Voiko Wuhanin koronavirus levitä Suomeen? THL:n johtava asiantuntija: "Ei syytä radikaaleihin toimenpiteisiin"

THL:n johtava asiantuntija sanoo, että epidemiariski on Euroopassa erittäin pieni.
Load more
Read full article on:
unread news
unread news
Minnesota Toddler With Rare Genetic Disorder Who Received World's Most Expensive Drug Is Now Walking
The treatment, known as Zolgensma, has a price tag of $2.1 million per patient.
9 m
#CouldaHadYang Trends as Andrew Yang Supporters Criticize 'Flaming Garbage Pit' Democratic Debate
The entrepreneur galvanized a younger demographic but he dropped out of the race after trailing behind in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary.
Op-Ed: There's a Ukrainian immigrant in my crawlspace, and I see him for what he is: An American
Plumbers who are Ukrainian immigrants cause an East Sacramento homeowner to reflect on racism and immigration in California.
House to take historic vote to make lynching a federal crime
Lawmakers will take a historic vote on Wednesday when the House of Representatives takes up legislation to make lynching a federal crime.
Tax ramifications to consider when estate planning
REAL ESTATE MATTERS | It's important to know the tax implications of selling an inherited property.
A doctor's radical treatment for pregnant addicts? Get them clean
Dr. Craig Towers has spent the last decade treating pregnant women addicted to opioids and clashing with the medical establishment about his radical form of treatment: Helping them wean off the drugs.
Inside the GOP effort to win back the California House seats they lost in 2018
Republicans lost half of their congressional seats in California two years ago. Here's how they plan to win them back in 2020.
Is Bernie Sanders’ 'democratic socialism' really just socialism?
On Fox Nation's "Deep Dive," a panel of experts debated what a possible Bernie Sanders' presidency would mean for America.
News Analysis: A week late, Democratic candidates wake up to Sanders' potential to beat them all
Democratic rivals treated Bernie Sanders gingerly in their debate a week ago. He clobbered them in Nevada's caucuses. In Tuesday's South Carolina debate, they attacked. They may have waited too long.
Letters to the Editor: Voting with L.A. County's new system: 'I really did enjoy myself. Honestly'
New technology and helpful volunteers made the voting experience good for one reader; another wonders about touch screens spreading pathogens.
Letters to the Editor: Trump isn't destroying democracy. Voters can still remove him in November
Republicans are doing only what their constituents want, which is to defer to President Trump. If the voters don't like that, they can say so in November.
Editorial: College athletes need Congress to protect them from the NCAA
Congress should step in and protect student-athletes' ability to profit from their own likenesses -- like every other college student.
Letters to the Editor: In defense of the late 9th Circuit 'liberal lion' Judge Stephen Reinhardt
A retired 9th Circuit staffer who knew Stephen Reinhardt for nearly 40 years defends the late judge in the wake of bullying and harassment allegations.
Editorial: A deal with the Taliban is a painful price for ending the war in Afghanistan
Trump was right to change course and talk to the Taliban
Scott Gunn: Ash Wednesday is the beginning of Lent -- Here's why it's important
Ash Wednesday invites us to turn away from what doesn’t matter and turn toward what does matter.
Elizabeth Warren again is pressed on past claims of Native American heritage
More than 200 Cherokees and other Native Americans urged Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren to fully retract her past claims to being Native.
Op-Ed: California's a climate leader? These six proposals show how much more we have to do
By mandating the sale of more electric vehicles and directly regulating dirty industrial practices, California can fill the gaps in its climate goals.
Column: Trump's dangerous message on coronavirus
When it comes to the coronavirus, Trump has his facts and his message dead wrong.
As the NFL leans into big data, the 40-yard dash still has a place
The 40-yard dash is a decades-old speed test of arbitrary distance. At the NFL combine, it still matters.
Letters to the Editor: Women's bravery ended Harvey Weinstein's reign of terror
As Harvey Weinstein awaits sentencing after his sexual assault conviction, we need to hear more from the women who stopped him.
Dear Care and Feeding: Testing Says My Kid Isn’t “Gifted.” How Should I Explain This to Him?
Parenting advice on gifted programs, co-parenting with cousins, and conspiracy theorists.
