Structured data markup can work diligently behind the scenes to help your local business shine online.
It can add eye-catching rich results to your search results, like review stars, FAQs, and breadcrumbs, that grab attention and encourage more clicks.
Structured data uses the standardized vocabulary of Schema to tell search engines – and even AI tools – exactly what your website is about, making it easier for customers to find you.
While it’s not a direct ranking boost, structured data plays a big role in making your business more visible, whether in traditional search results or AI-powered tools like Gemini or ChatGPT.
From a local ice cream shop to a hardware store, adding structured data can make a huge difference in boosting your local SEO and staying ahead in today’s ultra-saturated digital world. It often remains an untapped resource, despite its potential to significantly enhance your local SEO strategy.
This guide will equip you with actionable knowledge to use structured data markup to boost your local SEO and strengthen your visibility across search engines and AI platforms.
Why Does Schema Matter?
Structured data with Schema convey additional information to search engines so they can interpret and display your content more effectively, giving your business a competitive edge in search engine results pages (SERPs).
Google has consistently highlighted the importance of schema and structured data in delivering relevant, detailed information to users.
Implementing schema correctly can improve your visibility, attract more clicks, and even increase conversions.
Let’s clarify key terms related to schema and structured data markup.
Understanding Schema, Structured Data, Rich Results, And SERP Features
Local search marketers often use the terms “schema”, “schema markup” and “structured data” interchangeably, but there are differences to understand.
Structured Data
Structured data is the format for organizing and describing information on a webpage. By implementing structured data markup to a page, you convey additional information and make it easier for search engines to accurately interpret your pages and display relevant snippets in SERPs.
Schema
Schema is an open source standardized vocabulary used to markup structured data. There are other vocabularies, but the search industry uses Schema.org which is a collaborative initiative founded by Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Yandex in 2011.
This vocabulary enables webmasters to tag elements like business names, addresses, phone numbers, customer reviews, and services.
Pages using structured data with schema are eligible for rich results, which can significantly improve how your business appears in search results.
Rich Results
Rich results (also known as rich snippets) are enhanced search elements that provide more detailed and visually engaging information.
Rich results can also be referred to as “SERP features.” Examples include:
Rich results not only improve click-through rates but also help your business stand out in competitive local search results.
SERP Features
A SERP feature is a specialized element on a search results page that provides extra information or functionality beyond standard results.
Examples include featured snippets, local packs, and knowledge panels. It is a broader category covering various elements, while a rich result enhances individual listings using structured data.
Why Structured Data Matters
Structured data is an integral part of any business’s local SEO strategy for myriad reasons. Let’s explore each reason more in-depth.
Improved Search Engine Understanding
Structured data acts as a translator, turning your website’s content into a format that search engines can easily understand and classify.
This allows Google, large language models (LLMs), and other engines to identify key information such as your business hours, location, services, and customer ratings.
The better search engines understand your site, the more likely they are to display relevant information to users.
Enhanced SERP Visibility
Rich results generated from structured data are more visually appealing than standard search results.
For example, a local bakery using schema markup might appear with review stars, a photo, operating hours, and a “Place an Order” button directly in the SERPs.
This enhanced visibility can drive more traffic to your site and attract higher-quality leads.
Increased Click-Through Rates
Pages featuring rich results typically enjoy higher click-through rates (CTRs) compared to those with standard results.
By giving users detailed information upfront – such as pricing, availability, or reviews – you make it easier for them to decide to engage with your business.
Competitive Advantage
In saturated local markets, structured data markup can differentiate your business from competitors.
If your competitor’s listing only shows basic details while yours features rich elements like sitelinks or a star rating, potential customers are more likely to click on your result.
Voice Search Optimization
As voice search grows in popularity, structured data becomes even more important.
Devices like Google Assistant rely heavily on schema to deliver concise, accurate answers to voice queries.
For example, adding a “FAQ” schema to your site can make your business the top result when users ask questions like, “Where’s the best coffee shop near me?”
The Role Of Structured Data In Local SEO
As evidenced above, structured data serves as a vital tool for local businesses, helping search engines understand and present your information more effectively.
For businesses aiming to improve visibility in local search results, structured data provides an opportunity to display essential details in a highly appealing format.
With schema, businesses can highlight critical information such as:
Business hours, including holiday schedules.
Customer reviews and ratings.
Location details with maps and directions.
Product pricing and availability.
Events and promotions.
For example, a local bakery could use structured data to feature customer reviews, a “Place an Order” button, and seasonal promotions.
An event venue might showcase upcoming events with dates, times, and ticket links, making it easier for potential customers to engage directly from search results.
Practical Benefits For Local Businesses
Here’s how structured data benefits local businesses in practice:
Restaurant Example: A family-owned diner uses schema to display operational hours, reviews, and menu links, reducing barriers for diners looking for quick information.
Retail Example: A local bookstore features event details, such as upcoming author signings, directly in search results to attract customers.
Service Example: A home improvement company highlights service areas and customer testimonials, building credibility and attracting clicks from targeted local users.
These enhancements create a competitive edge by presenting detailed and relevant information before the customer even clicks on your website.
Data And Google Business Profile
Structured data on a location page doesn’t directly affect Google Business Profile (GBP) features like the Map Pack or reviews, but it enhances organic search features, such as rich results, by improving how search engines interpret your website.
While schema doesn’t directly impact GBP rankings, it complements them by ensuring consistent, accurate data across platforms, boosting credibility and visibility.
Including details like address, hours, and services in structured data helps Google associate your site with your GBP listing and can even fill gaps in unclaimed profiles.
Structured Data And Local Ranking Signals
Structured data is not a direct ranking signal in search engine algorithms, as confirmed by Google representatives like John Mueller.
However, it is essential for boosting a website’s visibility and engagement, both of which can impact search rankings.
By organizing information for easy interpretation, structured data improves how content appears in search results, encouraging clicks and interaction.
How Structured Data Impacts AI Results For Local Brands
The rise of AI in search engines and virtual assistants has redefined how structured data impacts digital visibility.
Once primarily a tool for helping search crawlers understand webpage content, structured data now plays a vital role in ensuring local landing pages perform well in AI-driven platforms like Gemini, Bing Chat, ChatGPT, and voice assistants such as Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant.
Structured Data: The Foundation For AI Optimization
Structured data is essential for AI systems like ChatGPT, helping them deliver accurate and relevant information.
Local landing pages using structured data, such as LocalBusiness or GeoCoordinates schema, provide a framework that AI can easily process for precise results.
For instance, structured data defining a business’s address, hours, and reviews allows AI platforms to seamlessly integrate this information into conversations.
Key Benefits Of Structured Data For AI
Improved Contextual Understanding: Structured data helps AI systems understand relationships between key entities on a page. For example, linking a business’s name, address, and service area allows AI to provide more accurate answers for local queries like “electrician near me” or “top-rated gyms in San Diego.”
Enhanced Rich Results: AI tools prioritize structured data to create detailed rich results. A local landing page with Review and AggregateRating schema can lead to AI displaying customer ratings and reviews directly in search results, fostering trust and engagement.
