Gosau, la capital del estado de Zamfara, fue testigo de protestas masivas cuando miles de manifestantes irrumpieron en las principales calles de la ciudad portando banderas rusas, estadounidenses y francesas en el quinto día de protestas a nivel nacional.
Los manifestantes coreaban: “No necesitamos al gobierno de APC” y “Dejen que el ejército tome el poder para solucionar la inseguridad que afecta a nuestro estado”.
El estado de Zamfara se enfrenta a una grave inseguridad como resultado de las actividades de bandidos armados durante el último decenio.
El corresponsal del sitio web Blueprint afirmó que el desfile de seguridad conjunto de la fuerza se llevó a cabo en toda la capital.
Several people are typing, and they’re all saying Netflix’s Leave the World Behind is wildly prescient. The movie, directed by Sam Esmail, opens on a world where communication has been knocked out following a cyberattack. And earlier this week, when nearly all of Meta’s platforms—Facebook, Instagram, Threads—went down, people took to (other) social media platforms to post and hand-wring about the apocalypse.
Most of the posts, per usual, were jokes: wry observations to help soothe the agita that comes with being alive when everything feels unstable. “Another dry run for Leave the World Behind,” wrote one X user. “I fear we are moving close to a Leave the World Behind scenario,” wrote another. “These tech glitches are increasingly [sic] with regularity.”
But there was also a more conspiratorial undercurrent. For those who don’t know, Leave the World Behind was produced by Barack and Michelle Obama through their company Higher Ground Productions. Ever since the movie’s release, a conspiracy theory has persisted online that the film is somehow a warning about the widespread disorder to come.
This same thread emerged late last month when an AT&T network outage wreaked havoc on US cellular networks. “The predictive programming of the Obama’s [sic] movie, Leave the World Behind, is becoming a little too real right now,” one user wrote on X. “I wouldn’t put it past our own federal government to institute a terrorist or cyber attack, just to blame it on foreign countries like China and Russia.”
Odds are that nothing of the sort happened. Leave the World Behind is based on a 2020 book by Rumaan Alam and, according to the film’s director Sam Esmail, the former US president came on as a production partner only after the script was pretty much done. “I would just say [the conspiracy theorists] are pretty wrong in terms of his signaling,” he told Collider. “It had nothing to do with that.”
Not that facts have ever gotten in the way of an online conspiracy before. Case in point, this week’s big trailer drop: Civil War. When the first trailer for Alex Garland’s next film dropped in December, online right-wing pundits speculated that it was also predictive programming, something meant to prepare the populace for events already planned by those in power. When the new trailer dropped this week, people on Reddit and elsewhere seemed to be fretting that the film will become, as The Hollywood Reporter put it, “MAGA fantasy fuel.”
Ultimately, reactions like these to Leave the World Behind and Civil War merely serve as proof that they’re effective as works of fiction. They’re not part of some psyop to placate the public—they’re reactions to a political era that is fraught at best. Comfort is not a prerequisite for good filmmaking; movies are supposed to be unsettling sometimes. Concerns about a movie being too real are just signs that the filmmakers have tapped in to the collective psyche. Rather than think that Esmail or Garland—or Obama, for that matter—are trying to send some warning, perhaps consider the circumstances for why you’re worried that they might.
We’re approaching that time of the year that everyone dreads – the switch to Daylight Savings Time and the loss of a precious hour in bed that comes with it – and naturally people are asking whether it’s time to ditch daylight savings.
As my learned colleague explains in the article linked above, there’s a whole stack of evidence to suggest that changing the clocks back and forth every year is a truly terrible idea, and the people seem to agree with the experts, with most in favor of sticking to a year-round standard time.
Sounds like a done deal, right? Sadly I’m here to tell you why it’s not going to happen. At least, not any time soon.
Permanent DST in the USA
Here’s the thing: the USA has already tried shifting to permanent DST, and it didn’t work out so well. Back in January 1974, President Richard Nixon enacted year-round DST as a two-year energy-saving experiment in response to the 1973 oil crisis. It was a popular move at first, with 79 per cent of Americans supporting it when surveyed in December 1973.
It didn’t take very long for the public mood to change, however; by February 1974 only 42 per cent were still in favor of the switch. The main reason? The increased danger of traffic accidents involving children going to school on dark winter mornings. The two-year experiment only lasted until October 1974, when the clocks went back as usual.
British Standard Time
The same concerns brought about the end of a similar experiment in the UK a few years earlier. Between 1968 and 1971 the British government introduced British Standard Time, time-shifting the whole country to DST all year round. The move resulted in an increase in road casualties in the morning, but it also transpired that there was a much greater decrease in evening road casualties. This decrease was skewed, however, by the introduction of new laws on drink-driving around the same time.
Ultimately it was the small increase in children getting injured on their way to school that led to the end of this experiment. However, the switch to darker winter mornings also made life harder for farmers and other workers who relied more on daylight to do their jobs effectively.
(Image credit: Getty Images)
Despite this, even in mid-winter half of the population was in favor of remaining on BST; that said, in Scotland 61 per cent wanted to go back to GMT. And this raises an important point: how hard you’re hit by permanent DST depends on just how far north (or south) you are.
For people in the north of Scotland during the British Standard Time experiment, in the middle of winter the sun wasn’t rising until 10am, which is a horribly late start to the day. Where I live in the West of England, the sunrise would have been 9.15am, and I don’t think having an extra hour of daylight while at work would have been much of a compensation.
And I have to say, in the US you have it pretty easy by comparison (except perhaps in Alaska. Sorry, Alaska), because you’re a lot further south. Even then, you’d still be looking at kids having to walk to school on dark winter mornings in most states (even Florida), and even if the overall result was fewer road accidents in total, an uptick in accidents involving children because of a switch to permanent DST would be a hard pill to swallow.
Keep changing the clocks
Obviously I’m talking about switches to DST here, while many are arguing instead for a move to standard time year-round. That has its own drawbacks, though: the sun setting earlier, meaning winter evenings are as dark and long as ever, and rising earlier in the mornings, which would mean a much greater need for blackout curtains in the summer months.
An eventual switch to permanent DST or standard time isn’t an impossibility – more of the world has abandoned it than currently uses it, and there’s a whole swathe of equatorial countries that have never had the need for DST – but the potential risks involved in switching mean that despite the clear benefits, there’s not much appetite for actually doing it.
(Image credit: Getty/pcess609)
Numerous states have voted in favor of permanent DST, but switching hinges on Congress changing federal law to allow them to do this. However while the Sunshine Protection Act for permanent DST passed the Senate in 2022, it failed in the House; it was reintroduced in 2023 but hasn’t made any progress. And it doesn’t help that while there’s a definite mood for a single year-round time, there’s disagreement over whether that time should be daylight savings or standard time, which is proving to be a major hurdle for the Sunshine Protection Act. Ultimately it’s a lot easier to muddle along with what we have, than to effect a change that’ll be unpopular with some.
