fortune--2020-11-27--Gift Guide: How to turn your outdoor space into a year-round living room

Winter came especially early this year to Chicago—the first snowflakes were spotted on October 26th, to be exact. In this part of the country people are already used to braving the elements, but with COVID still running rampant, having an outdoor space that is usable (no matter what the temperature) has become the best way to ensure you can keep socializing with other humans during the darkest and coldest months of the year. Here, we tracked down six essentials for making your outdoor space feel like your favorite indoor space this winter.
Solo Stove Bonfire, $284
You may have thought most of society’s great leaps forward in terms of innovation recently have been in gene editing, or perhaps app design. But don’t underestimate fire pits, particularly the Solo Stove’s “smokeless” model. As the company explains it, “Strategically placed holes in the double-wall structure suck the air from the bottom and feed the heated oxygen to the top resulting in a spectacular flame with intense heat.” Though you use regular firewood, there is “nearly no smoke and minimal ash left over.” The Solo comes in three sizes: Campfire, Bonfire and Yukon, with a range of covers and cooking accessories sold separately (we recommend the double-pronged marshmallow roaster). Bottom line: The perfect gift for anyone who loves sitting around a campfire, but doesn’t love smelling like one.
Nebula Capsule Max Projector, $470
If you haven’t already heard about the Nebula (or seen one in action) prepare to be amazed. At little more than the size of a soda can, this powerful wireless projector makes everything else on the market seem like something from your 7th grade science classroom. Set it on a table and stream your favorite shows or movies using your phone as a remote. The app supports Netflix, Amazon Prime and most other streaming services. We’ve seen the Nebula projected on a foldable screen, sheet, or even just the side of a house. Bonus: Technically you can also use it inside as well.
Cozy Wrap, $68
Is it a blanket? Is it a coat? Do we even care when it’s 24 degrees out? This cozy fall coverup not only looks like you just stepped off the Scottish moors, it’s flexible enough to keep you warm in almost any scenario. Tuck it around your next on a chilly evening or use it as a blanket during outdoor movie night. Perhaps Braveheart?
Nottingham Faux Fur Plaid Throw, $149
As the Swedish saying goes, “Det finns inget dåligt väder, bara dåliga kläder,” which translates roughly as “there is no bad weather, there are only bad clothes.” We’d take that a step further and say that as long as you are covered by blanket that’s made of wool on one side/faux fur on the other, you’ll forget about the weather entirely. This unbelievably cozy throw from Pottery Barn will work equally well outside by the fire pit, or inside by the TV.
Mr. Heater ‘Tank Top’ Outdoor Heater, $107
While there has been a run on those tall restaurant-style patio heaters this fall (they are sold out in many locales), they actually aren’t always the most practical choice for home use. For starters, you really need several of them to actually warm up a group of people, and it’s a bit awkward to congregate around a hot pole. A better choice may come in a slightly smaller package. This well-reviewed model sticks to the top of any size propane tank and effectively disperses heat around a screen porch, an outdoor seating area, or even a garage (aka your ‘outdoor living room.’) True, it’s not as ‘sleek’ as some models on the market, but hey: if it’s good enough for ice-fishing, it’ll definitely do the trick for backyard cocktails.
Cottage Lantern, $28
Pros know that taking your backyard from dull and lifeless to magical is largely a matter of creative lighting. A few lanterns arranged around a seating area, balcony or on a screen porch will lead to a magical effect. Combined with all the other elements above, you may find that even after the pandemic has passed, you may never want to entertain indoors again.


fortune--2020-11-27--The email security market is littered with false claims. How to fix it

Thousands of Amazon workers will walk off the job today to fight for fair pay and COVID protections

Today’s crowded email security market has become littered with false claims. I can tell you that firsthand—the company I run competes in this crowded arena. (And as such, I have a financial stake in writing this article.)
As a potential buyer, empty promises are incredibly confusing. As a vendor, they’re counterproductive and dishonest—it’s pretty unethical to say your product removes all risk of any existing or future threats.
How did the industry get here? It’s a little more complicated than just too many vendors trying to get heard over all the noise—and it’s entangled in the history of cybersecurity itself. Many of us often wonder if it’s even possible today for companies to see fact versus fiction to make sure they’re investing in the right system features and benefits.
Cybersecurity has grown extremely complex over the last decade. At its earliest, the landscape was ruled by hackers steeped in computer science whose activity was mostly on the offensive side—finding ways around security protocols for street cred. As it evolved, many hackers “went corporate” and refocused their skills defensively to help companies arm their internal systems against malicious attacks. These skills, honed intricately by years of practice and trial-and-error, established the baseline for the entire cybersecurity industry.
On the plus side, a new sense of professionalism has evolved with certifications such as certified information systems security professional (CISSP) and CSA. There’s even a course dedicated to certified ethical hacking. None of these programs were available 20 years ago. In addition, more mid-level jobs now exist for cybersecurity professionals, so the role of the chief information security officer (CISO) has become significantly less technical than it once was.
Today, it exists as an amalgamation of a variety of functions, including application security, network security, and physical security. There’s much more on a CISO’s plate and many more security vendors to choose from. Many CISOs also sit on corporate boards and are carefully watched and assessed. With breaches potentially costing millions of dollars, the stakes are high—and vendors converge on stressed out CISOs unsure of where to turn.
In the past, hackers were highly skilled at cyber breaking and entering—and these proficient hackers became cybersecurity leaders in the private sector.
But today’s hackers are lazy criminals. Many of them don’t even do the hard work of hacking; they buy stolen data on the dark web or buy ransomware-as-a-service. And so the people making up companies’ cybersecurity leadership are less technically proficient than they once were.
At a time when the attack space has grown considerably more complex, security professionals are relying less on innate computer science knowledge and more on marketing-driven vendors to educate and protect their companies.
This environment has become a breeding ground for false claims.
Compare cybersecurity to the CRM industry, where to procure a system, businesspeople turn to one of the big players like Salesforce or HubSpot. These big vendors educate people about their products and then deliver the product as a cloud service.
Unfortunately, in the cybersecurity industry, there are too many players, and the majority of the “educational” information and reports from the vendor community are mostly elaborate product pitches. People who have been around the block in this industry will always roll their eyes at language like “eliminate” and “annihilate” when referring to cyber threats. But newer CISOs may not have that response because they were trained by an industry that loves to promote such claims, most of which are false and solely profit-motivated.
There’s really not a huge difference in the efficacy of many of the products out there. They all play by the same rules and are based on the same analyses. Back in the day, there was a balance of power between market leaders—and all these companies won and lost at generally the same rate. The introduction of venture capitalist companies blew up this playbook.
Today, the industry has become overcrowded with too many vendors and led by people who don’t have nearly enough background in security and computing. It’s become easy to spot who just wants to make the sale and enter the next round of funding—and who really wants to put out a good product that solves an industry challenge.
For CISOs and other cybersecurity professionals who may have just entered the industry, it’s a daunting task to sift through the vendor clutter. Luckily, buzzwords are easy to spot, and they’re a telltale sign of false claims. Hollow promise-makers know that CISOs are always at the mercy of the board to meet metrics and manage risk—and they prey on them with lofty claims.
As a vendor, it’s tempting to make claims that will get your company noticed and help your product stand out in the racket—but don’t. Email security marketing tactics don’t have to be embellished or overly exaggerated to get noticed and be effective. In fact, the best way to promote your product is to ditch the buzzy bells and whistles altogether.
To truly stand out in a world where nearly everyone is lying, speak the truth. For many organizations, this requires a fairly significant culture shift—one that starts with leadership and permeates the rest of the company. The content you produce, the advertising you run, the way you train your sales team, and the priorities you choose for engineering should all be in alignment with your capabilities and your mission. That kind of self-assessment alone is a daunting task and should be a major objective for company leaders.
In a similar vein, focus on hiring, training, and retaining talented professionals, and routinely instilling in them an emphasis on the real benefits your product provides for your customers. This level of customer service, which promotes an open dialogue, holds both your solution and your people accountable for following through on promises.
Simply put, explain what your product does and how your company will support your client’s IT staff and security team. Give them realistic cost and return-on-investment numbers they can take to the board. Then prove your worth.
Kevin O’Brien is cofounder and CEO of GreatHorn.


fortune--2020-11-27--In a historic vote, the Swiss will determine if multinationals should be held liable for global abus

In a historic vote, the Swiss will determine if multinationals should be held liable for global abuses

