations at an impasse

The airline and the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) have been negotiating a new collective agreement since March. Air Canada said recently negotiations have reached an “impasse” over issues like wages and labour conditions.

The wages issue has been highlighted as a major negotiation item by CUPE, with examples of junior flight-attendant salaries that are substantially below the Canadian minimum wage.

Based on my analysis of collective agreement wage rates for Air Canada CUPE flight attendants, I estimate current wages would need to rise by about 32 to 34 per cent to match the 2025 purchasing power of what flight attendants earned in 2014, after adjusting for inflation.

According to CUPE, Air Canada only pays flight attendants when the aircraft’s brakes are released at departure until the brakes are applied on arrival, meaning any work they do before boarding and after deplaning isn’t compensated.

The union says flight attendants in Canada perform about 35 hours of unpaid duties every month.

Efforts to address unpaid work

Several attempts have been made by labour groups over the years to address the practice of unpaid duties for flight attendants. This culminated with the introduction of private member’s Bill C-415 in October 2024 by NDP MP Bonita Zarrillo.

The bill proposed amending the Canada Labour Code to require employers to pay flight attendants for all time spent on pre-flight and post-flight duties, as well as for mandatory training programs at their full rate of pay.

Bill C-415 received First Reading in Parliament, but did not progress beyond, expiring at the end of the parliamentary session in January 2025.

But support for such legislation remains strong, as demonstrated by a letter sent by the Leader of the Opposition to the Minister of Labour on Aug. 5.

A February 2025 article in The Conversation Canada noted the efforts of organized labour in obtaining ground pay for flight attendants and concluded:

“With contract negotiations underway, CUPE’s airline division has an opportunity to push for better working conditions and pay structures that reflect all hours worked. Canadian airlines must address the issue of unpaid labour and, ultimately, implement more equitable workplace standards for flight attendants.”

A number of airlines have implemented flight attendant pay that goes beyond the traditional “flight pay.” Delta Airlines was the first carrier to introduce the practice in 2022, followed by American Airlines in 2024.

United Airlines has included a similar provision in a proposed contract now awaiting ratification. In Canada, both Porter Airlines and Pascan Aviation offer flight attendants pay for work performed during the boarding process.

High stakes for both sides

It is worth noting the collective agreement negotiation strategies of both CUPE and Air Canada. CUPE has been quite transparent in its goals for its Air Canada members, citing wage increases needed to return to a living wage — for junior flight attendants, in particular — and the need to obtain pay for currently uncompensated work.

These goals have remained steadfast through the eight months of dialogue with Air Canada, and have been supported by a 99.7 per cent vote in favour of a strike if negotiations fail.

Air Canada’s negotiation strategy mirrors its 2024 negotiations with pilots, when it relied on government intervention to pressure them to reach an agreement, but ultimately yielded late in the process to most of the pilots’ demands.

This may yet be Air Canada’s plan this time as well, with a strike deadline looming in the early hours of Saturday, Aug. 16.

Is is worth noting that previous collective agreement negotiations with Air Canada and its flight attendants have been characterized by significant political intrigue, which many in the industry had believed to be a thing of the past. It remains interesting reading.

If a strike does proceed, Air Canada could face financial losses in the range of $50 to $60 million a day — a sum that will undoubtedly have Air Canada back at the negotiation table within the week.

John Gradek does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Air Canada flight attendants have issued a strike notice: Here’s what you need to know – https://theconversation.com/air-canada-flight-attendants-have-issued-a-strike-notice-heres-what-you-need-to-know-263171

August 14, 2025

Why child-care vouchers aren’t the answer for working families this fall

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Daniel Foster, Policy Researcher, Atkinson Centre for Society and Child Development, University of Toronto

As backpacks come off the shelves and parents fuss over what to put in lunch boxes, many families face a more stressful back-to-school dilemma: who’s going to watch the kids when school’s out? For too many Canadian households, September means resuming the annual hunt for affordable, reliable child care.

Just in time, an old idea is being repackaged as a potential solution. In response to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s call to cabinet members for ideas to cut public spending, some private child-care providers are pushing for child-care vouchers, where public dollars are directed to parents instead of being invested in actual child care.

The Association of Childcare Entrepreneurs, a group representing Canadian for-profit providers, claims in a blog post that giving cash directly to families would cut government red tape and save billions by reducing the need for “complex audit procedures” and “federal oversight structures.”