Voice Search Optimization: Structured data enables voice assistants to deliver precise answers. For example, a local restaurant with schema data about its menu and hours will yield accurate responses to queries like “What time does Joe’s Diner open?”
AI-Powered Features Integration: AI models like Google’s Search Generative Experience (SGE) synthesize content into conversational summaries. Local pages with detailed markup are more likely to be included in these overviews, giving businesses better visibility in AI-driven search environments.
Screenshot from search, Google, January 2025 – Brand Retailer Local Page AI Overview Example (webpages are utilizing advanced schema)
Localized Search Benefits Of Structured Data
AI search systems increasingly focus on localization, making structured data essential for businesses targeting specific geographic areas.
Key schema types that enhance localization include:
GeoCoordinates Schema: Ensures precise location information, allowing AI to integrate it into map-based results.
LocalBusiness Schema: Supplies essential business details like name, hours, and services offered.
Event Schema: Highlights local events and activities directly tied to the user’s location and query.
Practical Steps To Implement Structured Data For Local Pages
Structured data is essential for local business websites aiming to improve visibility in search engine results.
While many local sites have basic structured data enabled, implementing detailed and well-validated markup can significantly enhance search engine performance and qualify pages for rich results.
Below is a comprehensive guide to applying schema markup effectively.
Step 1: Select The Best Schema.org Category
Choosing the appropriate Schema.org category is critical for ensuring an accurate representation of your business in search results.
Schema.org provides various categories specifically tailored for local businesses. For example:
Ice Cream Shops: Use schema.org/IceCreamShop
Hardware Stores: Use schema.org/HardwareStore
If no specific category exists for your business, use the general schema.org/LocalBusiness.
Additionally, if you’re technically inclined, you can propose new categories via the Schema.org GitHub forum.
Screenshot from schema.org, January 2025 – Recommended Local Business Schema for a Hardware Store
Step 2: Implement Required Schema Properties
After selecting the correct category, include the following required schema properties to ensure validation and avoid disqualification from rich results:
These properties are not required but are highly recommended for enhancing visibility:
review: A review of your business (only if the local landing page has visible reviews).
aggregateRating: The overall rating based on multiple reviews. Ensure compliance with Google’s Review Rich Results guidelines.
FAQPage: Mark up FAQ sections with this schema to appear as FAQ rich results.
alternateName: Alternative names for your business, e.g., “Acme Inc.” vs. “Acme Stores.”
sameAs: Links to third-party profiles like Facebook, YouTube, or Wikipedia.
hasMap: A link to your business’s location on Google Maps.
breadcrumb: Structured navigation schema to improve rich results in SERPs.
department: Internal departments or services within your business.
priceRange: A general indicator of your pricing, such as “$$$.”
Step 4: Explore Advanced Schema Types
For businesses seeking even more advanced features, consider these schema types:
SearchAction: Formerly known as the sitelinks search box, lets users perform site-specific searches directly from the search engine results page (SERP), enhancing engagement and accessibility.
additionalType: Defines additional topical relevance, often using Wikipedia categories. For example, a sporting goods store might use the Wikipedia page for Sports Equipment.
headline: Helps local businesses optimize key pages—such as service offerings, promotions, and blog posts—by providing a clear, structured title that improves visibility in search results.
alternativeHeadline: Allows local businesses to add a secondary title variation, making content more discoverable for different search terms and customer queries related to local services.
significantLink: Highlights key pages that matter most for a local business, such as appointment booking, contact pages, or location-specific services, improving navigation and SEO.
contentLocation: Specifies the geographic area a business serves, helping search engines associate its services with a specific city or region, boosting local search rankings.
Step 5: Validate Your Schema Markup
Proper validation is critical for ensuring your structured data qualifies for rich results. Google provides several tools for this purpose:
Schema.org Structured Data Validator: Tests structured data directly by pasting your code into the tool. It flags both errors and warnings. While errors must be fixed, warnings are less critical and may not affect rich results.
Screenshot from Schema Markup Validator, January 2025 – Validated Schema Example (validated with no errors/warnings)
Rich Results Test: Google’s official tool to preview which rich results can be generated by your structured data.
Google Search Console Enhancement Reports: Monitors structured data across your site and provides enhancement reports, highlighting pages with errors or warnings. Notifications from Search Console should be addressed promptly to maintain performance.
Screenshot from Google Search Console, January 2025 – Google Search Console Enhancements Reporting Example
Step 6: Measure Rich Results Performance
Tracking your rich results’ performance helps you understand the impact of your schema implementation.
Third-party tools like Semrush offer “SERP feature” reports that show the aggregate rich results your site is earning. This data can be used to identify further optimization opportunities.
Semrush SERP Features Trend Example
You Can’t Go Wrong With Implementing Good Structured Data
Adding structured data to your location pages is a powerful way to enhance local SEO and improve how search engines and AI systems display your business.
Structured data is especially important for AI, as it helps models like ChatGPT and search assistants better understand and showcase your business details.
It also ensures your website’s information aligns with your Google Business Profile, even if your listing is incomplete or unclaimed.
By making key information easy to find, structured data benefits both AI systems and customers.
With better visibility, higher click-through rates, and a stronger online presence, schema markup is a must for local businesses. Add it to your location pages today to stand out and connect with more customers.
Key Takeaways
Selecting the right Schema.org category is crucial for accurate business representation.
Implement required and recommended schema properties to qualify for rich results.
Validate your structured data using tools like Google’s Rich Results Test and Schema.ord Structured Data Markup Validator.
Monitor performance through Google Search Console and third-party tools.
By following these steps, local businesses can maximize the visibility and effectiveness of their structured data, ultimately driving more traffic and engagement through enhanced search results.
Special thanks to Chad Klingensmith, Sr. SEO Strategist at Rio SEO, for his extensive contributions to this article. His in-depth knowledge of structured data ensures the accuracy and relevance of the insights shared here.
A new lawsuit seeking class action status alleges that WordPress co-creator Matt Mullenweg and Automattic engaged in unfair business practices to harm managed WordPress web host WP Engine (WPE) and its customers.
According to the lawsuit:
“Plaintiff and the class seek equitable relief pursuant to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17203 to end Defendants’ wrongful practices including requiring Defendants to cease its tortious interference with contract.”
…Plaintiff and the class also seek an order requiring Defendants to make full restitution of all monies it received through its wrongful conduct, along with all other relief permitted under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.”
The lawsuit makes multiple claims against Mullenweg and Automattic:
That defendants interfered with access to WordPress resources, disrupting WPE customers.
Interfered with customers’ ability to manage their websites hosted on WP Engine (WPE).
The lawsuit claims that the actions were not legitimate trademark enforcement efforts but a pretext for degrading WP Engine’s services and pressuring customers to leave.
The complaint also accuses the defendants of monopolistic behavior, alleging that they wielded control over the WordPress ecosystem for financial gain, harming WPE customers.