Trump’s Quiet Power Grab
Throughout the federal government are thousands of officials who do not direct courtrooms, but who are, in a sense, judges. They are federal employees who preside over trial-like disputes, hear evidence and testimony, and make decisions that can deeply shape people’s lives, such as the granting of asylum and veterans benefits. These executive-branch employees are administrative adjudicators.The Trump administration has launched an obscure but dangerous effort to undermine this system, and to dictate both the appropriate circumstances for commencing adjudication and the rules that govern how disputes with agencies are resolved. If the Trump administration’s strategy works, it will have steered the federal bureaucracy further toward an authoritarian future in which all executive-branch policy making must bend to the whims of a single individual, the president.Although precise data are hard to find, recent work by two leading administrative-law scholars suggests there are roughly 12,000 of these agency adjudicators of various types across the federal bureaucracy, as compared with about 870 permanently authorized federal-court judges. Though the number of matters these adjudicators handle is very hard to come by, a 2016 estimate suggests that they decide more than 750,000 cases annually, which would be about double the number of civil and criminal felony case filings in federal district court.[Adam Serwer: The first days of the Trump regime]A plurality of administrative adjudications involve Social Security disability claims. But there is extensive variety among the several hundred agencies and programs involved in administrative adjudication. Some agencies, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, engage in licensing. Others, such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Trade Commission, impose penalties for legal noncompliance. Numerous adjudication schemes across multiple agencies involve disputes about government payments, the awarding and administration of government contracts and benefits, and the imposition of employee discipline. A database created by Stanford Law School and the Administrative Conference of the United States numbers these programs and the agencies involved in the hundreds.The public is, for the most part, quite oblivious to much of this activity’s scope and importance, much less the Trump administration’s attacks on its integrity. What is at stake is not the specific resolution of individual disputes—at least not thus far—but rather the authority to dictate the general rules by which agencies decide individual cases, cases in which accuracy and impartiality are key values.Administrative adjudication is essential to the effective implementation of federal law. For some agencies, adjudication is a necessary component of policy making, because the statutes they enforce are extremely general and sweeping; specificity gets fleshed out on a case-by-case basis. Indeed, prior to the 1960s, administrative adjudication was more prevalent than issuing general regulations as a policy-making vehicle. For example, the National Labor Relations Board is charged with combating “unfair labor practices.” It gives that standard meaning by bringing cases against individual employers who engage in activity the NLRB suspects is unlawful. These matters are tried before officials called administrative-law judges, or ALJs, whose decisions are reviewable first by the five members of the NLRB and then, if appealed, by a federal court. Lawyers working on subsequent labor disputes can consult the administrative orders that emanate from these adjudicative proceedings, just as they would read court decisions, to find out how the NLRB interprets the law. This is, likewise, how the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) pursues “unfair or deceptive trade practices,” and how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) prosecutes a variety of offenses under the federal Securities Act.Congress also empowers a wide variety of administrative judges to be the first-line decision makers regarding individual applicants for all sorts of government benefits. The largest group comprises the ALJs who work for the Social Security Administration. Other agencies use different categories of administrative judges to approve applications under programs as diverse as veterans benefits, patents, and refugee asylum. ALJs enjoy a number of statutory protections intended to depoliticize their service and to protect, within bounds, the independence of their judgment. Other agency adjudicators with different titles almost always enjoy less protection for their decision-making independence, based on their agencies’ governing statutes.The Trump administration is now waging a two-pronged attack on the independence of all administrative adjudicators, including ALJs, and the agencies that employ them. The first prong involves telling agencies, via executive orders, how to exercise the discretion that Congress has given them to conduct adjudication. One such order, from October 2019, boasts the lofty title “Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication.” Among its provisions is a limit on when agencies may judge a private party’s past conduct to be unlawful based on a general legal standard. The executive order says that no such agency determination may be issued unless the agency has first warned the public—through a specific rule—that the general legal standard prohibits the conduct the agency would now challenge.This may not sound like much, but in practice it would make the work of a number of federal agencies far more difficult. Consider this scenario: The FTC finds that a company has been using artificial intelligence in a novel way to ascertain which of its online customers can most effectively be tempted by a misleading, if not outright duplicitous, sales pitch. The FTC has never encountered the practice before. The FTC’s statute currently gives the agency discretion to launch an administrative proceeding against the company to determine whether the technique should be deemed a forbidden “unfair or deceptive trade practice.” If, based on the agency’s policy deliberations and a carefully assembled factual record, the FTC determines that the practice is “unfair” or “deceptive,” it could prohibit the company’s future use of that practice. What the FTC could not do would be to penalize the company for its pre-adjudication conduct—for example, by levying a fine—if no prior FTC proceeding had warned the company that it was violating federal law. The relief—as lawyers call a remedy to a legal problem—would have to be entirely forward-looking. The Supreme Court has approved this manner of administrative adjudication since 1947.Under the Trump order, the FTC would not be allowed to proceed as I have described. It would first have to conduct a rule-making on the fairness of AI-guided online sales practices before it could go after any firm. This might be grossly inefficient and would disable the FTC from developing a nuanced factual understanding of regulated practices through individual cases. The Trump order does insist: “Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect … the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof.” The problem with this promise not to “impair” is that the order’s so-called fair-warning requirement, if applied to delay or prevent adjudication, would do just that. On this issue, Trump’s order either alters the discretion of administrative agencies or it is meaningless.