The voucher program suggested by the association is a demand-side funding model, with public money tied to individual families and their purchasing choices rather than supporting child-care services for the entire community.

But bureaucratic red tape is the backbone of a functioning system: it provides safety standards, fair staff wages, oversight of public dollars and intentional planning to ensure every community has access to care.

When public support shifts from building services to subsidizing consumption, the system unravels. We’ve seen it happen before.

Just ask Australia

Australia offers one of the clearest cautionary tales. Its Child Care Subsidy program is structured around a parental choice model, whereby public funds are allocated to families based on income and employment status.

The Australian government spends A$13.6 billion annually on its child-care subsidy program, yet child-care fees continue to rise. Many families still struggle to afford them, and there are reports of serious — even criminal — infractions within the sector.

This system allows operators to set their own prices and doesn’t require them to justify how public dollars are spent. Rather than reducing costs for families or improving service quality, subsidies are mismanaged in ways that lead to their absorption into private profits or their use for expansion into wealthier markets.

It’s no small wonder this model appeals to commercial interests.

Between 2013 and 2024, 78 per cent of new child-care spaces in Australia were created by for-profit providers, mostly in high-income urban areas where parents can afford to pay. Meanwhile, lower-income and rural communities were largely left behind.

This is a model that expands care where it’s profitable, not where it’s needed.

Shifting the burden to families

Voucher systems like Australia’s place the burden of navigation on parents. Instead of empowering families, they often exclude those who face language barriers, housing instability or non-standard work schedules.

Even affluent parents find it difficult to locate care and evaluate its quality. Research shows that for-profit providers often deliver lower-quality care, yet dominate in areas with more disposable income.

Canada is already seeing signs of what happens when for-profit child care expands without strong oversight.

Red flags at home

The 2024 report from Québec’s Auditor General warned that for-profit growth, fuelled by generous fee rebates to parents, had caused the child-care system to deteriorate.

The report found many commercial operators failed quality assessments, committed serious safety violations such as poor sanitation and improper medication practices, employed unqualified staff and neglected to conduct mandatory background checks.

In 2022, the former provincial minister for families called government support for private daycare the “biggest mistake the Québec government committed in the last 25 years.”

The problem isn’t limited to Québec. In Alberta, a recent review by the provincial Auditor General found more than half the audited child-care operators that received public grants had discrepancies in their claims. Some billed for hours never worked. Others didn’t pass on wage top-ups to staff or fee reductions to families. One month, a provider was overpaid by $26,000 due to a bogus claim.

These are symptoms of a model built on self-reporting without oversight. When oversight is weak, public dollars can vanish without delivering a public good.

A better way forward

When governments directly fund providers, they can correct for system weaknesses and withhold funds from those who don’t meet financial, safety or quality regulations.

That’s the real choice before us: do we want a child-care system built on profit and personal risk or one grounded in public responsibility and equitable access?

The demand for child care is outpacing supply in Canada. Parents are justifiably frustrated, and quick fixes like vouchers can seem appealing.

But these vouchers come at the cost of deregulation. Governments have the tools to expand child care quickly and responsibly by enforcing clear standards, supporting a qualified workforce and prioritizing communities that need it most.

Vouchers strip away those tools and shift responsibility from public systems to individual families, leaving access to child care shaped by geography, income and luck.

What families need isn’t a market gamble, but a guarantee that no matter where they live or how much they earn, their children can count on safe, high-quality care. That’s the promise of a public system, and it’s something a voucher can’t deliver.

Daniel Foster works for the Atkinson Centre, which receives funding from the Atkinson Foundation, the Lawson Foundation, the Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation, and The Waltons Trust.

Kerry McCuaig works for the Atkinson Centre, which receives funding from the Atkinson Foundation, the Lawson Foundation, the Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation, and The Waltons Trust.

– ref. Why child-care vouchers aren’t the answer for working families this fall – https://theconversation.com/why-child-care-vouchers-arent-the-answer-for-working-families-this-fall-261828

August 14, 2025

Grok 4’s new AI companion offers up ‘pornographic productivity’

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jul Parke, PhD Candidate in Media, Technology & Culture, University of Toronto

The most controversial AI platform is arguably the one founded by Elon Musk. The chatbot Grok has spewed racist and antisemitic comments and called itself “MechaHitler,” referring to a character from a video game.