Our mission to make business better is fueled by readers like you. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
For decades, Switzerland has been a favorite headquarters for global corporations, and for good reason: It transformed its tiny Alpine country into an economic powerhouse, in good part by keeping business secrets and asking few questions.
But that could be about to change—as soon as this weekend.
In a nationwide referendum on Sunday, Swiss voters will decide whether companies headquartered there should be held legally liable for whatever environment wreckage and human rights abuses occur as a result of their operations, no matter where. The so-called Responsible Business Initiative, or RBI as the Swiss call it, has been nearly a decade in the making, and would compel companies to report on non-financial aspects involved in every part of their global supply chain—a potentially mammoth undertaking for giants like pharmaceutical manufacturer Novartis or oil trader Trafigura. Those are just two of the 29,000 or so companies headquartered in Switzerland. In the future, all would be held accountable under Swiss law for transgressions across the world.
Depending on who you are, the idea is either long overdue, or a catastrophe in the making.
Human-rights advocates, trade unions and NGOs argue that the RBI would finally force companies to make sure that their suppliers and sub-contractors do not use child labor, expel people from their land, or pollute local rivers and air; those are among the accusations leveled against Nestlé (headquartered in Vevey, Swizerland), commodities trading house Glencore (headquartered in Zug, Switzerland) and cement giant LafargeHolcim (also in Zug).
“If we can only be competitive by ignoring human rights, by ignoring the basic laws of environmental protection, that means our country has really lost all dignity,” Dick Marty, the former Swiss Senator who spearheaded the proposal, told a local journalist earlier this month. He says that by far the majority of Swiss-based businesses are good global citizens, but that the abuses committed by a small number of them are “damaging to the local population and environment, as well as to the image of Switzerland and its economy.”
“Change is coming”
Surprisingly, Switzerland’s business organizations largely agree with that sentiment, saying that clearly something needs be done about the human-rights violations, corruption, and environmental problems in global supply chains. For years, multinationals have been able to wash their hands of such issues, arguing that they lie beyond the control, and too remote from their corporate decision-makers.
But that argument is unlikely to survive much longer.
“I completely agree that change is coming,” Erich Herzog, executive board member of Switzerland’s umbrella business federation economiesuisse, told Fortune by phone on Friday. “There are some very sensitive areas into which companies have to make specific efforts.”
Beyond that broad agreement, however, lies deep division over how to compel companies to change, and most Swiss-based businesses and Swiss politicians have rejected the RBI proposal in Sunday’s referendum as putting much too big a burden of proof on companies.
“The RBI is dangerous,” says Herzog, who heads the organization’s competition and regulation department. “Swiss companies have to do vast due diligence on its whole supply chain,” he says. “It is something that companies cannot really work with. There might be a withdrawal of investments in countries where the risks are too high.”
It could, say some execs, even lead companies to move countries. “It will perhaps drive businesses not to install themselves in our home [Switzerland],” Beat Hess, President of LafargeHolcim told the Swiss paper Le Temps this month. “This will cause us to spend a lot more money to lawyers and communications people.” He calls the RBI “a gigantic absurdity.”
What the polls say
Even so, recent polls show wide support among Swiss voters for the RBI proposals—a sign that Sunday’s referendum could pass. In Herzog’s opinion, that is because many voters believe companies are likely committing abuses elsewhere in the world, yet they do not realize how arduous it will be to enforce the law. “We are in a very ambiguous and very toxic environment, which companies, even if they try to do good, they cannot cope with,” he says.
Predicting that the referendum could well succeed, the Swiss parliament has drafted an alternative proposal that it would try to pass during the coming months—stopping the RBI measures from being turned into law.
The politicians’ counterproposal would still force companies to monitor human-rights and environmental issues across their global supply chains, and issue regular due diligence reports on a range of non-financial factors. But crucially, it does not threaten legal action against Swiss-based companies for any violations they find.
That, says Marty, the former senator who drafted the RBI, gives companies complete protection from the law. “It does not give the injured party which suffers damage any opportunity to assert its rights,” he told the news site SwissInfo. “It is total impunity.”
In recent note earlier this month, the accounting firm EY says parliament’s proposed law would nonetheless compel Swiss-based companies to hugely increase its due-diligence reporting (a service, it adds, that EY would be happy to offer prospective clients). If the parliament’s new law is approved, “the according nonfinancial report would need to be approved and signed by the highest management and administrative body, and approved by the body responsible for annual accounts,” EY says. Companies would also need to monitor all minerals and metals in conflict zones and audit its suppliers for child labor.
Either way, as Herzog says, change is coming in Switzerland—no matter what Swiss voters decide in Sunday’s referendum.
Correction and update, November 27, 2020: This post has been updated to clarify that the proposal on the referendum is called the Responsible Business Initiative, or RBI.


fortune--2020-11-27--The pandemic paradox: surviving a public health crisis breeds more science skeptics, researchers fin

The pandemic paradox: surviving a public health crisis breeds more science skeptics, researchers find

Our mission to make business better is fueled by readers like you. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
It sounds crazy, but it could be true: The current pandemic experience of a crucial cohort of the world population could make future pandemics worse.
The surprising evidence comes from new research by Barry Eichengreen of the University of California at Berkeley, Cevat Giray Aksoy of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and Orkun Saka of the University of Sussex.
They examined the attitudes and behavior of more than 75,000 people worldwide who had lived through an epidemic, focusing on those who were age 18 to 25 at the time. That age range is when individuals form long-lasting attitudes, psychologists report, and some of the attitudes formed by those in the study could endanger themselves and others in a future pandemic. Even decades after enduring an epidemic, the researchers found, the experience during those impressionable years “significantly reduces trust in scientists and in the benefits of their work.”
Even worse, those people are more skeptical of vaccines and are less likely to get their children vaccinated.
It’s hard to believe anyone could respond that way to today’s pandemic, when science is the hero. Worldwide trust in science is the highest in the three years that 3M has been sponsoring an annual State of Science Index; 54% of respondents said COVID-19 has made them more likely to advocate for science. Skepticism of science declined for the first time in the survey.
Yet the findings of the Eichengreen team could hold up even after this extraordinary pandemic. That’s because there turns out to be a significant difference between people’s attitudes toward science and their attitudes toward scientists. The researchers found that going through an epidemic in the impressionable years didn’t affect attitudes toward science as an endeavor; in the abstract, people approve of it for its potential to improve society. But “if past epidemics are a guide,” the researchers write, “the virus…will reduce trust in individual scientists, worsen perceptions of their honesty, and weaken the belief that their activities benefit the public.”
Those results are consistent with other research going back years. When bad things happen, people tend to blame individuals rather than institutions. In addition, the researchers note that in previous surveys “a significant share of respondents take disagreement among scientists, which is not unlikely in the context of a swiftly unfolding pandemic, as evidence that their conclusions are based on personal belief (rather than on issues of data and methodology), or as simply indicating that the investigators in question are incompetent.”
There’s reason to hope that at least developed countries might escape the worst of the damaging attitudes that may be sparked by this pandemic, since the research found that such attitudes were strongest in countries with low incomes and few physicians per capita. But another factor could be especially bad news for the U.S. and Europe. In the study, anti-scientist, anti-vaccine attitudes were stronger after the most severe epidemics, and COVID-19 has hit the U.S. and Europe harder than almost anywhere else; those countries haven’t experienced a pandemic as severe as COVID-19 in living memory.
This new research offers valuable help to policymakers hoping to maximize support for science, scientists, and vaccines in future pandemics. Don’t bother trying to persuade oldsters; they’re beyond help. And don’t worry about kids; their lasting attitudes won’t be formed until later. Go all in on Gen Z, starting today. The next pandemic could be years away, but it’s outcome may be partially determined right now.


fortune--2020-11-27--When second stimulus checks could arrive if Biden strikes a deal

For months Democratic and Republican leaders have failed to reach an agreement for another COVID-19 relief package, which would include items like a second round of $1,200 stimulus checks.
But staffers on Capitol Hill expect that breakthrough to come shortly after the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden on January 20.
And if that economic aid package includes another round of stimulus checks, here’s when Americans could expect to actually get the money.
If the last go-around is any indication, the first of the checks would start to be deposited within two weeks of the legislation passing. After the passage of the $2.2 trillion CARES Act on March 27, Americans started to receive their stimulus checks as early as the week of April 13.
The long waits shouldn’t happen this time. Back in the spring, millions of Americans, including those on Social Security, saw their checks delayed until they provided additional information. Since this payment would be based on the same tax year, it’s unlikely more information will need to be verified—at least among those who received their first round of payments.
And the Biden White House could even ask the Treasury Secretary—likely to be Janet Yellen—to speed up the distribution of the checks given that the system is already in place. That is exactly what the Trump White House discussed prior to losing the election.
Once control of the Senate is determined by a pair of runoff races in Georgia on January, we’ll have a better idea of what the next stimulus package will look like. If Democrats win the Senate, expect a larger package like the $2.2 trillion Heroes Act passed in the Democratic controlled House. But if Republicans retain the Senate, they’ll have the leverage to push Democrats to accept a more modest package—which could exclude direct payments altogether.
If stimulus checks do get included, expect it to be similar to the first round. The direct payments sent in the spring were worth as much as $1,200 for individuals or $2,400 for married couples, plus $500 for each qualifying child. That amount would decrease for adjusted gross income above $75,000 per individual or $150,000 per qualified couple. And the checks phase out for individuals earning above $99,000, head of household filers with one child above $146,500, and joint filers with no children at $198,000.


fortune--2020-11-27--These megacities could become breeding grounds for the next pandemic, scientists say