[Peter M. Shane: The obscure—but crucial—rules the Trump administration has sought to corrupt]The second and even more aggressive prong is the Trump administration’s campaign to undermine independent agencies, which conduct a lot of the highest profile administrative adjudications. The aim is to put an end altogether to the idea of independent officers in the executive branch. An agency is considered an “independent agency” if its head or heads may be dismissed by the president only with good cause—typically, “inefficiency, malfeasance, or neglect of office.” Conventional understanding is that presidents may fire at will any administrator who lacks such statutory protection. The Department of Justice under Trump, however, has been working hard to nudge the Supreme Court into determining either that any statutory limits on presidential at-will removal authority are categorically unconstitutional or that “inefficiency, malfeasance, or neglect of office” must be interpreted broadly enough that failure to follow any presidential directive would become “good cause” for dismissal. This would effectively end, for example, the independence of the Federal Reserve System.The Justice Department’s first attempt at curtailing independence came in a 2018 case called Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission. The issue in Lucia was whether ALJs used by the SEC were “officers”—as opposed to “employees” of the United States—and thus had to be directly appointed by the SEC itself. (Under Article II of the Constitution, Congress may allow heads of agencies to appoint “inferior” officers. The president must appoint “principal officers” with Senate advice and consent. Congress has free rein for determining how “employees” may be hired.) The Court determined that the ALJs were indeed “officers” under the Constitution. It thus concluded that the SEC had acted unconstitutionally by allowing its chief administrative-law judge, working with SEC staff, to choose the commission’s ALJs. By not personally signing off on the appointments, the SEC commissioners had hoped to create the appearance of greater impartiality when their ALJs decided cases in which the SEC itself was a party. But given the Court’s holding, the SEC commissioners—the agency’s principal political appointees—would henceforth have to formally appoint the bureaucratic judges deciding the agency’s cases.The Justice Department wanted the Court to go further, however. It argued that if the ALJs are “officers,” then the statute protecting them from at-will discharge would have to be narrowly interpreted so that they could be fired simply for failing to follow directions. The Court explicitly refused to discuss the issue. But the Solicitor General proceeded to issue a memorandum to all agency general counsels, advertising the Department’s eagerness to mount this argument in a future case.A more direct vehicle for pushing the Court to invalidate agency independence from presidential control is a case to be argued on March 3, Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. (I helped write an amicus brief in this case defending the constitutionality of the CFPB’s structure.) The Justice Department’s position is that the Supreme Court’s unanimous 1935 decision upholding agency independence, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, should be overruled. Should the Court agree, it would not only render independent judges unconstitutional within any agency, but Congress would no longer be able, through tenure protections, to limit direct presidential policy control over the principal officers who deliver each agency’s final judgments—members of the Federal Communications Commission, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and all the similar bodies I have already mentioned. All would become removable by the president at will.The Trump administration, in short, is challenging agencies’ ability to go after wrongdoing through administrative adjudication, and is seeking to undermine the independence of both first-line agency adjudicators and the heads of the agencies they work for. The administration appears intent on expanding this campaign. On January 30, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published a request for information that could be used to inform further agency-adjudication orders. Public comments are due on March 16. The questions posed by the OMB suggest the Trump administration is interested in significantly rewriting the rules by which agencies conduct their trial-type proceedings.By making the investigation and prosecution of regulated parties more difficult, the president threatens to create a system that, through centralized control, would allow cronyism and “agency capture” to protect corporate interests ahead of the public interest. New rules shaping adjudication could also enable political officials to make it harder for individuals to get the government benefits to which they are entitled.A group of administrative-law scholars at George Washington University wrote a friend-of-the-court brief in Lucia warning of the disaster that would follow tightening political controls over agency adjudicators. They pointed out that “Congress devoted a substantial amount of time during the 1930s and 1940s to the question of how to structure agencies that engage in adjudication of regulatory disputes.” By statute, Congress imposed procedures for ALJs that were “specifically designed to ensure that they had an appropriate degree of decisional independence from the agencies whose cases they were to hear.” Making ALJs removable at will, or simply for failing to follow directions by political superiors, would undermine the impartiality that Congress sought to guarantee.Impartiality is anathema to Trumpism. That the Trump administration wants to upend a long-standing system for assuring both the reality and appearance of fairness in agency adjudication may be shocking. But it is not surprising. If you consider yourself on block watch for threats to democracy, take your eyes for a moment off the president’s Twitter feed and turn your attention to administrative law. Danger is lurking amid the complexity.