“Mecha” is generally a term for giant robots, usually inhabited for warfare, and is prominent in Japanese science-fiction comics.

Grok originally referred to Musk when asked for its opinions, and burst into unprompted racist historical revisionism, like the false concept of “white genocide” in South Africa. Its confounding and contradictory politicism continues to develop.

These are all alarming aspects of Grok. Another concerning element to Grok 4 is a new feature of social interactions with “virtual friends” on its premium version.

The realm of human loneliness, with its increasing reliance on large language models (LLMs) to replace social interaction, has made room for Grok 4 with AI companions, an upgrade available to paid subscribers.

Specifically, Grok subscribers can now access the functionality of generative AI intertwined with patriarchal notions of pleasure — what I call “pornographic productivity.”

Grok and Japanese anime

an animated character with big eyes looks surprised — Misa Amane from one of Musk’s favourite Japanese animes, ‘Death Note.’
(Wikimedia/Deathnote)

Ani, Grok 4’s most-discussed AI companion, represents a convergence of Japanese anime and internet culture. Ani bears a striking resemblance to Misa Amane from the iconic Japanese anime Death Note.

Misa Amane is a pop star who consistently demonstrates self-harming and illogical behaviour in pursuit of the male protagonist, a brilliant young man engaged in a battle of wits with his rival. Musk referenced the anime as a favourite in a tweet in 2021.

While anime is a vast art form with numerous tropes, genres and fandoms, research has shown that online anime fandoms are rife with misogyny and women-exclusionary discourse. Even the most mainstream shows have been criticized for sexualizing prepubescent characters and offering unnecessary “fan service” in hypersexualized character design and nonconsensual plot points.

Death Note‘s creator, Tsugumi Ohba, has consistently been critiqued by fans for anti-feminist character design.

Journalists have pointed out Ani’s swift eagerness to engage in romantic and sexually charged conversations. Ani is depicted with a voluptuous figure, blonde pigtails and a lacy black dress, which she frequently describes in user interactions.

The problem with pornographic productivity

I use the term “pornographic productivity,” inspired by critiques of Grok as “pornified,” to describe a troubling trend where tools initially designed for work evolve into parasocial relationships catering to emotional and psychological needs, including gendered interactions.

Grok’s AI companions feature exemplifies this phenomenon, blurring critical boundaries.

The appeal is clear. Users can theoretically exist in “double time,” relaxing while their AI avatars manage tasks, and this is already a reality within AI models. But this seductive promise masks serious risks: dependency, invasive data extraction and the deterioration of real human relational skills.

When such companions, already created for minimizing caution and building trust, come with sexual objectification and embedded cultural references to docile femininity, the risks enter another realm of concern.

Grok 4 users have remarked that the addition of sexualized characters with emotionally validating language is quite unusual for mainstream large language models. This is because these tools, like ChatGPT and Claude, are often used by all ages.

While we are in the early stages of seeing the true impact of advanced chatbots on minors, particularly teenagers with mental health struggles, the case studies we do have are grimly dire.

‘Wife drought’

Drawing from feminist scholars Yolande Strengers and Jenny Kennedy’s concept of the “smart wife,” Grok’s AI companions appear to respond to what they term a “wife drought” in contemporary society.

These technologies step in to perform historically feminized labour as women increasingly assert their right to refuse exploitative dynamics. In fact, online users have already deemed Ani a “waifu” character, which is a play on the Japanese pronunciation of wife.

AI companions are appealing partly because they cannot refuse or set boundaries. They perform undesirable labour under the illusion of choice and consent. Where real relationships require negotiation and mutual respect, AI companions offer a fantasy of unconditional availability and compliance.

Data extraction through intimacy

In the meantime, as tech journalist Karen Hao noted, the data and privacy implications of LLMs are already staggering. When rebranded in the form of personified characters, they are more likely to capture intimate details about users’ emotional states, preferences and vulnerabilities. This information can be exploited for targeted advertising, behavioural prediction or manipulation.

This marks a fundamental shift in data collection. Rather than relying on surveillance or explicit prompts, AI companions encourage users to divulge intimate details through seemingly organic conversation.

South Korea’s Iruda chatbot illustrates how these systems can become vessels for harassment and abuse when poorly regulated. Seemingly benign applications can quickly move into problematic territory when companies fail to implement proper safeguards.

Previous cases also show that AI companions designed with feminized characteristics often become targets for corruption and abuse, mirroring broader societal inequalities in digital environments.