According to the legal filing:
“Defendants deliberately wielded their power over the WordPress.org website like a cudgel, not only blocking access to the website but stealing resources like the ACF plugin, forcing visitors to click a checkbox asserting they are not associated with WPE, publishing WPE customer website addresses in an attempt to pressure customers to leave WPE, and repeatedly threatening future consequences including the risk of additional service disruptions for class members who did not leave WPE. “
Why the Lawsuit Seeks Class Action Status
The legal filing asserts that the lawsuit qualifies for class action certification based on allegations that Mullenweg and Automattic engaged in conduct that harmed not just the plaintiff but a broader group of WP Engine (WPE) customers. The plaintiff contends that the defendants’ actions, including interfering with WPE’s services, blocking access to essential WordPress tools, disrupting and degrading service, and pressuring customers to leave WPE, resulted in harm that, according to the lawsuit, meets the criteria for class certification under Rule 23. The lawsuit claims that WPE customers faced service disruptions, financial losses, and potential security risks.
The justification for the class action is outlined in paragraph 58 of the lawsuit:
“Plaintiff brings this action as a class action pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(1)-(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on behalf of himself, his business and a Nationwide Class defined as:
All persons in the United States who had ongoing active WPE WordPress Web Hosting Plans on or before September 24, 2024 through December 10, 2024.”
The legal filing asserts that numerous public statements and court records, including filings related to WP Engine, support the allegation that the defendants caused harm to the plaintiff and the alleged class. It then details the plaintiff’s personal experiences as further evidence of the alleged harm.
Section III, ‘Plaintiff’s Experiences,’ outlines how the defendant’s actions harmed the plaintiff, Keller, including:
Service Disruptions
Business and Financial Impact
Personal Website Impact
Security Risks
Customer Relationship Concerns
Consideration of Alternative Hosting
The legal filing details the following:
“Defendants’ interference significantly impacted the business of Plaintiff Keller. While Plaintiff Keller was happy with WPE services and intended to continue using WPE services, the service disruption and degraded service, coupled with repeated public statements and threats made by Defendants, led Plaintiff to explore moving his website and all those operated by his business to another managed web host.
Plaintiff’s livelihood revolves around building and operating websites, and significant disruptions will impact his business including his own capacity to fulfill his contractual obligations to his own clients.
Plaintiff Keller’s websites were significantly impacted by outages despite WPE’s attempts to create workarounds.
Plaintiff Keller has had to spend significant time and expense responding to the service disruptions and degradations, preparing for moving his and his clients’ websites to a new host, and in investigating a new host environment after a long and successful prior partnership with WPE. He is not alone in the harm he has suffered.
Plaintiff Keller’s personal website was also significantly impacted. Access to the WordPress backend was available intermittently, and Plaintiff Keller received emails related to this downtime.
Plaintiff Keller pays WPE $3,300 per year for its “Scale Plan,” 2 additional websites, and GeoTargeting and Multi-Site services. Due to Defendants’ actions, Plaintiff Keller was unable to update his website in a standard marketing cycle adjustment. Plaintiff Keller had to spend time and expense to manage, update, and modify his website as a result of Defendants cutting off WPE from the WordPress ecosystem and therefore, did not receive the benefit of his bargain with WPE as Plaintiff Keller had to do the work that he pays WPE for.”
A New Phase In Dispute Between Mullenweg/Automattic And WPE
This class action lawsuit is a new phase in the dispute between Mullenweg, Automattic and WP Engine. It expands the legal battle to include claims from individual customers. With allegations of unfair competition, monopolistic behavior, and deliberate service disruptions, the class action lawsuit adds another layer to a dispute that has led some in the WordPress community to call for a change in governance to the WordPress open source project.
Advertising technology has entered a new phase that pairs personal privacy with targeting.
For years, the ad industry has depended on third-party tracking cookies — tiny snippets of code downloaded to a user’s browser — to identify prospects, gather data about them, and employ that data for targeting. Consumers saw relevant ads, and advertisers enjoyed good, if not superb, returns.
Adobe’s new real-time customer data platform is one of many innovations in cookie-less ad targeting.
Cookies
Unfortunately, cookie-based tracking has privacy problems. In contrast to first-party cookies, which store preferences, third-party tracking cookies aggregate, share, and thereby expose lots of private information.
Just this month, Wired magazine reported, “Google’s advertising ecosystem reveals that a wealth of sensitive information is being openly served up to some of the world’s largest brands…Experts say that when combined with other data, this information could be used to identify and target specific individuals.”
Privacy advocates recognized this and began railing against sharing personal and sensitive information across advertising networks. Technology companies responded. Mozilla’s Firefox browser, for example, stopped allowing tracking cookies back in 2019.
Google, which operates one of the largest ad networks in the world and has the most popular web browser in Chrome, nearly killed third-party cookies in 2024, as it planned to block them in Chrome and move all advertisers to alternative targeting methods — but it didn’t happen.
“Google heard the alarm bells from the industry that nearly 20 years of ad tech infrastructure cannot be recreated in six months,” said David Stein, then the CEO of the data firm Audigent, in an April 2024 email to Practical Ecommerce.
Those alarm bells could have been Google’s ad exchange customers, its ad tech partners, and the anti-trust regulators concerned that ending cookie tracking would give Google a performance advertising monopoly.
Hence tracking cookies remained in Chrome, but ad tech providers did not stop innovating.
Innovation
The same day that Wired published its report, Adobe announced the general availability of its real-time customer data platform (CDP).
“Brands have long relied on third-party audience signals to power tailored digital ads. As consumers play a more active role in customizing their privacy preferences, a move away from third-party data means new tools are required for brands to identify relevant audiences and deliver personalized ad experiences,” read the Adobe press release.
Adobe’s CDP allows advertisers and publishers to securely collaborate on first-party data to enhance ad targeting while respecting user privacy. This relationship is often called second-party data sharing, and resembles Shopify’s Audiences and similar products.
Methods
Second-party data sharing is one of six primary methods ad tech companies are exploring as they try to maintain or improve ad targeting efficacy without raising privacy concerns.
Second-party data sharing allows advertisers and publishers to collaborate, often sharing aggregate data.
First-party data is when a business uses its own data to target or retarget individuals or cohorts. Many companies are buying publications to advertise to known customers and prospects.
Unified ID solutions produce encrypted identifiers to share among systems. The Trade Desk’s Unified Solution is an example. Often, these IDs stem from an email address.
Data clean rooms make it possible for analysts to use data without privacy concerns.
Cohort-based advertising targets groups of shoppers with similar profiles instead of individuals.
Contextual targeting analyzes the context — web page, app, video, email — to deliver relevant ads to consumers without relying on personal data. Artificial intelligence makes this more successful.
Used individually or in combination, these targeting techniques have significant promise. Most reports suggest that results vary among advertisers, yet the techniques will likely work better than third-party cookies.
Ad Experiments
Listing the ad tech companies developing cookie-less targeting methods would fill pages. Thus advertisers seeking to acquire customers might find it wise to experiment.
For example, marketing platform Zeta Global recently purchased the email advertising company LiveIntent. Some in the industry believe Zeta Global valued LiveIntent’s ability to identify website visitors based on email interactions.
Could Zeta Global’s demand-side platform be worth a look?