How ‘Show, Don’t Tell’ Turns Readers Into Voyeurs
By Heart is a series in which authors share and discuss their all-time favorite passages in literature. See entries from Jonathan Franzen, Amy Tan, Khaled Hosseini, and more.Doug McLeanIn Minor Feelings, her first book of nonfiction prose, Cathy Park Hong reflects on learning to write about race. Throughout, she describes herself as working against an unfortunate archetype: the narrative that presents racial trauma as a kind of catalyst for personal growth. In Hong’s telling, this framing falsely portrays racism as a force that individuals can surmount if they work hard enough. It also capitulates to a perceived white audience that seeks to feel some of the pain that racism inflicts without ever getting too uncomfortable.In a conversation for this series, Hong discussed how she struggled with the process of representing her own pain on the page. She described how Susan Sontag’s remarkable book Regarding the Pain of Others helped her understand that depictions of suffering can be almost pornographic in nature, a source of complicated pleasure for readers who want to feel ennobled by encountering them. And she explained how she learned to represent pain in a way that precludes voyeurism and implicates the reader. Combining aspects of memoir, history, and cultural criticism, her resulting book is artful and rigorous, powerful and profound, but never to be mistaken for “enjoyable.”Hong’s term minor feelings describes the everyday terrain that she reclaims in her exploration: emotions such as shame, envy, embarrassment, and boredom that Americans of color are routinely encouraged to suppress, in both literature and life. She is the author of three poetry collections, including Dance Dance Revolution and Engine Empire. The winner of the Barnard Women Poets Prize, a Guggenheim Fellowship, and other awards, she is the poetry editor of The New Republic and teaches at Rutgers University–Newark. She spoke with me by phone.Cathy Park Hong: Susan Sontag’s work was a lifeline while I was writing Minor Feelings. Her words kept me company, gave me inspiration, and prodded me to think more deeply, unpacking platitudes that we unquestionably accept. I first began reading her obsessively years ago, at a time when I was thinking of switching genres from poetry to prose. I’m a poet, and poets tend to feel it’s essential that every word isn’t wasted. When we think of aphoristic writing in nonfiction, we think of Sontag, and I was just trying to drink in her style—the ability she has to take complex ideas and express them with such clarity and authority.I first read Sontag’s Regarding the Pain of Others in its entirety when I was commissioned to write an essay on Doris Salcedo, the artist who makes installations about Colombians who disappeared 20 years ago. At the time, I was thinking about the idea of art as witness, or poetry as witness. But thinking about Salcedo, I started to wonder what it means to be a witness when we live in a surveillance culture where we’re being watched all the time, and where we’re also watching all the time, and when eyewitness accounts are tweeted seconds after a disaster. In art, I started to wonder, is bearing witness enough?That’s when I turned to Regarding the Pain of Others. One quote, in particular, stayed with me: “It seems that the appetite for pictures showing bodies in pain is as keen, almost, as the desire for ones that show bodies naked.”For me, the quote crystallized the notion that we as humans have this irresistible desire to see violence because of the adrenaline sensation of horror it gives us, without any of the consequences. I was thinking about that idea in relation to myself—as a poet of color, as a person of color, as a woman—because as someone who writes in American culture, my talent is measured by how much I hurt on the page.From a young age, I was always aware that racial trauma is aestheticized and celebrated. And when I first started writing poetry, there was this pressure to write about my family history. But there was also this expectation that there would be this hurt that needed to be explored. And my question was always, why this hurt, and who is this hurt being written for? When I was grappling with these questions, Sontag always provided answers, or mapped out my confusion in a way that I found gratifying. Because throughout her whole oeuvre, Sontag was always wrestling with the moral question of what it means to see. For her, representation of pain is not enough.When I was working on the essays in Minor Feelings, I was conscious of the fact that there would be an expectation that I would write about my own racial trauma as an Asian American woman. And so in writing about my own lived realities, it was very important for me to question what I was reproducing these narratives of racial trauma for. Was it to satiate the appetite of a broader American audience, or a white audience—to allow them to take a ride in my reality before arriving at some kind of self-affirmation?