Mumbai. Jakarta. Manila.
All of these mega-metropolises share a global risk, scientists say: they could be breeding grounds for the next pandemic.
A group of international researchers, led by scientists at the University of Sydney, have mapped out the cities that offer the ripest conditions for the incubation of viruses that could jump from animals to humans—and then spread around the world.
The researchers tracked the risks based on three factors: the first was identifying cities where intense urban life collides with both domesticated animals and rich biodiversity, raising interactions between humans, farmed animals, and wildlife, often due to disruption like deforestation.
This increases the risks of zoonotic disease outbreaks in which, for example, a virus makes the jump from a mammal or bird species to humans. Well before the arrival of COVID-19, virologists and other scientists have been sounding the alarm that our modern world creates ideal conditions for just such an outbreak, as Fortune wrote in April.
“Whence the next pandemic? The intersecting global geography of the animal-human interface, poor health systems and air transit centrality reveals conduits for high-impact spillover”; One Health.
But to create a global pandemic, the Sydney researchers researched an additional two factors.
The second is tracking which of those super cities are globally connected—not just through international airports and aviation routes—allowing the virus to be spread quickly. The third factor is an insufficient public healthcare infrastructure (measured, in this case, by rates of infant mortality), which increased the risk that a virus in circulation won’t be identified and reported straight away.
Combining those factors, the researchers found that 20% of the world’s most-connected cities are at risk of such disease spreads. Another 14-20% of those cities have poor health infrastructure, with the majority in South and Southeast Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa. The cities with the highest risks including Mumbai, Delhi, Jakarta, Singapore, and Kunming, in China.
“Whence the next pandemic? The intersecting global geography of the animal-human interface, poor health systems and air transit centrality reveals conduits for high-impact spillover”; One Health.
The researchers broke the risks down into three levels: a yellow, orange and red rating system with red the highest risk, yellow the lowest.
Low- and -middle income countries are highly represented in “red” due to the healthcare risks. But some high-income cities—the researchers cite San Francisco, and Adelaide, Australia as two—can be found in the yellow tier, said Michael Walsh, an infectious disease epidemiologist at the University of Sydney and one of the authors of the study, in a release. That’s because of the extreme impact more affluent cities can have on local wildlife, Walsh said.
Addressing these risks would require a holistic approach, he said, one that looks at wildlife conservation and animal husbandry alongside human healthcare systems and monitoring and surveillance at airports—a huge cost, but a necessary one.
“Given the overwhelming risk absorbed by so many of the world’s communities and the concurrent high-risk exposure of so many of our most connected cities, this is something that requires our collective prompt attention.”


fortune--2020-11-28--Biden’s national coronavirus strategy is starting to take shape—and it’s very different than Trump’s

Biden ’ s national coronavirus strategy is starting to take shape—and it ’ s very different than Trump ’ s

Congress is bracing for President-elect Joe Biden to move beyond the Trump administration’s state-by-state approach to the COVID-19 crisis and build out a national strategy to fight the pandemic and distribute the eventual vaccine.
The incoming administration’s approach reflects Democrats’ belief that a more comprehensive plan, some of it outlined in the House’s $2 trillion coronavirus aid bill, is needed to get the pandemic under control. Republicans have resisted big spending but agree additional funding is needed. With the nation on edge but a vaccine in sight, the complicated logistics of vaccinating hundreds of millions of Americans raise the stakes on the major undertaking.
“We have an incredible challenge on our hands,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, which is approaching the anniversary of its first reported case of the virus last January.
A vaccine can only go so far, Murray warned, without a distribution plan. “A vaccine can sit on a shelf. A vaccination is what we’re talking about,” she said.
As Congress weighs a new round of COVID-19 relief, federal officials say doses of the vaccine could begin shipping within a day of Food and Drug Administration approval. Three pharmaceutical manufacturers — Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca — have announced early results. But the rollout faces a patchwork of state plans, a transitioning White House and potential backlash from vaccine skeptics, despite the rising U.S. death toll of nearly 260,000 people.
Biden said Tuesday on NBC’s “Nightly News with Lester Holt” that his team has started meeting with COVID-19 officials at the White House on how to “get from a vaccine being distributed to a person being able to get vaccinated.”
Democrats have been sounding the alarm that the Trump administration’s delay in granting Biden’s team access to transition materials was wasting precious time.
States submitted draft vaccination planning documents last month, but not all of them have made full plans public. Private Capitol Hill briefings by officials from Operation Warp Speed, the federal vaccine effort, left some lawmakers fuming last week over what they called a lack of coordination with Biden’s camp.
Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said Tuesday that his department “immediately” started working with Biden’s staff after the General Services Administration formally acknowledged the election results.
Azar said he wanted to ensure Biden’s transition would be “in the spirit of looking out for the health and well-being of the American people and, in particular, saving lives through this COVID-19 pandemic.”
From the start, the pandemic has challenged and reflected the two parties’ approaches to the public health crisis, with the Trump administration largely outsourcing many decisions to the states and Democrats pressing for a more nationalized approach.
In Congress, Republicans largely rejected the $2 trillion-plus House bill from Democrats as excessive. They prefer their own $500 billion Senate effort, saying states and cities can tap funding from previous relief legislation. Senate Democrats blocked that bill twice as insufficient.
Biden’s campaign called for $25 billion for vaccines to “guarantee it gets to every American, cost-free.” That’s similar to the amount included in both the House and the Senate bills, through different strategies, and Congress previously mandated that vaccines be free. With fresh legislation stalled, it’s uncertain if states will have the resources needed once the FDA approves the vaccines.
During a conference call this week with governors, Azar and other health officials fielded a range of questions. Governors were seeking guidance on which populations they should prioritize for the vaccine and whether there was a list of pharmacies available to administer the two-dose regimens, according to a readout of the call provided by the office of Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington.
Blaire Bryant, who oversees health care policy at the National Association of Counties, said a national strategy for communicating vaccine information to the public and the funding to make vaccinations equitable are vital.
“We’re in uncharted territory,” she said. “The more information, the more guidance we can get from the federal level, the better.”
She said states do have access to previously approved funding, but cash-strapped local governments have been reluctant to draw down the remaining dollars for vaccines. It’s robbing Peter to pay Paul, she said.
As Congress debates funding, at least two Republican senators are participating in vaccine trials as a way to build confidence among Americans skeptical of the federal effort.
Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, said in a statement that he hoped his participation “will reassure people about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.”
Sen. Steve Daines of Montana, who is participating in the Pfizer trials, asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday to consider the “unique challenges” of distributing the vaccine to remote and rural communities like those in his state.
Daines said in a letter to the CDC that it will also be “critical” to ensure access for frontline health care and essential workers, as well as older adults and people with medical conditions.
Other lawmakers, though, have brushed off concerns. GOP Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said he expects vaccine distribution will be “well underway” by the time Biden takes office Jan. 20.
Murray, as the top Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, grew concerned this summer as she said the Trump administration outsourced much of the vaccine distribution planning to the states.
She drafted a 19-page paper calling for $25 billion to stand up a vaccination program with supply chains, hired personnel, drive-in clinics and other ways to provide no-cost vaccines. She warned of the Trump administration’s “lack of centralized leadership” and “chaotic communication” with the states.
Biden and Murray have since talked about her approach, which draws on input from health professionals on Biden’s team. Former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, a member of Biden’s COVID-19 task force, briefed Senate Democrats the week after the election.
Murray compared the vaccine effort to sending a man to the moon or fighting a world war. She said it will take all Americans joining to say, “This is a pandemic, and I’m going to do my part to get the country out of it.”


fortune--2020-11-28--Pfizer’s COVID vaccine comes with a chilly complication. But that may change

Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine candidate, announced earlier this month, comes with a major complication that could delay its distribution in rural areas and developing countries: It must be stored at the ultra-cold temperature of -70°C. That means the vaccine must be kept in specialized freezers that cost as much as $20,000 each and are rare outside of medical research facilities.
But that problem may just be temporary. Experts say that the vaccine’s cold storage requirements may become less stringent as more is learned about how the vaccine reacts to warmer temperatures.
Tinglong Dai, a medical logistics specialist at Johns Hopkins University, says he wouldn’t be surprised if Pfizer eventually revises the storage requirements for its vaccine. With the current storage requirements, Dai says, “they’re being more cautious.”
“You can only use [a] vaccine at storage conditions that have been proven and documented,” said Barney Graham, Deputy Director of the Vaccine Research Center at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Early research during a vaccine’s development is often done under more cautious conditions, but according to Graham, later testing can demonstrate a vaccine’s durability under a wider range of conditions.
This dynamic has already played out with a vaccine candidate from Moderna, which uses similar technology to Pfizer’s to trigger viral immunity. As recently as August, Moderna was expected to seek approval of its vaccine with storage standards similar to Pfizer’s.
But on November 16, the same day it announced promising large-scale trial results, Moderna revealed that its vaccine candidate was effective for up to six months when stored at standard freezer temperatures of -20° C, and for up to 30 days at standard refrigerator temperatures of 2-8° C.
Pfizer declined to comment about the possibility of revising storage requirements for its current vaccine candidate.
Changing storage requirements, according to Dai, would make it far easier to deliver Pfizer’s vaccine to populations further from research hospitals. In its current “vaccine playbook”, the CDC advises against local vaccine managers buying specialized freezers.
To help with distributing its vaccine, Pfizer has developed a shipping container that can maintain the required -70° C for up to 10 days unopened. With regular refills of dry ice, it can maintain that temperature for up to 30 days.
But using shipping containers for storage is risky. “Every time you put new dry ice in is an opportunity for mistakes,” says Dai.
Any change to Pfizer’s storage requirements is unlikely to impact the first wave of vaccine distribution, which may start by early 2021. That’s only if the federal government approves the vaccine for distribution.
Pfizer did confirm, however, that it’s working on a more durable version of the vaccine that is “lyophilized,” or freeze-dried. That vaccine, the company said, would be able to be kept at normal refrigerator temperatures and may be ready by 2022. The Food and Drug Administration would have to approve the updated vaccine following additional trials.
Joshua Michaud, associate director for Global Health Policy at the Kaiser Family Foundation, says Pfizer could also reformulate the protective layer of fatty lipids around the core of its vaccine. Moderna says its specific lipid shell technology is key to its vaccine’s greater durability.
The Pfizer vaccine’s storage requirements are slightly less of a problem now considering that easier-to-store candidates, including AstraZeneca’s, are in the approval pipeline. Those more durable vaccines could be distributed in areas that lack the equipment necessary to safely store Pfizer’s.
But according to Dai, the unprecedented scale of the challenge – immunizing essentially the entire global population as quickly as possible – means every vaccine will be needed in the short term. The question is whether sturdier vaccines will be available as soon as Pfizer’s, making it easier to protect far-flung patients.