Similarly, Paved, another email ad platform, expanded its programmatic network, permitting advertisers to target and retarget shoppers safely and privately.
In short, ad targeting is changing, and the best options may not be familiar platforms.
Ever since World War II, the US has been the global leader in science and technology—and benefited immensely from it. Research fuels American innovation and the economy in turn. Scientists around the world want to study in the US and collaborate with American scientists to produce more of that research. These international collaborations play a critical role in American soft power and diplomacy. The products Americans can buy, the drugs they have access to, the diseases they’re at risk of catching—are all directly related to the strength of American research and its connections to the world’s scientists.
That scientific leadership is now being dismantled, according to more than 10 federal workers who spoke to MIT Technology Review, as the Trump administration—spearheaded by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—slashes personnel, programs, and agencies. Meanwhile, the president himself has gone after relationships with US allies.
These workers come from several agencies, including the Departments of State, Defense, and Commerce, the US Agency for International Development, and the National Science Foundation. All of them occupy scientific and technical roles, many of which the average American has never heard of but which are nevertheless critical, coordinating research, distributing funding, supporting policymaking, or advising diplomacy.
They warn that dismantling the behind-the-scenes scientific research programs that backstop American life could lead to long-lasting, perhaps irreparable damage to everything from the quality of health care to the public’s access to next-generation consumer technologies. The US took nearly a century to craft its rich scientific ecosystem; if the unraveling that has taken place over the past month continues, Americans will feel the effects for decades to come.
Most of the federal workers spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk or for fear of being targeted. Many are completely stunned and terrified by the scope and totality of the actions. While every administration brings its changes, keeping the US a science and technology leader has never been a partisan issue. No one predicted the wholesale assault on these foundations of American prosperity.
“If you believe that innovation is important to economic development, then throwing a wrench in one of the most sophisticated and productive innovation machines in world history is not a good idea,” says Deborah Seligsohn, an assistant professor of political science at Villanova University who worked for two decades in the State Department on science issues. “They’re setting us up for economic decline.”
The biggest funder of innovation
The US currently has the most top-quality research institutes in the world. This includes world-class universities like MIT (which publishes MIT Technology Review) and the University of California, Berkeley; national labs like Oak Ridge and Los Alamos; and federal research facilities run by agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Department of Defense. Much of this network was developed by the federal government after World War II to bolster the US position as a global superpower.
Before the Trump administration’s wide-ranging actions, which now threaten to slash federal research funding, the government remained by far the largest supporter of scientific progress. Outside of its own labs and facilities, it funded more than 50% of research and development across higher education, according to data from the National Science Foundation. In 2023, that came to nearly $60 billion out of the $109 billion that universities spent on basic science and engineering.
The return on these investments is difficult to measure. It can often take years or decades for this kind of basic science research to have tangible effects on the lives of Americans and people globally, and on the US’s place in the world. But history is littered with examples of the transformative effect that this funding produces over time. The internet and GPS were first developed through research backed by the Department of Defense, as was the quantum dot technology behind high-resolution QLED television screens. Well before they were useful or commercially relevant, the development of neural networks that underpin nearly all modern AI systems was substantially supported by the National Science Foundation. The decades-long drug discovery process that led to Ozempic was incubated by the Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Institutes of Health. Microchips. Self-driving cars. MRIs. The flu shot. The list goes on and on.
In her 2013 book The Entrepreneurial State, Mariana Mazzucato, a leading economist studying innovation at University College London, found that every major technological transformation in the US, from electric cars to Google to the iPhone, can trace its roots back to basic science research once funded by the federal government. If the past offers any lesson, that means every major transformation in the future could be shortchanged with the destruction of that support.
The Trump administration’s distaste for regulation will arguably be a boon in the short term for some parts of the tech industry, including crypto and AI. But the federal workers said the president’s and Musk’s undermining of basic science research will hurt American innovation in the long run. “Rather than investing in the future, you’re burning through scientific capital,” an employee at the State Department said. “You can build off the things you already know, but you’re not learning anything new. Twenty years later, you fall behind because you stopped making new discoveries.”
A global currency
The government doesn’t just give money, either. It supports American science in numerous other ways, and the US reaps the returns. The Department of State helps attract the best students from around the world to American universities. Amid stagnating growth in the number of homegrown STEM PhD graduates, recruiting foreign students remains one of the strongest pathways for the US to expand its pool of technical talent, especially in strategic areas like batteries and semiconductors. Many of those students stay for years, if not the rest of their lives; even if they leave the country, they’ve already spent some of their most productive years in the US and will retain a wealth of professional connections with whom they’ll collaborate, thereby continuing to contribute to US science.
The State Department also establishes agreements between the US and other countries and helps broker partnerships between American and international universities. That helps scientists collaborate across borders on everything from global issues like climate change to research that requires equipment on opposite sides of the world, such as the measurement of gravitational waves.
The international development work of USAID in global health, poverty reduction, and conflict alleviation—now virtually shut down in its entirety—was designed to build up goodwill toward the US globally; it improved regional stability for decades. In addition to its inherent benefits, this allowed American scientists to safely access diverse geographies and populations, as well as plant and animal species not found in the US. Such international interchange played just as critical a role as government funding in many crucial inventions.
Several federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, also help collect and aggregate critical data on disease, health trends, air quality, weather, and more from disparate sources that feed into the work of scientists across the country.
The National Institutes of Health, for example, has since 2015 been running the Precision Medicine Initiative, the only effort of its kind to collect extensive and granular health data from over 1 million Americans who volunteer their medical records, genetic history, and even Fitbit data to help researchers understand health disparities and develop personalized and more effective treatments for disorders from heart and lung disease to cancer. The data set, which is too expensive for any one university to assemble and maintain, has already been used in hundreds of papers that will lay the foundation for the next generation of life-saving pharmaceuticals.
Beyond fueling innovation, a well-supported science and technology ecosystem bolsters US national security and global influence. When people want to study at American universities, attend international conferences hosted on American soil, or move to the US to work or to found their own companies, the US stays the center of global innovation activity. This ensures that the country continues to get access to the best people and ideas, and gives it an outsize role in setting global scientific practices and priorities. US research norms, including academic freedom and a robust peer review system, become global research norms that lift the overall quality of science. International agencies like the World Health Organization take significant cues from American guidance.
US scientific leadership has long been one of the country’s purest tools of soft power and diplomacy as well. Countries keen to learn from the American innovation ecosystem and to have access to American researchers and universities have been more prone to partner with the US and align with its strategic priorities.
Just one example: Science diplomacy has long played an important role in maintaining the US’s strong relationship with the Netherlands, which is home to ASML, the only company in the world that can produce the extreme ultraviolet lithography machines needed to produce the most advanced semiconductors. These are critical for both AI development and national security.
International science cooperation has also served as a stabilizing force in otherwise difficult relationships. During the Cold War, the US and USSR continued to collaborate on the International Space Station; during the recent heightened economic competition between the US and China, the countries have remained each other’s top scientific partners. “Actively working together to solve problems that we both care about helps maintain the connections and the context but also helps build respect,” Seligsohn says.
