• In a Wednesday memo, Trump administration officials advanced a plan for federal staff reductions.
• The memo said departments across agencies should prepare to cut staff and reorganize by March 13.
• Federal workers told BI they're frustrated, but not surprised, by the planned restructuring.

President Donald Trump's administration officially announced its plan for federal staff reductions in a Wednesday memo, telling agencies to prepare to cut staff and reorganize their departments by March 13.

Federal workers who spoke to Business Insider after the memo was announced said the move was "crazy and illogical." Still, some were determined to continue working until they were removed from office.

The memo, sent by the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management, did not identify specific targets for cutbacks, which they described as advancing the White House DOGE office efficiency initiatives. However, during a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Trump suggested as an example that as much as 65% of staff at the Environmental Protection Agency could be cut.

Representatives for the White House, OPM, and OMB did not immediately respond to requests for comment from BI.

"I think what is going on is unfair to us. I have been told my job is exempt, but I truly don't believe it," an employee from the Department of Veterans Affairs said. "I know that we are shorthanded but also don't trust the government or my supervisors here. I have seen nothing in writing. That scares me also."

The memo outlines a timeline for most agencies — with exemptions for federal law enforcement, military, border security, and US Postal Service employees — to prepare and execute a layoff and reorganization strategy. Agencies must submit their restructuring plans by March 13 and "outline a positive vision for more productive, efficient agency operations" by April 14, with an implementation deadline in September.

It also requires field office operations to be consolidated or closed, which one employee of the Social Security Administration said would impact frontline offices that handle claims and issue Social Security cards, as well as disability hearing offices that handle appeals of unfavorable decisions in disability cases.

"So, the people who complain about long wait times and nobody answering the phone are talking about those entities, maybe there are a lot of layers of bureaucracy above us, but those exist to provide support for us frontline people," the Social Security Administration employee told BI. "This is crazy and illogical, motivated by a blind, stupid hatred of the Public Sector as a whole."

An Internal Revenue Service employee told BI that "it will take years, if not decades, to fully recover" from the federal government cuts.

"Americans are going to feel this very deeply," they said. "Services are going to be nonexistent."

An employee from the Department of Housing and Urban Development said they're prepared to be moved to a different department after a meeting with their supervisor about the memo.

"There's so much confusion — respond to the productivity email, don't respond, and now being told to get ready to move departments — I see how this Elon tactic can mentally drain you because this week was so hard to log in and be productive," the HUD worker told BI.

The restructuring memo comes just days after the White House DOGE office sent a weekend email asking all federal employees to list what work tasks they had accomplished last week, prompting confusing among some employees about how and whether to reply outside their chain of command.

While the confusion created by the emails and subsequent conflicting guidance from department heads has caused some federal workers who previously spoke to BI to reconsider their work in the government, others say they're resolved to stick it out.

"I've never seen morale so low in my 18 years of service," an employee from the Bureau of Reclamation told BI, adding that they "believe we are witnessing the final days" of their agency.

Still, they said they see their department's work protecting water resources as essential for the country and have no plans of stopping unless they're forced out of public service.

"They'll have to fire me," they said.

• The US imposed sweeping export controls on China around high-end chips in 2022.
• Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said China revenue-percentage was double what it is now pre-export controls.
• The CEO told CNBC "it's hard to tell" if export controls are effective regarding innovation.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is unsure if export controls against China are effective national security measures for the US amid the artificial intelligence race. However, they've certainly hurt the chipmaker's business abroad.

"It's hard to tell whether export control is effective," Huang said in a CNBC interview on Wednesday. The CEO was responding to a question about whether the Chinese AI startup DeepSeek and its latest model showed there are workarounds against the US-imposed sanctions on semiconductors.

"Our percentage revenues in China before export controls was twice as high as it is now," the CEO said, adding that competition from China remains stiff with companies like Huawei and that software will continue to innovate.

"I think that ultimately, software finds a way. Maybe that's the easiest way of thinking about it," he said. "Whether you're developing software for a supercomputer, or software for a personal computer, or software for a phone, or software for a game console — you ultimately make that software work on whatever system that you're targeting and you create great software."

Since the US implemented export controls on semiconductors in 2022 — and tightened those restrictions in 2023 — Nvidia's revenue from China has taken a significant hit.

For the fiscal year ending in January 2023, Nvidia's China business made up 21% of the company's total revenue. For the same fiscal year ending in January 2025, revenue from China made up about 13% of Nvidia's overall revenue.

An Nvidia spokesperson declined to comment.

Despite the export restrictions and a brief shock to the chipmaker's stock after DeepSeek unveiled its R1 reasoning model, Nvidia reported another strong quarter on Wednesday, growing total revenue to $39.3 billion — 78% year-over-year increase from $22.1 billion.