fortune--2020-11-28--As libraries fight for access to e-books, a new copyright champion emerges

Our mission to make business better is fueled by readers like you. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
A long running battle over copyright has flared up again, and Lila Bailey is at the center of it.
A personable 43-year-old with degrees in philosophy and law, Bailey is the chief lawyer for the Internet Archive, a non-profit facing a major lawsuit from big publishers over how it lends out e-books.
“This case will determine what libraries will be. We think the future of libraries hangs in the balance here,” says Bailey in a recent interview from her home in San Francisco.
The case involves the Internet Archive’s decision to create a temporary “National Emergency Library” at the height of the pandemic’s first wave—a service that expanded how many e-books clients could borrow simultaneously. The publishing industry sued, saying the non-profit was handing out digital books without permission.
The Internet Archive case has received national attention—a widely shared article in The Nation described it as “publishers taking the Internet to court”—and has drawn attention to the reality that, as library branches close over COVID concerns, patrons must often wait 10 weeks or more to borrow the digital version of a best-seller.
A debate as old as the Web
While some of the legal details are new, the underlying conflict is not: Since the late 1990s, the publishing and entertainment industry has clashed bitterly with Internet users and public interest advocates over how to distribute the fruits of the digital economy.
For Bailey, the debate is personal. Growing up in an artistic family of modest means on Long Island, she never encountered the Internet until arriving at Brown University in 1995. There, Bailey made friends with a circle of creative types thrilled by the culture and community they discovered on web, from the music-sharing bazaar Napster to blogging platform LiveJournal.
“The Internet seemed like this amazing new thing to distribute knowledge and information,” she recalls.
After college, Bailey landed in the midst of New York’s cultural elite with a job as an executive assistant to a creative director at magazine giant Conde Naste. But she soon became disillusioned, concluding the publishing industry prioritized money over artistic ideals.
Bailey’s next move took her to Berkeley Law School, a political and intellectual milieu more to her taste. She also acquired a mentor in the person of Pam Samuelson, an influential copyright professor who was among the first to argue the laws of the Internet should reflect the public interest—and not just create a series of economic padlocks for giant corporations.
Bailey worked at Samuelson’s eponymous tech law clinic as a student. And then, as a lawyer, she did stints at Creative Commons and the Electronic Frontier Foundation—two other Bay Area institutions that have been at the forefront of many legal battles around digital rights. She also practiced at two prominent tech law firms, Wilson Sonsini and Perkins Coie, working on landmark copyright cases involving YouTube videos and thumbnail images.
After setting up her own firm, Bailey joined the Internet Archive—one of her former clients—in 2017. She notes the non-profit serves as a vital online archive not just to the general public but to many lawyers who rely on its “Wayback Machine” for evidence in patent trials and many other cases.
“Digital book burning”
In its current fight with the publishers, Bailey says the Internet Archive is standing up for the right to act as a library, lending out scanned versions of the books it owns in a controlled fashion.
Needless to say, the publishers disagree, and are pressing forward with the lawsuit even though the Internet Archive shut down the “emergency” version of the library in June. The publishers claim the non-profit is a rogue operation and are also seeking an order that would force it to destroy 1.5 million of the more than 4 million works it lends (the rest are in the public domain)—a remedy that Internet Archive founder Brewster Kahle called a “form of digital book burning.”
The case is set for trial in 2021 and, if past copyright clashes are any indication, is likely to give rise to nasty invective on both sides—a situation Bailey decries.
“We’d love to be in talks with the publishers. We prefer conversation to litigation,” she says.
Bailey adds she is dismayed by the visceral tone of many copyright debates, and particularly by smears leveled at Samuelson, whose integrity she says is unimpeachable. Critics have implied, without evidence, that Samuelson is in the pocket of Google, but may also hold a special ire for her role leading the Authors Alliance, a group of writers who disavow the more hardline stance of the New York-based Authors Guild.
Fortune repeatedly invited John Mckay, a spokesperson for the American Association of Publishers to comment on Bailey’s work and the tone of copyright debates, but he declined to respond.
One reason for the often bitter nature of the copyright debates is that the Internet has hurt the bottom lines of book publishers and music labels, which has in turn left them with less money to pay creators. Bailey acknowledges this reality, but argues lawsuits like the one directed at the Internet Archive do little to fix it.
“An issue I am deeply sympathetic with is that many authors don’t have access to affordable healthcare during this pandemic. I just have serious doubts that aggressive copyright enforcement is the appropriate policy mechanism to solve [it],” she says. “I want authors to have healthcare, but let’s do that by fixing healthcare.”
Taking up the copyright torch
Bailey’s advocacy for the public interest in copyright law led Public Knowledge, a respected policy think tank, to award her its annual intellectual property award at the recent IP3 Awards—a gala that featured a who’s who of tech intellectuals, including author and law professor Tim Wu.
According to Meredith Rose, senior policy counsel at Public Knowledge, Bailey is among a new generation of leaders who are taking up the copyright torch from the likes of Kahle, and scholars like Sameulson and Lawrence Lessig. Rose says others in this new vanguard include the journalist Sarah Jeong, law professor Blake Reid and Kyle Wiens, who has led a successful “right to repair” campaign against Apple, John Deere and others to allow individuals to tinker with the software code in their devices.
According to Rose, Bailey has stood out in particular for her ability to explain the arcane aspects of copyright law, and advocate for those whom it affects.
“She can describe the real experience of librarians and borrowers who are often overlooked in the copyright debates. We hear a lot from Google and and publishers and authors, but not from schools navigating remote education, and trying to obtain course work,” says Rose.
Even as the publishers proceed with their lawsuit against Internet Archive, Bailey remains optimistic that the wrangling factions will find ways to work together. She points to the Music Modernization Act, a recent bipartisan law that updated how artists are compensated for music streaming, as an example of what is possible.
“At the end of the day, we all want great creative stuff to be out in the world, including great books and great art and movies. We can all agree on that, so it’s weird we can’t agree on a way to get there.”
An earlier version of this piece incorrectly stated Bailey had an MFA.


fortune--2020-11-28--Bet on these stocks for the millennial-powered COVID recovery, says Goldman’s Katie Koch

Encouraging vaccine news has Wall Street searching for stocks to play the rebound—scouring the market for names that have been beaten up amid the pandemic but poised to boom once things return to normal.
Katie Koch, cohead of fundamental equity at Goldman Sachs Asset Management, is feeling bullish on trades that bank on a surge in pent-up demand among an increasingly powerful cohort of spenders: Millennials.
Koch calls them the “world’s most powerful consumer,” and believes the group will become “increasingly dominant” in the marketplace over the next 10 years. But these millennials aren’t all materially obsessed, she argues.
“This is a generation of people that value experiences over things,” Koch tells Fortune. Those experiences, namely concerts and travel, have been “off limits” this year, but she believes “not only is it going to go back to normal, it may actually supersede that for some period of time because of how much pent up demand there is” once consumers are given the green light.
That would be welcome news for companies in those beleaguered live events industries whose balance sheets have been bloodied this year. Those names have “tremendous upside” to Koch because “very simply, they’re tied to a secular growth story we don’t think will go away, which is that people want to have fun and experiences, especially the millennials, and that they’ll go back to those behaviors,” she says.
Yet despite the encouraging developments for prospective vaccines like those from Pfizer and BioNTech and Moderna, Koch warns timing this sector is tricky: “We don’t know exactly when it’s going to normalize,” she says. That’s why she emphasizes investors need to be selective on these “experience-based companies” because “they need the balance sheet fortitude really to get through another 12 months of no revenue.”
One stock that fits the bill? Live Nation, a company specializing in concerts and live events that owns Ticketmaster. (Live Nation also made Fortune‘s 2021 Investor Guide.) Revenues are down nearly 60% in the last 12 months, and the analyst consensus is that earnings could remain depressed in 2021. But Koch (along with Live Nation’s management) note they have the necessary “balance sheet strength to make it through a continued, protracted shutdown,” yet have major upside potential when things return to normal. One bright spot: Even amid the pandemic, over 80% of Live Nation’s customers decided to hold on their tickets instead of getting a refund, which Koch believes shows “people are committed to it.”
But it’s certainly not just U.S. consumers that are excited to get back to events with their friends. Koch also likes CTS Eventim based in Germany, a “leading player” in live events and ticketing that has “very dominant market share in Germany as well as some other European countries” including Austria, Switzerland, and Italy. Like Live Nation, CTS was battered in 2020 as live events shuttered across Europe, with revenues down over 57% in the past 12 months. But Koch argues the business is “well capitalized, leading us to believe they could survive these headwinds for a few years,” while she expects CTS will “recover quickly” once events come back, hopefully in 2021 (analyst consensus is that earnings should improve in 2021). With the stock off roughly 11% from its 52-week high, there’s plenty of room for upside.
But concert-goers will also need to travel and stay in hotels. Koch points to U.K.-based hotel franchiser Intercontinental Hotel Group and Vinci, a French infrastructure and construction company with a focus on toll roads and airports, as a couple more names to look at. After all, if you can’t go to live events right now, you might at least get a thrill watching your stock portfolio gyrate.
All stock prices calculated as of Nov. 16, 2020.