The federal government itself is a significant beneficiary of the country’s convening power for technical expertise. Among other things, experts both inside and outside the government support its sound policymaking in science and technology. During the US Senate AI Insight Forums, co-organized by Senator Chuck Schumer through the fall of 2023, for example, the Senate heard from more than 150 experts, many of whom were born abroad and studying at American universities, working at or advising American companies, or living permanently in the US as naturalized American citizens.
Federal scientists and technical experts at government agencies also work on wide-ranging goals critical to the US, including building resilience in the face of an increasingly erratic climate; researching strategic technologies such as next-generation battery technology to reduce the country’s reliance on minerals not found in the US; and monitoring global infectious diseases to prevent the next pandemic.
“Every issue that the US faces, there are people that are trying to do research on it and there are partnerships that have to happen,” the State Department employee said.
A system in jeopardy
Now the breadth and velocity of the Trump administration’s actions has led to an unprecedented assault on every pillar upholding American scientific leadership.
For starters, the purging of tens of thousands—and perhaps soon hundreds of thousands—of federal workers is removing scientists and technologists from the government and paralyzing the ability of critical agencies to function. Across multiple agencies, science and technology fellowship programs, designed to bring in talented early-career staff with advanced STEM degrees, have shuttered. Many other federal scientists were among the thousands who were terminated as probationaryemployees, a status they held because of the way scientific roles are often contractually structured.
“Diplomacy is built on relationships. If we’ve closed all these clinics and gotten rid of technical experts in our knowledge base inside the government, why would any foreign government have respect for the US in our ability to hold our word and in our ability to actually be knowledgeable?” a terminated USAID worker said. “I really hope America can save itself.”
Now the Trump administration has sought to reverse some terminations after discovering that many were key to national security, including nuclear safety employees responsible for designing, building, and maintaining the country’s nuclear weapons arsenal. But many federal workers I spoke to can no longer imagine staying in the public sector. Some are considering going into industry. Others are wondering whether it will be better to move abroad.
“It’s just such a waste of American talent,” said Fiona Coleman, a terminated federal scientist, her voice cracking with emotion as she described the long years of schooling and training she and her colleagues went through to serve the government.
Many fear the US has also singlehandedly kneecapped its own ability to attract talent from abroad. Over the last 10 years, even as American universities have continued to lead the world, many universities in other countries have rapidly leveled up. That includes those in Canada, where liberal immigration policies and lower tuition fees have driven a 200% increase in international student enrollment over the last decade, according to Anna Esaki-Smith, cofounder of a higher-education research consultancy called Education Rethink and author of Make College Your Superpower.
Germany has also seen an influx, thanks to a growing number of English-taught programs and strong connections between universities and German industry. Chinese students, who once represented the largest share of foreign students in the US, are increasingly staying at home or opting to study in places like Hong Kong, Singapore, and the UK.
During the first Trump administration, many international students were already more reluctant to come to the US because of the president’s hostile rhetoric. With the return and rapid escalation of that rhetoric, Esaki-Smith is hearing from some universities that international students are declining their admissions offers.
Add to that the other recent developments—the potential dramatic cuts in federal research funding, the deletion of scores of rich public data sets on health and the environment, the clampdown on academic freedom for research that appears related to diversity, equity, and inclusion and the fear that these restrictions could ultimately encompass other politically charged topics like climate change or vaccines—and many more international science and engineering students could decide to head elsewhere.
“I’ve been hearing this increasingly from several postdocs and early-career professors, fearing the cuts in NIH or NSF grants, that they’re starting to look for funding or job opportunities in other countries,” Coleman told me. “And then we’re going to be training up the US’s competitors.”
The attacks could similarly weaken the productivity of those who stay at American universities. While many of the Trump administration’s actions are now being halted and scrutinized by US judges, the chaos has weakened a critical prerequisite for tackling the toughest research problems: a long-term stable environment. With reports that the NSF is combing through research grants for words like “women,” “diverse,” and “institutional” to determine whether they violate President Trump’s executive order on DEIA programs, a chilling effect is also setting in among federally funded academics uncertain whether they’ll get caught in the dragnet.
To scientists abroad, the situation in the US government has marked American institutions and researchers as potentially unreliable partners, several federal workers told me. If international researchers think collaborations with the US can end at any moment when funds are abruptly pulled or certain topics or keywords are suddenly blacklisted, many of them could steer clear and look to other countries. “I’m really concerned about the instability we’re showing,” another employee at the State Department said. “What’s the point in even engaging? Because science is a long-term initiative and process that outlasts administrations and political cycles.”
Meanwhile, international scientists have far more options these days for high-caliber colleagues to collaborate with outside America. In recent years, for example, China has made a remarkable ascent to become a global peer in scientific discoveries. By some metrics, it has even surpassed the US; it started accounting for more of the top 1% of most-cited papers globally, often called the Nobel Prize tier, back in 2019 and has continued to improve the quality of the rest of its research.
Where Chinese universities can also entice international collaborators with substantial resources, the US is more limited in its ability to offer tangible funding, the State employee said. Until now, the US has maintained its advantage in part through the prestige of its institutions and its more open cultural norms, including stronger academic freedom. But several federal scientists warn that this advantage is dissipating.
“America is made up of so many different people contributing to it. There’s such a powerful global community that makes this country what it is, especially in science and technology and academia and research. We’re going to lose that; there’s not a chance in the world that we’re not going to lose that through stuff like this,” says Brigid Cakouros, a federal scientist who was also terminated from USAID. “I have no doubt that the international science community will ultimately be okay. It’ll just be a shame for the US to isolate themselves from it.”
Maggie Barnidge, 18, has been managing cystic fibrosis her whole life. But not long after she moved out of her home state to start college, she came down with pneumonia and went into liver failure. She desperately wanted to get in touch with her doctor back home, whom she’d been seeing since she was diagnosed as an infant and who knew which treatments worked best for her—but he wasn’t allowed to practice telemedicine across state lines. The local hospital, and doctors unfamiliar with her complicated medical history, would have to do.
“A lot of what Maggie needed wasn’t a physical exam,” says Barnidge’s mother, Elizabeth. “It was a conversation: What tests should I be getting next? What did my labs look like? She just needed her doctor who knew her well.”
But doctors are generally allowed to practice medicine only where they have a license. This means they cannot treat patients across state lines unless they also have a license in the patient’s state, and most physicians have one or two licenses at most. This has led to what Ateev Mehrotra, a physician and professor of health policy at the Brown University School of Public Health, calls an “inane” norm: A woman with a rare cancer boarding an airplane, at the risk of her chemotherapy-weakened immune system, to see a specialist thousands of miles away, for example, or a baby with a rare disease who’s repeatedly shuttled between Arizona and Massachusetts.
While eligible physicians can currently apply to practice in states besides their own, this can be a burdensome and impractical process. For instance, let’s say you are an oncologist in Minnesota, and a patient from Kansas arrives at your office seeking treatment. The patient will probably want to do follow-up appointments via telehealth when possible, to avoid having to travel back to Minnesota.