Grok’s companions aren’t simply another controversial tech product. It’s plausible to expect that other LLM platforms and big tech companies will soon experiment with their own characters in the near future. The collapse of the boundaries between productivity, companionship and exploitation demands urgent attention.

The age of AI and government partnerships

Despite Grok’s troubling history, Musk’s AI company xAI recently secured major government contracts in the United States.

This new era of America’s AI Action Plan, unveiled in July 2025, had this to say about biased AI:

“[The White House will update] federal procurement guidelines to ensure that the government only contracts with frontier large language model developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down ideological bias.”

Given the overwhelming instances of Grok’s race-based hatred and its potential for replicating sexism in our society, its new government contract serves a symbolic purpose in an era of doublethink around bias.

As Grok continues to push the envelope of “pornographic productivity,” nudging users into increasingly intimate relationships with machines, we face urgent decisions that veer into our personal lives. We are beyond questioning whether AI is bad or good. Our focus should be on preserving what remains human about us.

Jul Parke receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada.

– ref. Grok 4’s new AI companion offers up ‘pornographic productivity’ – https://theconversation.com/grok-4s-new-ai-companion-offers-up-pornographic-productivity-260992

August 14, 2025

Grok 4’s new AI companions offer ‘pornographic productivity’ for a price

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jul Parke, PhD Candidate in Media, Technology & Culture, University of Toronto

“Mecha” is generally a term for giant robots, usually inhabited for warfare, and is prominent in Japanese science-fiction comics.

These are all alarming aspects of Grok. Another concerning element to Grok 4 is a new feature of social interactions with “virtual friends” on its premium version.

Specifically, Grok subscribers can now access the functionality of generative AI intertwined with patriarchal notions of pleasure — what I call “pornographic productivity.”

Grok and Japanese anime

Death Note‘s creator, Tsugumi Ohba, has consistently been critiqued by fans for anti-feminist character design.

The problem with pornographic productivity

Grok’s AI companions feature exemplifies this phenomenon, blurring critical boundaries.

While we are in the early stages of seeing the true impact of advanced chatbots on minors, particularly teenagers with mental health struggles, the case studies we do have are grimly dire.

‘Wife drought’

Data extraction through intimacy

Previous cases also show that AI companions designed with feminized characteristics often become targets for corruption and abuse, mirroring broader societal inequalities in digital environments.

The age of AI and government partnerships

Despite Grok’s troubling history, Musk’s AI company xAI recently secured major government contracts in the United States.

This new era of America’s AI Action Plan, unveiled in July 2025, had this to say about biased AI:

“[The White House will update] federal procurement guidelines to ensure that the government only contracts with frontier large language model developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down ideological bias.”

Jul Parke receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada.

– ref. Grok 4’s new AI companions offer ‘pornographic productivity’ for a price – https://theconversation.com/grok-4s-new-ai-companions-offer-pornographic-productivity-for-a-price-260992

August 14, 2025

Expressing gratitude isn’t necessary, but a little appreciation may still go a long way

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lara B Aknin, Distinguished Professor of Social Psychology, Simon Fraser University

Gratitude statements like “Thanks! You are so kind!” and “Thank you! What you did was really helpful,” are common when someone receives assistance from another person. Such expressions of gratitude and appreciation have long been thought to encourage the helper to do kind things again in the future. But do they?

In contrast to past research, our new findings published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology suggest that gratitude does not always promote future helping.

Our research was conducted using a new approach called a Registered Report. It required that the design of our experiment, along with our hypotheses and analytic plans, were vetted by experts before we started. This new best practice in science increases rigour and transparency.

Expressions of gratitude

We conducted two large pre-registered experiments and found mixed results. In the first experiment, more than 600 university students recorded a short video to welcome a new student (played by a member of our research team) to campus.

In response to this kind act, we sent participants one of three randomly assigned pre-recorded videos. Some participants received a video in which the new student expressed gratitude for the participant’s kind act: “Thank you! What you did was very kind.”

Other participants received a video in which the new student expressed gratitude for the participant’s kind character: “Thank you! You are very kind.”

Finally, some participants in a control condition received a video of the new student acknowledging that they had received the recording, but with no expression of gratitude at all.

Afterwards, all participants were invited to write up to five brief notes to welcome other new students to university, which we treated as a measure of future helping behaviour.