fortune--2020-11-28--Tony Hsieh, retired Zappos CEO, dies at 46

Tony Hsieh, the retired CEO of Las Vegas-based online shoe retailer Zappos.com who spent years working to transform the city’s downtown area, has died. He was 46.
Hsieh was with family when he died Friday, according to a statement from DTP Companies, which he founded. Downtown Partnership spokesperson Megan Fazio said Hsieh passed away in Connecticut, KLAS-TV reported.
Puoy Premsrirut, a lawyer for Hsieh, told news outlets that Hsieh had been injured in a house fire while visiting Connecticut. Additional details weren’t immediately released. An official cause of death wasn’t announced.
“Tony’s kindness and generosity touched the lives of everyone around him, and forever brightened the world,” a DTP Companies statement said. “Delivering happiness was always his mantra, so instead of mourning his transition, we ask you to join us in celebrating his life.”
Hsieh recently retired from Zappos after 20 years leading the company. The online shoe retailer shared a tribute on social media late Friday.
“The world has lost a tremendous visionary and an incredible human being,” the statement said. “His spirit will forever be a part of Zappos.”
Hsieh was a Harvard University graduate who joined the company — then called ShoeSite.com — in 1999. Zappos was sold to Amazon for $1.2 billion in 2009, but Hsieh had remained with the company until his retirement.
For years, he also worked to revitalize downtown Las Vegas, pledging $350 million in 2013 for redevelopment. The same year he moved Zappos’ headquarters into the former Las Vegas City Hall building.
“Tony Hsieh played a pivotal role in helping transform Downtown Las Vegas,” Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak tweeted Friday night. “Kathy and I send our love and condolences to Tony’s family and friends during this difficult time.”
A wave of tributes poured out on social media as news of Hsieh’s death spread.
“Tony Hsieh might be the most original thinker I’ve ever been friends with,” former venture investor Chris Sacca tweeted. “He questioned every assumption and shared everything he learned along the way. He genuinely delighted in making anyone and everyone happy.”
Skateboarder and entrepreneur Tony Hawk added, “Tony Hsieh was a visionary. He was generous with his time and willing to share his invaluable expertise with anyone.”
“A truly original thinker, a brilliant entrepreneur, and a kind-hearted and generous friend to so many,” tweeted entrepreneur Max Levchin.


fortune--2020-11-28--It may be a matter of weeks, not months, before Americans can start getting COVID vaccines

With recent news of a string of apparently safe and effective COVID vaccine candidates, the general public is likely wondering: When will the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) actually authorize a coronavirus vaccine? And who will be the first groups to receive them?
There’s a series of fairly straightforward, if intricate, regulatory steps by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) which will determine the answer. Here’s a timeline of what to keep an eye on in the coming weeks and months.
The FDA COVID vaccine process
Pfizer and partner BioNTech officially filed for FDA emergency use authorization (EUA) of their experimental COVID vaccine, which they say is about 95% effective, on November 20. U.S. biotech Moderna announced similarly encouraging results for its own candidate last week, suggesting the company will submit its own EUA at the end of November or in early December.
Emergency authorizations have a lower threshold for a regulatory green light than a full approval, which is a more time-consuming and involved process. Soon after Pfizer got the ball rolling, the FDA announced that its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) would convene on December 10 to discuss Pfizer’s data and make recommendations regarding the vaccine.
Advisory committees are made of a group of experts who counsel the FDA on a therapy. Their recommendations aren’t binding, but the agency has historically followed such committees’ lead. It’s possible that the VRBPAC could vote to recommend approval, or to recommend that the Pfizer COVID vaccine is indeed safe and effective, on December 10.
Then, in a separate decision, the EUA would head to the full FDA for consideration. That process could take another few days or about a week, meaning the vaccine could theoretically be granted its authorization by December 18 or earlier.
At this point, the vaccine would be ready for distribution. But just where that distribution may occur will likely be an ad hoc process. Companies across the supply chain such as drug distributors, hospitals, or local pharmacies may receive the initial doses, though it remains unclear. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has said it’s begun testing various distribution networks, including centers that are set up by states and locales to get the vaccine.
But how soon Americans can actually get it ultimately depends on the CDC.
Who decides the first people to get a COVID vaccine
The FDA is limited to a dual mandate: Judge a drug candidate by its safety and efficacy profile. It can’t speak to issues such as pricing and in the case of a COVID vaccine, the CDC will have to convene its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to determine how to prioritize in the face of what’s expected to be enormous demand. The group released an ethical framework that will serve the basis of that conversation this week.
That meeting could theoretically happen right after the FDA grants a COVID vaccine emergency authorization, so perhaps sometime during the week of December 14 (although there’s usually more of a lag between an authorization and such a meeting). Once the ACIP has voted on its distribution and prioritization guidance, CDC director Robert Redfield would give it a final blessing.
At that point people who meet the guidance criteria could begin getting immunizations. But there’s a pandemic-related twist: On Tuesday, HHS Secretary Alex Azar said that state governors would have the final say in how they decide to prioritize vaccine distribution regardless of the ACIP’s recommendations. While this is meant to provide states with different demographics some flexibility, it may also lead to hugely divergent distribution strategies, much like the early days of COVID testing.
It’s widely expected that the first tranche of Americans to have access to the Pfizer vaccine are those at highest risk of coronavirus infection, such as the elderly, certain minority groups, health care workers, and people with underlying health conditions such as diabetes and heart disease.
But, if everything works out for Pfizer, certain people may be able to start getting their COVID shots by mid-December, most likely at state-run locations or through companies like CVS Health which have teamed up with the government at first. State health professionals will have to determine their final guidance for who is prioritized for a vaccine (again, much like distribution of COVID tests) and then local health care sites, retail, state-run, or otherwise, with the capacity to implement them will follow that guidance to distribute doses.
It’s a massive undertaking which will likely be fluid as states, governments, and medical facilities figure out which strategies work best. “If all goes well, we could be distributing vaccine soon after Dec. 10,” Azar said on Tuesday.
“We believe we can distribute vaccine to all 64 jurisdictions within 24 hours of FDA authorization. Then we hope administration can begin as soon as the product arrives.” He also said that firms such as CVS, in collaboration with the federal government, could begin innoculating vulnerable populations in nursing homes within 48 hours of FDA authorization.
Widespread distribution will take more time
That doesn’t mean just anyone will be able to get Pfizer’s vaccine by next month. First, there’s the manufacturing problem. Creation of the actual vaccine will have to ramp up considerably in the coming months given that somewhere around 40 million doses are expected to be available by the end of the year.
But both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s experimental vaccines require two separate doses administered several weeks apart. That cuts the number of patients who might get one by then in half.
Companies working on these COVID drugs have said they plan to get up to hundreds of millions of doses, which will have to distributed not just in the United States but across the globe, by the end of 2021. For Americans generally, public health experts believe widespread use could begin by the spring or early summer of next year.


fortune--2020-11-28--Georgia Senate runoff: Republican Perdue boosted his wealth with well-timed stock trades