But if you are not yet licensed to practice in Kansas (and you probably are not), you can’t suddenly start practicing medicine there. You would first need to apply to do so, either through the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (designed to streamline the process of obtaining a full license in another state, but at a price of $700 per year) or with Kansas’s board of medicine directly. Maybe this poses too great an administrative hurdle for you—you work long hours, and how will you find time to compile the necessary paperwork? Doctors can’t reasonably be expected to apply for licensure in all 50 states. The patient, then, either loses out on care or must shoulder the burden of traveling to Minnesota for a doctor’s visit. The only way to access telehealth, if that’s what the patient prefers, would be to cross into the state and log in—an option that might still be preferable to traveling all the way to the doctor’s office. These obstacles to care have led to a growing belief among health-care providers, policymakers, and patients that under certain circumstances, doctors should be able to treat their patients anywhere.
Lately, telehealth has proved to be widely popular, too. The coronavirus emergency in 2020 served as proof of concept, demonstrating that new digital platforms for medicine were feasible—and often highly effective. One study showed that telehealth accounted for nearly a quarter of contacts between patients and providers during the first four months of the pandemic (up from 0.3% during the same period in 2019), and among Medicare users, nearly half had used telehealth in 2020—a 63-fold increase. This swift and dramatic shift came about because Congress and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services had passed legislation to make more telehealth visits temporarily eligible for reimbursement (the payments a health-care provider receives from an insurance company for providing medical services), while state boards of medicine relaxed the licensing restrictions. Now, more providers were able to offer telehealth, and more patients were eager to receive medical care without leaving their homes.
Though in-person care remains standard, telehealth has gained a significant place in US medicine, increasing from 0.1% of total Medicare visits in 2019 to 5.3% in 2020 and 3.5% in 2021. By the end of 2023, more than one in 10 Medicare patients were still using telehealth. And in some specialties the rate is much higher: 37% of all mental-health visits in the third quarter of 2023 were telemedicine, as well as 10% of obstetric appointments, 10% of transplant appointments, and 11% of infectious-disease appointments.
“Telehealth has broadened our ability to provide care in ways not imaginable prior to the pandemic,” says Tara Sklar, faculty director of the health law and policy program at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law.
Traditionally, patients and providers alike have been skeptical that telehealth care can meet the standards of an in-person appointment. However, most people advocating for telehealth aren’t arguing that it should completely replace visiting your doctor, explains Carmel Shachar, director of Harvard Law School’s Health Law and Policy Clinic. Rather, “it’s a really useful way to improve access to care.” Digital medicine could help address a gap in care for seniors by eliminating the need for them to make an arduous journey to the doctor’s office; many older adults find they’re more likely to keep their follow-up appointments when they can do them remotely. Telemedicine could also help address the equity issues facing hourly employees, who might not be able to take a half or full day off work to attend an in-person appointment. For them, the offer of a video call might make the difference between seeking and not seeking help.
“It’s a modality that we’re not using to its fullest potential because we’re not updating our regulations to reflect the digital age,” Shachar says.
Last December, Congress extended most of the provisions increasing Medicare coverage for telehealth through the end of March 2025, including the assurances that patients can be in their homes when they receive care and that they don’t need to be in a rural area to be eligible for telemedicine.
“We would love to have these flexibilities made permanent,” says Helen Hughes, medical director for the Johns Hopkins Office of Telemedicine. “It’s confusing to explain to our providers and patients the continued regulatory uncertainty and news articles implying that telehealth is at risk, only to have consistent extensions for the last five years. This uncertainty leads providers and patients to worry that this type of care is not permanent and probably stifles innovation and investment by health systems.”
In the meantime, several strategies are being considered to facilitate telehealth across state lines. Some places—like Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC—offer “proximal reciprocity,” meaning that a physician licensed in any of those states can more efficiently be licensed in the others. And several states, like Arkansas and Idaho, say that out-of-state doctors can generally practice telemedicine within their borders as long as they are licensed in good standing in another state and are using the technology to provide follow-up care. Expanding on these ideas, some advocates say that an ideal approach might look similar to how we regulate driving across state lines: A driver’s license from one state generally permits you to drive anywhere in the country as long as you have a good record and obey the rules of the road in the state that you’re in. Another idea is to create a telemedicine-specific version of the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (which deals only with full medical licenses) in which qualifying physicians can register to practice telehealth among all participating states via a centralized compact.
For the foreseeable future, telehealth policy in the US is locked in what Mehrotra calls “hand-to-hand warfare”—states duking it out within their own legislatures to try to determine rules and regulations for administering telemedicine. Meanwhile, advocates are also pushing for uniformity between states, as with the Uniform Law Commission’s Telehealth Act of 2022, which set out consistent terminology so that states can adopt similar telehealth laws.
“We’ve always advanced our technologies, like what I can provide as a doctor—meds, tests, surgeries,” Mehrotra says. “But in 2024, the basic structure of how we deliver that care is very similar to 1964.” That is, we still ask people to come to a doctor’s office or emergency department for an in-person visit.
“That’s what excites me about telehealth,” he says. “I think there’s the potential that we can deliver care in a better way.”
Isabel Ruehl is a writer based in New York and an assistant editor at Harper’s Magazine.
This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.
Yesterday marks a month since the inauguration of Donald Trump as the 47th US president. And what a month it has been. The Trump administration wasted no time in delivering a slew of executive orders, memos, and work notices to federal employees.
Making IVF more affordable and accessible should give people more options when it comes to family planning and reproductive freedom more generally. But the move comes after a barrage of actions by the new administration that are hitting reproductive care hard for people around the world. On January 20, his first day in office, Trump ordered a “90-day pause in United States foreign development assistance” for such programs to be assessed. By January 24, a “stop work” memo issued by the State Department brought US-funded aid programs around the world to a halt.
Recent estimates suggest that more than 8,000 women will die from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth over the next 90 days if the funding is not reinstated.
On January 24 Trump also reinstated the global gag rule—a policy that requires nongovernmental organizations receiving US health funding to agree that they will not offer abortion counseling and care. This move alone immediately stripped organizations of the funding they need to perform their work. MSI Reproductive Choices, which offers support for reproductive health care in 36 countries, lost $14 million as a result, says Anna Mackay, who manages donor-funded programs at the organization. “Over 2 million women and girls would have received contraceptive services with that money,” she says.
The US Agency for International Development (USAID) had a 2025 budget of $42.8 billion to spend on foreign assistance, which covers everything from humanitarian aid and sanitation to programs promoting gender equality and economic growth in countries around the world. But the “stop work” memo froze that funding for 90 days.
The impacts were felt immediately and are still rippling out. Clinical trials were halted. Jobs were lost. Health programs were shut down.
“I think this is going to have a devastating impact on the global health architecture,” says Thoai Ngo at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health. “USAID is the major foreign funder for global health … I’m afraid that there isn’t [another government] that can fill the gap.”
Reproductive health care is likely to lose out as affected governments and health organizations try to reorganize their resources, says Ngo: “In times of crisis … women and girls tend to be deprioritized in terms of access to health and social services.”