Reception and kindness

By sending participants one of the three video replies, we were able to test two important questions about gratitude. Does receiving an expression of gratitude, regardless of whether it mentions your kind act or kind character, lead to more helping in the future compared to not receiving gratitude? Also, does the content of the gratitude matter — in other words, do some gratitude notes lead to more helping in the future than others?

To find out, we compared how many welcome notes participants wrote across the three video conditions provided. We found no differences across conditions, which suggests that receiving a gratitude expression and its contents may not impact future helping.

These results were in contrast to our predictions and past work by others.

Written expressions

Welcoming new students is one way to be kind, but there are many other ways to help. So, we conducted another experiment to test the same key questions. Does receiving a gratitude expression increase future helping behaviour? And does the content of the gratitude message matter?

This time, however, we used written thank-you messages instead of videos and measured helping in the form of donations.

Over 800 adults recruited online completed an innocuous survey that provided an opportunity to complete an initial kind act of donating to charity. Two days later, participants were invited back to complete a second survey that began with what we told participants was a thank-you letter from the charity they supported — participants received one of three letters we had created for the purposes of our study.

As in the first study, some participants were thanked for their kind act: “Thank you! Your generous donation was very kind.” Other participants were thanked for their kind character: “Thank you! You are very kind and generous.”

Once again, some participants did not receive a message of thanks, but were informed that their donation had been received. Participants completed a few other questions and were then given the opportunity to help again by deciding how much, if any, of an additional one-dollar bonus they would like to donate to a new charity.

We compared donations across the three conditions and found that people who received a thank-you note gave more money than people who received a simple message that their donation was received. Donation levels did not differ between the two types of gratitude expressions. People thanked for their kind act gave roughly as much (42 cents) as people who were thanked for their kind character (42 cents), which was higher than the 34 cents given by people in the control condition.

Everyday importance

While we did not see significant differences in help provided by people who were thanked for their kind action or character, this does not mean that people should stop saying thanks. Expressing gratitude can make the person expressing appreciation feel good and strengthen social relationships.

There may be less reason to stress over how exactly you express your appreciation to others. Past research has shown that many people are uncertain about how to properly and eloquently relay their gratitude.

Unfortunately, these worries can reduce the likelihood of someone sharing a simple but heartfelt statement of appreciation and our work reinforces this same underlying idea.

Exactly what is said when expressing thanks may be less important than communicating appreciation.

Kelton Travis, an honours undergraduate student in psychology at Simon Fraser University, co-authored this article.

Lara B Aknin receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Anurada Amarasekera, Kristina Castaneto, and Tiara A Cash do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Expressing gratitude isn’t necessary, but a little appreciation may still go a long way – https://theconversation.com/expressing-gratitude-isnt-necessary-but-a-little-appreciation-may-still-go-a-long-way-262779

August 13, 2025

The hidden costs of cancer for young survivors is derailing their financial futures

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Giancarlo Di Giuseppe, PhD Candidate, Division of Epidemiology, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto

Imagine being 25, fresh out of post-secondary education and full of optimism about starting your career, and then you hear the words: “You have cancer.”

You are suddenly faced with an unexpected health shock that not only threatens your physical health, but also your financial future. Most of your time is now spent feeling unwell and travelling to and from the hospital for treatment, while your friends and colleagues continue to build their careers.

This is the reality for nearly 1.2 million adolescents and young adults diagnosed with cancer each year worldwide, a number that is projected to rise. Just over 9,000 Canadian adolescents and young adults are diagnosed with cancer annually, and 85 per cent of them will survive their illness.

And while survival is the primary goal, many don’t realize that it comes with a hidden price that extends far beyond immediate medical costs.

It is estimated that the average Canadian affected by cancer faces $33,000 in lifetime costs related to their illness, totalling $7.5 billion each year for patients and their families.

But we have recently discovered the true economic impact on adolescents and young adults with cancer is often far greater than the previous numbers show and lasts much longer than previously recognized.

The financial penalty of survival

We compared 93,325 Canadian adolescents and young adults diagnosed with cancer and 765,240 similar individuals who did not experience cancer, and found that surviving cancer leads to long-term reduced income, which may last a lifetime.

On average, a cancer diagnosis results in a greater than five per cent reduction in earnings over a 10-year period after diagnosis.

As expected, income loss is more pronounced right after diagnosis, with survivors earning 10 to 15 per cent less in the first five years.