As the ravages of the novel coronavirus forced millions of people out of work, shuttered businesses and shrank the value of retirement accounts, the Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged to a three-year low.
But for Sen. David Perdue, a Georgia Republican, the crisis last March signaled something else: a stock buying opportunity.
And for the second time in less than two months, Perdue’s timing was impeccable. He avoided a sharp loss and reaped a stunning gain by selling and then buying the same stock: Cardlytics, an Atlanta-based financial technology company on whose board of directors he once served.
On Jan. 23, as word spread through Congress that the coronavirus posed a major economic and public health threat, Perdue sold off $1 million to $5 million in Cardlytics stock at $86 a share before it plunged, according to congressional disclosures.
Weeks later, in March, after the company’s stock plunged further following an unexpected leadership shakeup and lower-than-forecast earnings, Perdue bought the stock back for $30 a share, investing between $200,000 and $500,000.
Those shares have now quadrupled in value, closing at $121 a share on Tuesday.
The Cardlytics transactions were just a slice of a large number of investment decisions made in the early days of the pandemic by Perdue and other senators. They stirred public outrage after it became clear that some members of Congress had been briefed on the economic and health threat the virus posed. The transactions were mentioned briefly in a story published by the Intercept in May.
Now that Perdue is locked in a pitched battle for reelection in a Jan. 5 runoff, his trades during a public health and economic crisis have become an issue in what already has become a negative, expensive campaign that will determine which party controls the Senate.
There is no evidence that Perdue, who is among the wealthier members of the Senate, acted on information gained as a member of Congress or through his long-standing relationship with company officials. It’s illegal to use nonpublic information gained as a company insider or member of Congress to make investment decisions.
But legal experts say the timing of his sale, the fact that he quickly bought Cardlytics stock back when it had lost two-thirds of its market value and his close ties to company officials all warrant scrutiny.
“This does seem suspicious,” said John C. Coffee Jr., a Columbia University law school professor who specializes in corporate and securities issues. But he added, “You need more than suspicions to convict.”
The Perdue campaign declined a request for an interview with the senator. In a statement, Perdue spokesperson John Burke said the senator had been cleared of wrongdoing but did not provide details.
“The bi-partisan Senate Ethics Committee, DOJ and SEC all independently and swiftly cleared Senator Perdue months ago, which was reported on,” Burke said.
Perdue’s opponent, Democrat Jon Ossoff, has seized on his stock trading while trying to brand him as a “crook.”
Perdue is not the only senator on the ballot in Georgia. Sen. Kelly Loeffler, also a Republican, is running against Democrat Raphael Warnock in a bid to complete the remainder of retired Sen. Johnny Isakson’s term.
Perdue’s Cardlytics transactions fit into a broader pattern of stock moves he made when the coronavirus first struck the U.S.
At the time, Perdue publicly maintained that the economy was strong and praised President Donald Trump during a Feb. 24 interview on Fox News Channel for “executing the greatest economic turnaround in U.S. history.”
A series of swift transactions in his portfolio told a different story, however, showing the senator dumped some company stocks, while investing in others — like protective equipment maker DuPont and pharmaceutical company Pfizer — that were poised to do well during the pandemic.
Perdue has previously said that outside financial advisers make most of his trades.
But Donna Nagy, an Indiana University law professor, said that type of arrangement doesn’t preclude Perdue from directing an adviser to make specific transactions. She said one way for members of Congress to avoid questions about their financial holdings is to put them in a blind trust, which Perdue has not done.
“All of these questions about the motivations behind our members of Congress and their personal securities trading could be alleviated if Congress passed a law that limited investments,” said Nagy, who specializes in securities law. “Ordinary citizens should not have to question members of Congress about their investments.”
The issue was enough of a liability that Perdue abruptly sold off between $3.2 million and $9.4 million of his stock portfolio over a four-day period in mid-April, according to an Associated Press review of mandatory financial disclosures he has submitted to the Senate. He did not sell his stock in Cardlytics.
Still, Perdue has largely avoided the same degree of scrutiny faced by some of his colleagues.
Republican Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina drew the most attention and stepped down as Senate Intelligence Committee chair amid a probe of his sale of upward of $1.7 million in stock, which came when he was privately warning some well-heeled constituents about the virus while publicly downplaying the threat.
Cardlytics works at the intersection of banking and online marketing. It helps run rewards programs for financial institutions, including Wells Fargo, using data the banks have gathered on their customers to market to them — similar to what Facebook does with targeted ads.
The company did not respond to a request for comment.
After the March turmoil, its share price dramatically rebounded. Lynne Laube, Cardlytics’ current CEO, said the pandemic had a lot to do with it, driving consumer interest in savings programs.
“I hate to say this pandemic is playing in our favor, but it’s playing in our favor,” she said during an earnings call in May.
Perdue acquired 75,000 shares in Cardlytics through stock options offered for his service on the company’s board from 2010 to 2014, when he stepped down after winning his Senate seat, Securities and Exchange Commission filings show. The company, which at the time had not yet gone public, also offered him options that would become available in October 2020 and January 2022.
Perdue’s latest financial disclosures do not indicate whether he has exercised the options that became available in October.
But according to Coffee, the Columbia University law professor, it’s an unusual move by the company.
“I’ve never seen options extended from 2014 to 2022,” he said. “That’s a very long extension.”
While Perdue left the company’s board, he has maintained ties to some of its executives, who have donated more than $30,000 to his political committees. Donations made to Perdue account for nearly 80% of all giving to federal candidates by Cardlytics employees over the past decade, records show.
Perdue, meanwhile, has used social media to publicize the company. In August 2016, he took a tour of its office and posed for a photo with Laube and then-CEO Scott Grimes, which he posted to Facebook. In fall 2019, he introduced Laube and Grimes at a gala in Atlanta, where they received a business achievement award.
Isakson, who served with Perdue, took steps to avoid the type of scrutiny Perdue is now facing. Isakson, a Republican, put most of his own holdings in a blind trust after some of his assets drew unwanted attention in 2012.
“I said I need to be as patently pure and patently clean as anybody, and the best way to do that is a blind trust,” Isakson, who served on the Senate’s finance and ethics committees, told the Atlanta Journal Constitution in 2017. “I don’t know what I own.”


fortune--2020-11-28--Facebook’s AI is mistakenly banning some small business’ ads

New York-based businesswoman Ruth Harrigan usually sells her honey and beeswax products in souvenir shops. But with Covid-19 pausing tourism, she’s been almost entirely dependent on Facebook ads to drive online sales. On Nov. 11, this new financial lifeline was abruptly cut when the social media company blocked her HoneyGramz ad account for violating its policies. She couldn’t imagine what about her tiny honey-filled gifts would have triggered the problem.
Friends told Harrigan to just wait a couple of days and the problem might resolve itself. She waited, until she lost an estimated $5,000 in revenue.
“I was getting a little anxious thinking, ‘Oh my God, Black Friday is around the corner, most of my sales for the year happen in November and December and that’s it,’” she explained. “I said, ‘If I’m shut down any longer than this, it’ll cripple me.’”
Harrigan is one of millions of small business advertisers who have come to rely on Facebook Inc. because the coronavirus has shut down many traditional retail channels. The social media giant has provided new sales opportunities for these entrepreneurs, but also exposed them to the company’s misfiring content-moderation software, limited options for customer support and lack of transparency about how to fix problems.
Facebook’s human moderators have focused on election and Covid-19 misinformation this year, so the company has leaned more on artificial intelligence algorithms to monitor other areas of the platform. That’s left many small businesses caught in Facebook’s automated filters, unable to advertise through the service and frustrated because they don’t know why.
The same weekend Harrigan’s account went down, Ivonne Sanchez, who runs a permanent makeup clinic in Ottawa, found her ads were blocked too, for what Facebook said was a “policy violation.” Her business, which had to shut down between March and June for the pandemic, was relying on Facebook to recover financially. The account was restored the next day without explanation, but “in the middle of a crucial shopping season, it left us shaken,” she said. “This experience makes us very nervous about investing dollars into a system that is operated seemingly by a bot.”
Even if an ad account gets restored, businesses lose crucial momentum. Facebook’s advertising algorithm takes a couple of weeks to figure out which users may be interested in an ad, to refine the targeting. Jessica Grossman, chief executive officer of digital marketing firm In Social, said when her clients get hit, the hardest part is telling them their campaigns have to start over and their money won’t go as far.
“Facebook almost doesn’t realize the impact of their own algorithm and what that means,” Grossman said. There seemed to be no logic to the account bans imposed on In Social’s clients, she added. A pizza vending machine company, a reusable water bottle company, a coffee delivery service, a business coach and a hair weave company were all suspended.
“We know it can be frustrating to experience any type of business disruption, especially at such a critical time of the year,” Facebook said in a statement. “While we offer free support for all businesses, we regularly work to improve our tools and systems, and to make the support we offer easier to use and access. We apologize for any inconvenience recent disruptions may have caused.”
Facebook often touts its commitment to small businesses, as it defends its ever larger hold over their economic future. On a recent earnings call, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said this was a “major focus” that’s “more important now than ever” as Covid-19 shifts commerce online. During a July ad boycott by major brands, Facebook’s revenue still grew, bolstered by small businesses rushing online to try to survive. The company added more tools this year for small businesses to sell directly to customers through its site, hoping these virtual shops become advertisers, too.
But while business owners agree that Facebook is a lifeline during the pandemic, they say it’s also an unreliable partner. Facebook’s ban on political ads around the U.S. election, for instance, affected companies that have no connection to politics, like a business selling bracelets to benefit refugees. A seed company was also blocked for sharing a picture of Walla Walla onions — which were “overtly sexual,” according to Facebook’s AI.
The company’s policies against cryptocurrency frequently trapped ads from a solar roof company, Human SOLR, because some of the acronyms used by the business are similar to cryptocurrency tokens. After that issue was resolved, Human SOLR’s ads were banned again for using phrases like “see if your roof qualifies.” Facebook’s software guessed the company was selling financial products, which are more regulated. After enough flags on the account, Brett Lee, who runs the business, gave up on Facebook ads. “My business is at a complete standstill,” said Lee, based in St. George, Utah. “My employees’ lives are at a standstill.”
GFP Delivered, a Chicago-based produce company advertising a way for people to avoid the grocery store during Covid-19, had its Facebook ads shut down for two months without clear explanation, according to owner George Fourkas. He said he was able to fix the problem only after reaching out to old college friends who work at Facebook.
Yaniv Gershom, co-founder of digital marketing firm 4AM Media, said he had to cut 12 jobs partly because of Facebook ad account bans, which have lasted almost six months. “They give you zero feedback,” he added. “The only people who are OK are massive spenders who get a Facebook rep that can escalate issues and find out what’s wrong.”
In some cases, the business impact is hard to quantify. Matt Snow, co-founder of an apparel business called Boredwalk, said Facebook’s automated systems inadvertently flagged 40% of his company’s product catalog as unsafe late last month. That left Snow targeting the wrong products to potential customers. He eventually noticed and quickly resolved the issue with a Facebook sales manager, but Snow doesn’t know how long the products were banned, or even which other items were being advertised in their place. “Facebook is very black box about all their internal machinations,” he said.
Facebook has been automating content moderation for years, a transition it highlights in a quarterly report detailing how much content the company removes. In more nuanced categories such as “hate speech,” Facebook removed almost 95% of violating posts automatically in the third quarter, up from just 53% two years ago.
But that increase comes with more corrections. Facebook removed 22 million posts for hate speech in the third quarter, more than 3 times as many as a year earlier. The number of posts it later restored jumped by 40%.
Appealing these often-automated decisions has also become a lot harder. “Due to a temporary reduction in our review capacity as a result of Covid-19, we could not always offer our users the option to appeal,” Facebook wrote in its third-quarter report.
Advertisers have been particularly hurt by these automated decisions in recent months. “It just exploded. They turned up the AI recently — somebody changed something — and all of the sudden everybody was getting shut down,” said Justin Brooke, founder of Adskills.com, which teaches businesses how to market on Facebook. “What are these small businesses going to do? They’ve got families to feed.”
One of Brooke’s own Facebook ads has a small written disclaimer saying it wasn’t open to those trying to sell adult content. That got flagged and taken down. Facebook’s automated explanation? The post didn’t follow the company’s community standards on “nudity/sexual activity.”
The over-reaction by Facebook’s AI is a side effect of the company taking more responsibility for the content on its platform, according to Guy Rosen, Facebook’s vice president of integrity. “As we take more action, we remove more content, there’s more opportunities also for those to be in error,” he said during a recent press call.
That’s what HoneyGramz’s Harrigan was told happened to her account. She eventually got desperate enough to Google names of Facebook employees who might help. She found Rob Leathern, the company’s director of ad products, and sent him a message on Twitter. Miraculously, he responded. A few hours later, Facebook sent an email restoring her account.
“They just said they turned it off in error,” Harrigan said. “They didn’t give me any feedback. They just reset the whole thing as if it never happened.”
But Harrigan won’t forget. She printed off the email and pinned it to her office whiteboard. “It was really, really scary,” she said.
–With assistance from Kurt Wagner.