Without information on and access to a range of contraceptive options, unintended pregnancies result. These have the potential to limit the freedoms of people who become pregnant. And they can have far-reaching economic impacts, since access to contraception can improve education rates and career outcomes.
And the health consequences can be devastating. Unintended pregnancies are more likely to be ended with abortions—potentially unsafe ones. Maternal death rates are high in regions that lack adequate resources. A maternal death occurred every two minutes in 2020.
“It’s difficult to overstate how catastrophic this freeze has been over the last several weeks,” says Amy Friedrich-Karnik, director of federal policy at the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on global sexual and reproductive health and rights. “Every single day that the freeze is in place, there are 130,000 women who are being denied contraceptive care,” she says.
The Guttmacher Institute estimates that should USAID funding be frozen for the full 90 days, around 11.7 million women and girls would lose access to contraceptive care, and 4.2 million of them would experience unintended pregnancies. Of those, “8,340 will die from complications during pregnancy and childbirth,” says Friedrich-Karnik.
“By denying people access to contraception, not only are you denying them tools for their bodily autonomy—you are really risking their lives,” she says. “Thousands more women will die down the road.”
“USAID plays such a central role in supporting these life-saving programs,” says Ngo. “The picture is bleak.”
Even online sources of information on contraceptives are being affected by the funding freeze. Ben Bellows is a chief business officer at Nivi, a digital health company that develops chatbots to deliver health information to people via WhatsApp. “Two million users have used the bot,” he says.
He and his team have been working on a project to deliver information on contraceptive options and family planning to women in India, and they have been looking to incorporate AI into their bot. The project was funded by a company that, in turn, is funded by USAID. Like the funding, the work is “frozen,” says Bellows.
“We’ve slowed [hiring] and we’ve slowed some of the tech development because of the freeze [on USAID],” he says. “It’s bad [for] the individuals, it’s bad [for] the companies that are trying to operate in these markets, and it’s bad [for] public health outcomes.”
Reproductive health and freedoms are also likely to be affected by the Trump administration’s cuts to federal agencies. The National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have been in the administration’s crosshairs, as has the Food and Drug Administration.
After all, the FDA regulates drugs and medical devices in the US, including contraceptives. The CDC collects and shares important data on sexual and reproductive health. And the NIH supports vital research on reproductive health and contraception.
The CDC also funds health programs in low-income countries like Ethiopia. Following Trump’s executive order, the country’s ministry of health terminated the contracts of more than 5,000 health workers whose salaries were supported by the CDC as well as USAID.
“That’s midwives and nurses working in rural health posts,” says Mackay. “We’re turning up to support these staff and provide them with sexual reproductive health training and make sure they’ve got the contraceptives, and there’s just no one at the facility.”
So, yes, it is great news if the Trump administration can find a way to make IVF more accessible. But, as Mackay points out, “it’s increasing reproductive choice in one direction.”
My colleague Rhiannon Williams reported on the immediate aftermath of the decision that reversed Roe v. Wade.
Fertility rates are falling around the world, in almost every country. IVF is great, but it won’t save us from a looming fertility crisis. Gender equality and family-friendly policies are much more likely to be effective.
Decades of increasingly successful IVF treatments have caused millions of embryos to be stored in cryopreservation tanks around the world. In some cases, they can’t be donated, used, or destroyed and appear to be stuck in limbo “forever.”
Ever come across the term “women of childbearing age”? The insidious idea that women’s bodies are, above all else, vessels for growing children has plenty of negative consequences for us all. But it has also set back scientific research and health policy.
The US Food and Drug Administration assesses the efficacy and toxicity of experimental medicines before they are approved. It should also consider their “financial toxicity,” given that medical bills can fall on the shoulders of patients themselves, argue a group of US doctors. (The New England Journal of Medicine)
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new US secretary of health and human services, has vowed to investigate the country’s childhood vaccination schedule. During his confirmation hearing a couple of weeks ago, he promised not to change the schedule. (Associated Press)
Some scientists have been altering their published work without telling anyone. Such “stealth corrections” threaten scientific integrity, say a group of researchers from Europe and the US. (Learned Publishing)
The US Department of Agriculture said it accidentally fired several people who were working on the federal response to the bird flu outbreak. Apparently the agency is now trying to hire them back. (NBC News)
Could your next pet be a glowing rabbit? This startup is using CRISPR to “level up” pets. Their goal is to eventually create a real-life unicorn. (Wired)
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.
The foundations of America’s prosperity are being dismantled
Ever since World War II, the US has been the global leader in science and technology—and benefited immensely from it. Research fuels American innovation and the economy in turn. Scientists around the world want to study in the US and collaborate with American scientists to produce more of that research.
These international collaborations play a critical role in American soft power and diplomacy. The products Americans can buy, the drugs they have access to, the diseases they’re at risk of catching—are all directly related to the strength of American research and its connections to the world’s scientists.
That scientific leadership is now being dismantled, according to more than 10 federal workers who spoke to MIT Technology Review, as the Trump administration slashes personnel, programs, and agencies. And it could lead to long-lasting, perhaps irreparable damage to everything from the quality of health care to the public’s access to next-generation technologies. Read the full story.
—Karen Hao
8,000 pregnant women may die in just 90 days because of US aid cuts
A barrage of actions by the new Trump administration is hitting reproductive care hard for people around the world.
This story is from The Checkup, our weekly newsletter all about what’s going on in health and biotech. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Thursday.
Doctors and patients are calling for more telehealth. Where is it?
Doctors in the US are generally allowed to practice medicine only where they have a license. It’s a situation that has led to a nonsensical norm: A woman with a rare cancer boarding an airplane, at the risk of her chemotherapy-weakened immune system, to see a specialist thousands of miles away, for example, or a baby with a rare disease who’s repeatedly shuttled between Arizona and Massachusetts.
This story is from the next edition of our print magazine, which is all about relationships. Subscribe now to read it and get a copy of the magazine when it lands on February 26!
The must-reads
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.
1 The US’s AI Safety Institute is being gutted As part of mass firings at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. (Wired $) + NIH grants are still frozen, despite lawsuits challenging Trump’s actions. (Nature)
2 OpenAI says ChatGPT has over 400 million users That must make it one of the most popular tech products ever launched. (CNBC) + AI is making Silicon Valley startups leaner. (NYT $) + AI took two days to crack a superbug problem scientists have been working on for years. (BBC)
3 Ukraine claims it rigged Russian drone pilot goggles with explosives Much like Mossad’s exploding pagers operation. (FT $) + Russia is secretly sabotaging Europe’s undersea cables. (BBC)
4 Trump’s FTC chief has launched an inquiry into Big Tech ‘censorship’ So much for all that cosying up at the inauguration. (Bloomberg $) + Meanwhile, Elon Musk says he’s going to ‘fix’ Community Notes on X so it agrees with him. (Gizmodo)
5 Figure unveiled new AI software for household robots And, best of all, you can instruct it with your voice. (TechCrunch) + Why everyone’s excited about household robots again. (MIT Technology Review)
6 We still don’t know which animal sparked covid-19 But suspicions are starting to alight on racoon dogs. (Nature) + Meet the scientist at the center of the covid lab leak controversy. (MIT Technology Review)
7 How should we feel about chatbots of dead people? They’re a lot less scary if you think of them as a means for remembrance, rather than companions. (Aeon) + Technology that lets us “speak” to our dead relatives has arrived. Are we ready? (MIT Technology Review)
8 In-office work is at the highest level since the pandemic Lots of workers are heading back in now, whether they like it or not. (WP $)
9 How to fight back against scam texts Do not click that link! (Vox)
10 Amazon has acquired the James Bond franchise The name’s Bezos. Jeffrey Bezos. (The Guardian)
Quote of the day
“What a lie. And from someone who complains about lack of honesty from the mainstream media.”