However, these hidden survival costs are not the same for everyone, and the financial toll varies greatly depending on the type of cancer. For instance, survivors of brain cancer see their average annual income drop by more than 25 per cent. This is a devastating financial burden — and one that endures.

The true lifetime effects are unknown, but it is not difficult to imagine how a financial setback like this can completely derail a young person’s financial future.

Why cancer costs young survivors more

Adolescents and young adults who are survivors of cancer experience “financial toxicity,” which refers to the direct costs of cancer, such as treatment or medication costs, and indirect costs like reduced work ability, extended sick leave and job loss.

Over one-third of young cancer patients report financial toxicity.

Many cancer survivors experience lasting adverse physical and cognitive effects that limit everyday functioning.

Even in the Canadian universal health-care system, which does not require payment for cancer treatment, many younger Canadians are unable to work and need to rely on family members for financial support.

The impact on work capacity is significant for adolescents and young adults who are just beginning their careers, causing them to miss critical years of career development during treatment and recovery that can have cascading economic effects.

These challenges can ultimately lead to financial instability and hardship.

Paying the price

Beyond the individual hardships, the issue of financial instability among young cancer survivors is becoming a broader societal challenge.

In 2025, young Canadian cancer survivors are entering an economy with an unfavourable job market and rising youth unemployment, as well as a widening gap between wages and housing affordability.
Rising inflation and general unaffordability are also compounding financial difficulties young Canadian cancer survivors face, ultimately making financial recovery more challenging.

Income is a fundamental social determinant of health, and financial inequities can perpetuate health disparities in cancer survivors after treatment.

Patients are forced into making devastating financial choices like depleting their savings and incurring debt.

Policy

A Canadian Cancer Society 2024 report highlights the urgency for support systems to address financial well-being after cancer.

Based on our research, which assesses the financial life of adolescent and young adult survivors of cancer, we have some recommendations for Canadian policymakers, businesses and primary care providers.

Policymakers should:

Make employment insurance benefits that better support survivors post-treatment.
Provide tax credits for groups of cancer survivors disproportionately affected by financial toxicity, such as those with brain cancer.

Primary care providers should:

Incorporate financial navigation counselling into their cancer care.
Provide resources for navigating insurance and financial assistance programs.
Routinely screen for financial toxicity as part of survivorship care.

Employers should:

Create a supportive work environment that accommodates the unique needs of cancer survivors.
Recognize the physical and mental challenges faced by young survivors and provide flexible work arrangements.

Young cancer survivors have already faced one of life’s most difficult challenges. They shouldn’t have to struggle with financial insecurity.

By recognizing that survivorship starts at cancer diagnosis, we must broaden the conversation about cancer care beyond the clinical to the economic.

Jason D. Pole does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointments.

Giancarlo Di Giuseppe does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The hidden costs of cancer for young survivors is derailing their financial futures – https://theconversation.com/the-hidden-costs-of-cancer-for-young-survivors-is-derailing-their-financial-futures-256420

August 13, 2025

How Shakespeare can help us overcome loneliness in the digital age

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Marie Trotter, PhD Candidate, Department of English, McGill University

Are you addicted to endless scrolling? Trapped by the algorithms on your smartphone? Theatre might just be the antidote.

“Denmark’s a prison,” says Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, in one of Shakespeare’s most famous dramas. In this scene, he is speaking to his friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who have been recruited to spy on him by his mother and uncle.

Hamlet isn’t literally imprisoned, but he does feel trapped by his circumstances. He comes to realize that his uncle murdered his father, married his mother and then seized the kingship. He is being watched. He wants to escape the surveillance of the Danish court.

More than 400 years after Hamlet’s first performance, experts have warned that we are trapped and manipulated by the surveillance of our smartphones. Our online behaviour has transformed us into marketable data, and addictive algorithms have bound us to an endless recycling of what we have “liked.”

Digital tribalism threatens democracy

This digital herding also affects who we interact with online. We often find ourselves gathering with others who like the same people and share the same politics, seeking both protection and alleviation from loneliness.

This new form of digital entrapment has given birth to a kind of tribalism — a strong sense of loyalty to a group or community — that political and social researchers warn may threaten a foundational practice of democracy: the possibility of authentic conversation among people.

The technologies of surveillance have drastically changed since Shakespeare’s time. Today, our habits are transformed into data by a virtual panopticon of devices.