fortune--2020-11-29--The skin care brand striving to make medical-grade topicals both more luxe and accessible

It may be a matter of weeks , not months , before Americans can start getting COVID vaccines

This is an installment of Startup Year One, a special series of interviews with founders about the major lessons they have learned in the immediate aftermath of their businesses’ first year of operation.
Many new skin care and beauty brands tout leaning on ingredients that are natural, vegan, and intended for all skin types. But not all of them are medical-grade, and few are founded by health care professionals.
Founded by a nurse practitioner and a beauty industry veteran, The Route launched in October 2019. The pair wanted to make medical-grade skin care products more luxurious, but also mass market-accessible while simplifying the skin care routines of busy moms like them—both women are in their fifties and live in Southern California.
Fortune recently spoke with cofounders Courtney Baber and Nancy Pellegrino, NP (a.k.a. Nurse Nancy) to learn more about their business, the lessons learned, the hurdles overcome, and their plans for next year.
The following interview has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity.
Courtney Baber and Nancy Pellegrino, RN, cofounders of The Route. Photograph courtesy of The Route
Fortune: What were you doing professionally prior to launching The Route?
Baber: I graduated from the University of Cincinnati with a major in Communications and minor in Retail Marketing. But the most valuable education I received was at Estee Lauder, one of my first jobs in the beauty industry. I like to say I got my Masters there. And when I was with Sephora, over a decade later, I helped bring Indie Beauty to Europe, which meant I got to travel and live and work abroad. The lessons learned and experiences I had overseas was like getting a PhD in life and business. Urban Decay was the culmination of all of these experiences and is what gave me the tools and ability to launch my own brand. On-the-job education has been priceless and has taught me probably more than I learned in college.
Pellegrino: I went to nursing school at Cal State Long Beach and got my Masters in Nursing at UCLA; I’m proud to say I graduated top of my class. I started out my nursing career as a hospital nurse in the cardiac catheterization lab. I went on to nurse practitioner school and began working in internal medicine with a focus on women’s health. I did this for eight years.
In 1991, I decided to get into aesthetic nursing, a field that was largely uncharted. I was drawn to the opportunity to help women in a different way. To do what I could to help them feel a little more confident and beautiful. I’d always been fascinated by makeup, even working as a makeup artist during nursing school, and the field of aesthetics seemed to tie my two passions, nursing and makeup artistry, together nicely.
There was no formal training or programs when I started in 1999, so I would travel around the country to get my hands on every class and lecture I could. I researched and then researched some more. I wanted to learn the best of the best techniques, participate in think tanks, and find mentors so I could perfect my craft as quickly as possible. I opened my own aesthetics business in Newport Beach in 2007.
What inspired you to launch The Route? How does it stand apart in the skin care industry?
Pellegrino: I met Courtney at NP Aesthetics 12 years ago. She was a senior vice president at Urban Decay and just had her second child. We became fast friends and discovered our shared desire to create a skin care brand that was beautiful, medical grade, results-driven, and didn’t cut corners. As mothers of young children who had tried and tested virtually every cream, serum, and treatment in the business, we knew that together we just might be able to create something amazing. I had dreamt of creating a skin care line a decade prior, but never made it happen. When I met Courtney, I knew that this was my chance, and I grabbed onto it.
With Courtney’s prestige beauty expertise and my experience treating thousands of women’s skin, we knew we could bring a fresh yet educated perspective. In addition to creating best-in-class products, we wanted to make medical-grade skin care more widely available. And because there are so few nurse-founded skin care brands, we were even more motivated to do it right. We sought out arguably the best medical grade skin care formulator on the planet, John Garruto; he’s often referred to as the godfather of cosmetic chemistry. When we met him, we knew he was the one we wanted to help us create our formulas.
Baber: I think it’s fair to say Nurse Nancy and I are early pioneers of aesthetic nursing and indie beauty, respectively. We have combined 60 years in the beauty industry and seeing how the indie beauty industry has evolved over time has been fascinating. Fusing our decades of experience with our unique, complementary expertise is one of the things that makes us stand out as a brand and we tried really hard to make it shine through in our products.
Because we’re both in our fifties, we started by addressing all the reasons the skin ages. We made sure the formulas could stand the test of time and were looked at through both medical-grade and luxury skin care lenses. We also made sure to use all ingredients at their clinically tested levels of efficacy because that’s what makes them perform the way they’re intended. We made a pact to one another from the start that we would not skimp on any ingredients, which is something that happens too often in the industry. Taking the easy route isn’t in our DNA. We want to do what works best, and we want to do it right. It’s expensive to do but if you want to see results, it’s crucial. It took us three years to develop the formulas because we are very thoughtful and careful with everything we do; we are laser-focused on creating a brand capable long-term success.
The Route makes vegan creams, primers, and invisible peels that are meant to work on virtually all skin types. Courtesy of The Route
How have you divided up the workload between yourselves? How has your workforce grown since establishing the company?
Baber: For the most part, it divided naturally based on our areas of expertise. Nurse Nancy is the cook in the kitchen working with the formulators and the chemist. Nancy is also more of the face and voice of the brand because she’s a nurse and has been working on people’s skin for decades. She also creates more of the video content, social media, and education, whereas I focus on the strategy, operations, running the business, and leading the team.
Our workforce has evolved primarily on the operations side. A year ago, we didn’t think we needed an operations lead, but learned quickly that it was a vital part of the business and something we should have had from Day One. The day we hired a head of operations is the day things started to fall into place and feel more manageable. We use consultants and contractors for everything else—creative, IT, social, PR, etc.—and made the choice not to set up payroll early on. We will probably begin setting it up in 2021, but as a new company, it’s a big burden. My recommendation is only hire what you absolutely need, leverage your network, and be able to work high and low every day—meaning ship packages one day, negotiate a deal the next.
Pellegrino: There are a lot of people graduating and struggling to find jobs right now. They are savvy about the digital world and can see things from a fresher perspective. Hiring them to help out with social media can be wonderful and for us, it was just that. We brought on some interns in the beginning and are also lucky to have some really nice friends with invaluable expertise who were happy to lend it to us when needed.
The founders say they wanted to make medical-grade skincare products more luxurious—but also mass market-accessible—while simplifying the skincare routines of busy moms like themselves. Courtesy of The Route
Skin care is increasingly outselling cosmetics in the beauty business. Why do you think that is? How much of a role does social media play in your branding and marketing?
Baber: There is a movement of people wanting to take care of themselves, which includes their skin and being more minimalist about makeup. Social media has helped fuel this fresh face, healthy skin, #nomakeup trend. People are now looking at beauty from a skin-first lens. And skin care is far more innovative and creative than ever before. There is no shortage of amazing ingredients out there, and I don’t think it was as interesting or cutting edge 10 or 20 years ago.
Pellegrino: I agree with Courtney. When I started out in aesthetics skin care was referred to as “lotions and potions,” the latter making it seem magical or unreal. And people are still somewhat skeptical of skin care claims. But now, thanks to ingredient technology and science, you really can have transformative results. In the era of COVID, people are staying home, going on zoom, and choosing comfort. They are working out, eating better, taking care of their skin, and letting their skin breathe, which is always a good thing and something I encourage my patients to do. A little skin freedom goes a long way. Simplifying your routine has become a movement, too. For the most part, more is no longer more when it comes to skin care.
Baber: As far as social media goes, it is a key part of who we are and how we market ourselves. It’s a non-negotiable. But you have to figure out how to play in the world of social media in a way that makes sense for your brand. And that’s not that easy to do. Your website and social media are the windows to your brand. So whatever you put out there has to reflect your brand DNA. And how you do it has to be extremely thought through and unique to your brand. But the first year is a learning experience, for sure.
Pellegrino: We chose from the start that we would write the copy ourselves as much as we could because we wanted to be authentic and have our personalities and voices shine through. We will continue to do that.
What has been your most successful or greatest “hero” product since launching? Have customers been asking for any new offerings in particular?
Baber: By far, The Party Peel. It’s the gateway to The Route. It’s something you can get both immediate and long-term results from, not to mention it’s selfie-worthy and super fun to use. It is our number one product.
Pellegrino: The Party Peel is the first product that we made. It’s patent-pending, and based on the most popular peel I did in my office. I wanted to bring it to people at home, no appointment necessary. Customers have been asking us for an SPF and cleanser to round out the routine and really make the brand give you everything you need. We agree, and we want them to be special and different just like our other products. These two products will add to our essential line, which currently includes our day and night face and eye creams and our next-gen retinoid, The Golden Rule. We didn’t want to rush the development so just like all of our products, it’s taking time to formulate and get just right. I have stacks and stacks of tester bottles to prove how long this process takes for us. But we plan to launch both in 2021.
The Route launched in October 2019 and rolled out to Ulta Beauty stores as lockdowns orders were beginning in March 2020. Courtesy of The Route
How are you funded? And given the ongoing economic crisis, what has been raising funds been like during this time?
Baber: Up until October 2020, we’ve been self-funded. Bootstrapping allowed us to be really thoughtful about what we were doing and what we wanted to do without having to answer to anyone else. When you have to supply 400 stores with inventory after being in business for just a few months, that’s a big undertaking. But being able to do this in the first year of business is an honor. It’s also a challenge and we wanted to do it right, not cut corners, and ensure things rolled out exactly how we wanted them to.
Not everything is seamless; for example, the week we launched with Ulta, the first lockdown orders were going into effect and stores had to close, but we kept at it and evolved accordingly. We just did our very first friends and family raise, and think it will keep us going for the foreseeable future. We are very grateful and plan to do them proud.
Pellegrino: We waited until we felt we had proven ourselves to raise money. We wanted what we had done already and what we were offering to be exciting and compelling. During this uncertain time, having real proof is vital and also ensures you can feel confident in what you’re selling. Not just the proof that we could do it pre-2020, but that we were able to both survive and ultimately (and thankfully) thrive amidst an economic time like no other. Both Courtney and I asked people who we wanted to go on this journey with us first. What we learned was that people believed in us and wanted us to succeed. That was so validating.
Post-pandemic and five years down the road, where do you see The Route in the market?
Baber: I want to set the brand up to be uber-successful in the U.S. initially and recognized as a top medical-grade, luxury skin care brand. I also hope we can partner with someone who will help us propel the business and expand globally. I’ve learned early on from mentors to do one thing and do it really well. That’s such a great recommendation. You can only handle so much so prioritize and excel accordingly.
NN: I want to be traveling around the world on a leisure trip and see The Route in women’s bags and suitcases. I want to see The Route at the local beauty boutique down the street, in a thousand languages. I want to continue helping people feel beautiful in their skin. I want to teach my daughter what I learned along the way and have her upstage me in business and in life.