[Read: The limits of fiction that wants readers to empathize]Sontag was instrumental in defining this approach, helping me outline my thoughts behind this book. In Chapter 3 of Regarding the Pain of Others, she writes that “to photograph is to frame, and to frame is to exclude.” In a sense, Minor Feelings was not so much writing about racial trauma, but about the way racial trauma has been framed and what has been excluded from that framing. Of course, it’s necessary that you write about your pain. But if that story has been shaped for you again and again and again, how do you go about writing outside that mold towards something that’s closer to your lived experience?In my book, there’s one essay where I write about the L.A. riots and the conflict between Korean Americans and African Americans. I write about Rodney King’s beating and how its circulation has made it almost too easy to look at a black body in pain—that bodies become a spectacle to be consumed. A lot of race scholars and brilliant black thinkers, like Saidiya Hartman, have already written about this phenomenon. Though Sontag isn’t posing this as a complete solution to the problem of us as voyeurs when we look at images of violence and atrocity, she asks what it would mean if such looking were made more difficult.I thought a lot about that as I was writing—I didn’t want to tell a story, or a series of stories, about historical atrocities that a reader can get in and get out of easily. I wanted to also make the viewer put themselves in the same map of the suffering that’s happening. The goal was to go beyond bearing witness, and instead make the viewer accountable.How does one do that? I don’t know if I succeed in my book, but I write about other writers and artists who do—like Salcedo. She has these installations of tables and chairs and dressers, and they’re all kind of marked and weathered. It’s about the belongings of people who have been murdered by the Colombian paramilitary government. But what makes her work not sensational is that there are no bodies. The viewer can’t be satiated by the presentation of visual pain. Instead, what you feel is an uncanny sense of loss because of that absence. Photographs cannot capture the full impact of the work. You really have to be there in person. And yet she creates the artwork so that you feel the distance between you and the victims. You understand that you can never really understand the loss these family members went through.It’s difficult to create that same painful distancing effect in writing. One thing that I critique is this whole MFA “show, don’t tell” orthodoxy that has dominated fiction. To me, that approach enables a form of voyeurism, where you’re just sort of in the cockpit of the character’s consciousness and you get to kind of cinematically see what they’re seeing without being interrupted by their editorializing. It allows the reader to have a kind of catharsis at the end, before exiting the book.I questioned that approach as I wrote about, for example, the racism that I faced as a kid. Rather than just show the reader what happened—letting the reader see the pain and marinate it in and then put the book down—I do a lot of telling, dissecting, and analyzing. Instead of just describing it evocatively, I have to analyze it to death, and put it in a larger historical context. There’s a lot of exposition. It’s about turning the inside out.I’ve tried to show in my book that some experiences of racial trauma are actually quite mundane. Racism is a typical, everyday, even banal part of the structurally racist society we inhabit. Depictions of exceptional racial trauma can sometimes suggest to readers that racism itself is extraordinary and rare, and not an everyday reality for millions of people.Narratives that end in some kind of individual triumph or reclamation don’t leave room for all of these other, more nuanced, not quite legible feelings—feelings like shame, suspicion, melancholia. But those feelings are huge for people of color, for anyone in marginalized positions, living in a country where their realities are constantly gaslit by a dominant culture who tells their stories for them. Or doesn’t allow them to tell their own stories.Most Americans can only understand racial trauma as a spectacle. What’s not represented enough is the constant stress of its anticipation. That’s what I wanted to make real here: the everyday, psychological effects, rather than “This happened, and I am a victim.”
When should retirees stop actively investing?
A retiree needs to consider whether it's time to transition away from active investing and individual stocks and move into a more passive portfolio.
Kuwait says total of 25 coronavirus cases confirmed: KUNA
Kuwait's health ministry said on Twitter on Wednesday that the number of people diagnosed with coronavirus in the country had risen to 25 after 13 more cases were confirmed.