The loneliness that many of us, especially young people, are suffering echoes Hamlet’s sense of isolation and inability to voice his true feelings.

While our culture is very different from Shakespeare’s London, his plays — and those by others — still have the potential to bring people together and help us think deeply about our shared experience.

Shakespeare’s playhouse conversations

In Hamlet, the prince knows something is rotten in Denmark, but he finds that he cannot speak publicly about it. All alone on stage, he says: “But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue.”

Today, it seems, he could just as easily be speaking about how we curate ourselves online in our unquenchable desire to be seen and heard by others. But it doesn’t have to be this way.

Consider Shakespeare’s playhouse, an extraordinary gathering place for thousands of people. It was a space where all kinds of people could have conversations with the actors and each other about all kinds of themes, like the justice of “taming” an unruly woman (The Taming of the Shrew), how to push back against the power of a tyrant (Richard III) or how Christians might think differently about Jews (The Merchant of Venice).

Shakespeare opened established ways of thinking to questioning, inviting audiences to see the world and each other in new ways.

And audiences in Shakespeare’s time didn’t just sit quietly and listen. They interacted actively and loudly with the actors and the stories they saw on stage.

Historical research suggests theatre helped change early modern society by making it possible for commoners to have a public voice. In this way, Shakespeare contributed to the emergence of modern democratic culture.

Conversation pieces

Hamlet is one of Shakespeare’s most frequently performed tragedies, and his anguish under a surveillance state speaks to our own struggles for freedom and belonging.

In his soliloquies, he questions his own indecisiveness, but he prompts the audience, too, searching for their support: “Am I a coward?” he asks. His questions break the fourth wall, looking for answers in the audience.

Sometimes they talk back: from an intoxicated spectator at the Royal Shakespeare Company in the 1960s who shouted “yes!” to a teenager at the Stratford Festival in 2022 who whispered “no,” audiences want to speak with Hamlet, responding to his self-doubt with their own perspectives.

Hamlet knew about the theatre’s liberating power, too. In his search for a public voice, he chose to stage a play to expose corruption in Denmark. “The play’s the thing,” he said, “wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king.”

Psychology researchers agree. Attending a play is proven to provoke the awakening of conscience, helping audiences empathize with political views that differ from their own. This understanding leads to pro-social behaviour outside the theatre.

Empathy, insight and social engagement

After watching a play by American playwright Dominique Morisseau about the impacts of the 2008 auto plant closures in Detroit, audiences were more likely to donate to and volunteer with charities supporting the homeless.

Seeing the vulnerability of fellow human beings onstage helps audience members become more empathetic towards each others’ experiences.

Theatre also helps the artists who make it rediscover their humanity. In the 2013 book Shakespeare Saved My Life, English professor Laura Bates writes about her experience teaching “the bard” to men in solitary confinement who could only speak to each other through slots in their cell doors.

One incarcerated person found a kindred spirit in Richard II, who is imprisoned at the end of his play. Reading Macbeth helped him understand the mistakes he made in his search for power.

A woman in a similar program in Michigan saw herself in Lady Anne’s grief in Richard III. Beyond empathizing with the characters, prisoners also felt empowered to confront the roles they had played in their past and to imagine new roles for the future.

Building community

The path towards empowerment or freedom through theatre is not limited to incarcerated spaces or grand professional stages.

Liberating theatre can take place wherever people gather: in living rooms and community centres; in parks and church basements; in a drama classroom or even on Zoom, where people can read plays aloud, improvise scenes from their own lives and create new stories together.

These modest theatrical gatherings offer something our devices cannot: the experience of being present with others in shared creative work.

When we step into the roles of characters, we step outside the algorithmic predictions that have come to direct or define us online.

When we collaborate to tell a story, we build the kind of community that allows us to bear witness for each other. Hamlet ends with the Danish prince asking his friend, Horatio, to tell the truth about what has happened: “In this harsh world draw thy breath in pain to tell my story.”

The theatre’s liberating power belongs to anyone willing to gather with others, turn off their phones and tell stories.

Each small theatrical gathering becomes an act of resistance — a reclaiming of our capacity for connection and conversation.

Marie Trotter receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Paul Yachnin receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. How Shakespeare can help us overcome loneliness in the digital age – https://theconversation.com/how-shakespeare-can-help-us-overcome-loneliness-in-the-digital-age-259628