fortune--2020-11-29--Hawaii seeks to be seen as a remote workplace with a view

Software engineer Raymond Berger begins his work day at 5 a.m., before the sun comes up over Hawaii.
Rising early is necessary because the company he works for is in New York City, five hours ahead of Maui, where he is renting a home with a backyard that’s near the beach.
“It’s a little hard with the time zone difference,” he said. “But generally I have a much better quality of life.”
The pandemic is giving many workers the freedom to do their jobs from anywhere. Now that Hawaii’s economy is reeling from dramatically fewer tourists, a group of state officials and community leaders wants more people like Berger to help provide an alternative to relying on short-term visitors.
Coinciding with the approach of winter in other parts of the U.S., “Movers & Shakas”—a reference to the Hawaii term for the “hang loose” hand gesture—launches Sunday as a campaign to attract former residents and those from elsewhere to set up remote offices with a view. They’re touting Hawaii’s paradisiacal and safety attributes: among the lowest rates per capita of COVID-19 infections in the country.
The first 50 applicants approved starting Sunday receive a free, roundtrip ticket to Honolulu. Applicants pledge to respect Hawaii’s culture and natural resources and participants must commit several hours a week to helping a local nonprofit.
It didn’t take much to convince Abbey Tizzano to leave behind her Austin, Texas, apartment to join four Silicon Valley friends in a rented house in Kahala, Honolulu’s version of Beverly Hills.
She had never been to Hawaii before. She booked a one-way ticket, arrived in September and quarantined for 14 days, complying with the state’s rules at the time for arriving travelers. She’s keeping Central time zone hours while working in account management for a software company, allowing her to end the work day early enough to enjoy long hikes along mountain ridges or walk five minutes to the beach.
“It’s like I live two lives right now. There’s the corporate side for … the early mornings,” Tizzano said. “And then there’s just like the Hawaii lifestyle after I get off work around noon or 1 p.m.”
Neighbors tell the remote workers they’re a welcome change from the bachelor and bachelorette parties the luxury home normally hosts, she said.
Tizzano wonders what other locals think of them: “Are they appreciative of people coming that want to help stimulate the economy or are they concerned that they’re going to raise housing prices more and stuff like that?”
Housing is a real concern in a state where there’s an affordable housing crisis, said Nicole Woo, a policy analyst for Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice.
She worries that if their presence remains beyond the pandemic and if they come in larger numbers, they could start pushing property values even higher.
Lifelong Kauai resident Jonathon Medeiros felt uncomfortable when he saw an airline ad luring remote workers to Hawaii.
The remote worker campaign just feels to him like another kind of tourism. “We just get portrayed as this paradise, a place for you to come and play,” he said. “And there’s such privilege involved in that attitude.”
One focus of the campaign sounds appealing to Medeiros, a public high school teacher: An opportunity for those who grew up in Hawaii to come home without having to take the pay cuts that are often required to work here.
“I see so many of my students, they graduate and many of them leave and never come back,” he said, “because they don’t see Kauai as a place where they can make a life.”
Richard Matsui grew up in Honolulu. After high school, he left for the U.S. mainland and Asia for educational and career opportunities.
As CEO of of kWh Analytics, he never expected to be able to leave California’s Bay Area and still be able to run the company.
The pandemic shut down child care options in San Francisco for his baby born in January. He and his wife planned to come to Honolulu for a month so that his mother could help with the baby. A month turned into two and then six.
“If there’s an opportunity now to take mainland salaries and our mainland jobs and to execute them well from Hawaii, I do think that Hawaii has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to diversify the economy and … take advantage of the fact that our core strength is Hawaii is a tremendously wonderful place to live and to raise kids,” he said.
The idea behind the campaign started with wanting more people like Matsui to come home, said Jason Higa, CEO of FCH Enterprises, parent company of Hawaii’s popular Zippy’s restaurants.
Then the group started thinking about broadening it to others.
With the impacts on housing in mind, Higa said the group included a vacation rental company that’s sitting on a large inventory of vacant properties normally rented by tourists.
Wissam Ali-Ahmad, a software solution architect from San Jose, California, is renting a Kauai condo that’s normally marketed to vacationers.
He has picked up side projects as a consultant for local food trucks and restaurants to help the small businesses improve their contactless services.
“I feel like I’m a guest here, and I have to contribute as much as possible,” he said.
Many Hawaii neighborhoods are overrun with illegal short-term vacation rentals, and having those properties occupied legally by longer-term tenants is appealing, said Ryan Ozawa, communications director for local tech company, Hawaii Information Service.
“What I like about the idea of, say, a cabal of Twitter employees all moving to Kailua is that one, they bring their jobs with them, so you’re not talking about displacement in that regard,” he said. “But for all of the things that we want, which is local sales tax, groceries, electric bill, et cetera, you know, those paychecks from San Francisco get spent in Hawaii.”
The Honolulu suburb of Kailua has been struggling with how to manage an influx of short-term vacation rentals. It’s where Julia Miller, who works for a company that provides payroll services for small businesses, her Google employee husband and their two toddlers, ended up last month when they left Northern California’s dreary weather and fires.
“We do feel really grateful that we were able to come here and be welcome,” she said. “We want to do our part in keeping Hawaii safe.”
While the Millers plan to stay four to six months, others are looking at Hawaii as a longer-term remote workplace.
Software engineer Gil Tene and his wife, an intensive care unit doctor, bought a house in September in Hanalei, Kauai’s most desirable beach town of multimillion-dollar homes.
They plan to split their time between Hanalei and Palo Alto, California, so they looked for a property with remote working in mind. They settled on a five-bedroom house — enough rooms for Tene to work in, his wife to see patients virtually in and their daughter to study in.
“What you look for in a place you intend to work from is very different than when you want to vacation,” he said.