—Danish astronaut Andreas “Andy” Mogensen criticizes Elon Musk’s claim that former president Joe Biden intentionally abandoned two American astronauts aboard the International Space Station, the Guardian reports.
The big story
Bright LEDs could spell the end of dark skies
ADAM SCHMID/GETTY IMAGES
August 2022
Scientists have known for years that light pollution is growing and can harm both humans and wildlife. In people, increased exposure to light at night disrupts sleep cycles and has been linked to cancer and cardiovascular disease, while wildlife suffers from interruption to their reproductive patterns, and increased danger.
Astronomers, policymakers, and lighting professionals are all working to find ways to reduce light pollution. Many of them advocate installing light-emitting diodes, or LEDs, in outdoor fixtures such as city streetlights, mainly for their ability to direct light to a targeted area.
But the high initial investment and durability of modern LEDs mean cities need to get the transition right the first time or potentially face decades of consequences. Read the full story.
—Shel Evergreen
We can still have nice things
A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.)
+ I thoroughly enjoyed this food critic’s mic-dropping final column. + The simplest cocktails are often the best. + Check out Pikaswaps: fun filters, boosted with generative AI. + Sometimes I really miss Scottish Twitter.
In 2023 Mathias Schrøder was stressed, burned out, and perplexed. He had scaled revenue on his Denmark-based clothing company, but bloated overhead meant little profits and even less free time.
“I felt lost, unable to fix our predicament,” he told me, “until I realized I was trying to solve the wrong problem.”
His solution was to scale down. He fired employees, lowered warehouse costs, and eliminated stagnant inventory. The result was 60% less revenue and 25% more profit.
He shared his journey in our recent conversation. The entire audio is embedded below. The transcript is condensed and edited for clarity.
Eric Bandholz: Who are you, and what do you do?
Mathias Schrøder: I’ve been in ecommerce for about seven or eight years, working for Patina, my family’s clothing business, and as a consultant and developer. Before that, I had a short stint in finance as an analyst for an investment firm. I quickly realized that wasn’t for me — wearing a suit and tie and following orders.
One thing led to another, and in 2018, I joined my parents’ business, selling clothing for women 65 years and older. Back then, we were doing tiny numbers, around $300 to $400 a month. Fast forward to now, we operate online and in physical locations in Denmark, Sweden, and Germany, generating around $3 to $4 million annually.
We recently decided to lower our revenue to gain more freedom. The original concept was to load clothing into large vans, drive to retirement homes or other places where seniors gather, put on small fashion shows, and sell the clothes afterward. We still do that but are now focused on scaling back to have more control over our time.
Bandholz: What led you to that choice?
Schrøder: The decision started several years ago when my girlfriend and I vacationed in Thailand. I love running a business but realized there’s more to life. Plus, I was stressed, burned out, and not hitting the numbers we needed.
We had bloated budgets, excess inventory, too many employees, and a too-large warehouse. I felt lost, unable to fix our predicament until I realized I was trying to solve the wrong problem.
So I said to my girlfriend, “I have this crazy idea. What if we just fire everyone? Why do we keep trying to run faster?” I crunched the numbers in Google Sheets. I started deleting salaries, deleting warehouse costs, deleting X, Y, and Z. I quickly realized that we could decrease revenue without hurting profits.
That was the start of the journey. And it worked.
Implementing the changes took some time. In Denmark, we can’t just fire people, for example. By November 2024 we had completed most of the reductions. Our revenue that month was roughly $800,000, down from $2 million in November 2023 — less than half. But profits increased by 25%!
We killed 60% of the revenue and made a lot more money. It’s a lesson for all entrepreneurs. We should all take an honest look in the mirror and ask, “Why are we doing this?“
I have more time to work on projects I enjoy. For example, I’m launching an analytics app for Shopify stores called Kleio, inspired by the Greek muse of history, to help others manage their data at a much more affordable price. It’s a passion project, and I’m excited to share it with merchants who want a better understanding of their numbers.
Bandholz: Where can people follow you?
Schrøder: Our ecommerce site is PatinaMode.dk. It’s in Danish, and we cannot ship to the U.S., unfortunately. The analytics app is at GetKleio.com. I’m on X and LinkedIn.
The European Commission is reportedly preparing to charge Google with not fully complying with the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
According to sources, Google’s recent tweaks to its search algorithms haven’t satisfied regulators’ requirements, prompting the EU to step up its scrutiny.
Key Details
Under the DMA, tech companies are expected to offer a level playing field in the EU.
The probe on Google focuses on whether the company is pushing its services, such as Google Shopping, Flights, and Hotels, over competitors.
Regulators are concerned that by giving these in-house services a leg up, Google could be stifling competition.
Failure to adhere to the DMA rules could cost a company up to 10% of its global annual revenue, which shows how significant the potential penalties could be.
Google’s Response
In response to regulatory pressure, Google has gradually changed its European search results.
These adjustments address complaints from price-comparison sites, airlines, hotels, and small retailers.
Google details the changes it’s made in response to the DMA in a blog post. Key changes include:
Greater Visibility for Comparison Sites: Google says it’s made over 20 changes to increase the visibility of comparison sites for flights, hotels, and shopping.
Balanced Search Options: Google has introduced new units that let users choose between results that lead to comparison sites or those that go directly to supplier websites.
New Ad Options for Competitors: Google has launched new ad formats for comparison sites. These allow them to directly show more detailed information, like prices and images, in search results.
Testing Simpler Search Formats: Google tested simpler search formats in Germany, Belgium, and Estonia. They removed features like hotel location maps and returned to a basic list of ten links to see how users reacted.
However, these measures have been criticized as not going far enough to level the playing field.
Google’s EMEA competition director, Oliver Bethell, has stated that the company is working toward a balanced solution with the Commission. However, he warned that further changes might negatively impact the search experience.
This investigation isn’t only targeting Google. The EU is casting a wide net over major tech companies, with similar DMA probes against companies like Apple and Meta.
Broader Context
These potential charges come amid ongoing tensions between the U.S. and Europe, adding another layer to the situation.
U.S. President Donald Trump has openly supported American tech giants, arguing that fines imposed by the EU are essentially a disguised tariff. This political pressure has raised concerns about how external influences might impact regulatory decisions.
The upcoming months will be crucial for Google and other tech companies under the EU’s scrutiny. Stay tuned as we monitor this evolving story and its implications for the SEO community.