Tokyo 2020 preparations going ahead 'as planned' despite coronavirus threat
I Gave My Husband One Rule for Threesomes, and He Broke It Right in Front of Me
I know it was an accident, but I can’t help feeling uneasy and betrayed.
Why Russia Is Rooting for Both Trump and Sanders
The Russian government is again trying to meddle in the presidential election. In doing so, they’re working to aid two very different candidates.
5 things to know for February 26: 2020 Dems, coronavirus, India, Disney, Syria
Here's what else you need to know to Get Up to Speed and Out the Door.
Algeria not to suspend flights over coronavirus: official
Algeria is not contemplating a suspension in flights but will reinforce controls on planes from Italy after it confirmed its first case of coronavirus in an Italian man, a health ministry official said on Wednesday.
BTS 'Carpool Karaoke' Sees BTS and James Corden Sing Songs from 'Map of the Soul: 7,' Bruno Mars and Post Malone
The host of "The Late Late Show with James Corden" attempted to convince the group he's has the dance moves to be the 8th member of BTS in an impromptu audition at a Los Angeles dance class.
Player reps send new CBA to union members for approval
The NFL moved closer to labor peace for another decade early Wednesday when player representatives voted to send a new deal already approved by the owners that includes a 17-game season to the full union membership.
Tom Steyer: I've worked tirelessly for racial justice
Tom Steyer, who has made significant inroads with black voters after focusing his campaign on South Carolina, went head-to-head with Joe Biden after the former vice president lambasted the billionaire for investing in private prisons. Steyer joins CNN's Erin Burnett and Dana Bash to discuss his priority of racial justice.
Hunters Is an Anti-Nazi Series That Finds Actual Nazis Insufficiently Shocking
Since when do these facts require exaggeration?
Tokyo organizers, IOC going ahead as planned with Olympics
A spokesman for the Japanese government on Wednesday said the International Olympic Committee and local organizers are going ahead as planned with the Tokyo Olympics despite the threat of the spreading coronavirus.
The crosstalk debate
And the White House hires a college senior to be one of the top officials in its powerful Presidential Personnel Office.
Childress, Demon Deacons stun No. 7 Duke 113-101 in 2OT
Brandon Childress never panicked as shot after shot clanged off the rim. Nor did Wake Forest when it fell behind late in regulation against seventh-ranked Duke.
Two bills banning most late-term abortions blocked by Senate Dems
Both were voted down several times in recent years but Republicans raised them anew to provide an election year spotlight on their anti-abortion rights efforts
Malaysia's Mahathir and Anwar in new showdown amid turmoil
Malaysia's decades-old political rivals Mahathir Mohamad and Anwar Ibrahim set out claims to lead the Southeast Asian country on Wednesday after Mahathir's shock resignation as prime minister sparked turmoil.
12 famous buildings in India: From ancient wonders to modern marvels
From the Sikhs' Golden Temple to the Victoria Memorial, these are the stories behind 12 famous buildings in architecturally rich India.
12 famous buildings in India: From ancient wonders to modern marvels
If you could boil India's architecture down to a single word or phrase, what would it be? Dynamic? Melting pot? Overwhelming? Complex?
Many teams want to scrap video review for pass interference
The NFL's video review system for pass interference calls could be scrapped after one season.
France reports second coronavirus death, Italian link in another case
A second person suffering from the coronavirus has died in France and a Frenchman who had traveled to Italy's Lombardy region had also tested positive, the country's health authorities said on Wednesday.
US testing begins for possible coronavirus treatment as health experts predict virus will spread
The first US study of a drug to treat the novel coronavirus is underway, the National Institutes of Health said Tuesday, as a federal health officials warned that the virus will eventually begin spreading in US communities.
Yanks' Severino needs Tommy John surgery, out for year
Luis Severino will miss the season with an elbow injury that requires Tommy John surgery, and the New York Yankees' rotation no longer looks all that imposing.
Boris Johnson's family 'stunned' after neighbor found murdered
Boris Johnson's family are "stunned and saddened" after a neighbor of the British Prime Minister's father was found shot to death near his country home in southwest England.
Global markets drop for a third day
The shock from the novel coronavirus is rocking global markets for a third consecutive day.
Brazil test confirms first coronavirus case in Latin America: source
A Brazilian government test has confirmed the first case of a fast-spreading new coronavirus in Latin America, a source said on Wednesday, after a Sao Paulo hospital flagged the possible infection of a 61-year-old who had visited Italy.