Nvidia saw a short sell-off following the DeepSeek release in January. In a single day, it erased nearly $600 billion of its market cap, putting the company's valuation at about $2.4 trillion.

The company has since recovered its market-cap loss, currently standing at a $3.22 trillion valuation.

• Intuitive Machines, Firefly Aerospace, and ispace are all on their way to attempt a moon landing.
• Three private missions at once is notable, and it's just the beginning of the moon opening for business.
• Here's why three companies are flying to the moon right now.

Three companies are flying missions to land on the moon right now, in the early stages of a mad dash for lunar wealth.

The moon may not be Mars-obsessed Elon Musk's favorite space destination, but many other entrepreneurs see it as an untapped economic opportunity.

That's why two Texas-based companies and one Japanese firm are flocking to the moon this month.

All three missions were launched aboard SpaceX rockets.

None of them are carrying human crews, but they all lay the groundwork for more complex operations in the future as the moon opens for business.

Intuitive Machines wants to mine the moon

The Texas-based company Intuitive Machines launched its second moon-landing mission, called IM-2, on Wednesday.

The company became the first commercial enterprise to land on the moon a year ago, but the new mission is taking its ambitions further. The mission includes a rover and a hopper, which carry experimental technology for GPS on the moon and a small drill to test the technology needed to one day mine minerals and ice beneath the lunar surface.

Water ice on the moon could be broken down into hydrogen and oxygen for rocket fuel, while minerals like titanium or rare earth elements used in smartphones and computers could be sold back on Earth.

"The whole package of this mission is about prospecting," Steve Altemus, the CEO of Intuitive Machines, told Business Insider in December.

He added that eventually, he hopes to mine rare materials on the moon and bring them back to Earth.

Firefly Aerospace is testing lunar dust for NASA

For now, Intuitive Machines is the only company to ever successfully land softly (that is, without crashing) on the moon. Another Texas company, Firefly Aerospace, is gunning for second place this weekend.

Firefly's Blue Ghost mission is set to attempt its first moon landing on Sunday.

"I think a lot of us will be holding our breath, you know, lighting a candle," Ray Allensworth, the director of Firefly's spacecraft program, told BI.

If Blue Ghost succeeds, it will run experiments on the lunar surface for about two weeks, which is a full lunar day.

All in all, the spacecraft is carrying 10 payloads for NASA, mainly focusing on "what the surface of the moon looks like or feels like, trying to figure out the impacts of the regolith, how the dust interacts with materials, the temperatures under the surface, stuff like that," Allensworth said.

Japan's ispace wants people to live on the moon

Both Texas companies' moon landers are funded in part through NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services initiative.

The third mission en route to the moon, though, is from the Japanese company ispace.

The company's Hakuto-R spacecraft previously tried to land on the moon in 2023, but ispace reported that the lander had miscalculated its altitude when it detected an unexpected crater rim on the lunar surface, causing it to plummet and crash.

Ispace is trying again with a new mission carrying a lander and a micro-rover. The mission, called M2, launched aboard the same Falcon 9 rocket as the Firefly Blue Ghost spacecraft on January 15. M2 is taking a more leisurely route to the moon, though, with its landing set for May or June. The new lander is named RESILIENCE.

Ispace touts a future where the moon and its water resources support "construction, energy, steel procurement, communications, transportation, agriculture, medicine, and tourism."

The ispace website also advocates for permanent human residence on the moon, saying that "by 2040 the moon will support a population of 1,000, with 10,000 people visiting every year."

It's going to take a lot more moon missions to bring that vision to life. For now, for all three missions, just sticking the landing would be a huge achievement.

• An unvaccinated child in Texas died from measles, with statewide vaccination rates trending down.
• Texas faces a measles outbreak with 124 cases, mostly among unvaccinated children.
• Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine critic, is the new US Health Secretary amid the outbreak.

A child in West Texas has died from measles, marking the first reported fatality from the disease in the US in nearly a decade, state health officials announced on Wednesday.

The "school-aged child" who was unvaccinated died at a children's hospital in Lubbock after being hospitalized last week and testing positive for measles, according to a press release from the Texas Department of State Health Services.

The death comes as Texas battles a growing measles outbreak that has surged from a handful of cases to at least 124 infections since early February, mostly among children, state health officials said. At least 18 people have been hospitalized so far, most of whom are unvaccinated or have unknown vaccination status, according to the Texas Department of State Health Services.

Another nine cases have been confirmed in eastern New Mexico close to its border with Texas, bringing the total to more than 130 across the two states, per Texas DSHS.

Measles, a highly contagious airborne virus, has a fatality rate of one to three deaths per 1,000 reported cases, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Lara Anton, senior press officer of the Texas Department of State Health Services, told Business Insider that it is very difficult to stop the spread of measles. Not only does an unvaccinated person have a 90 percent chance of being infected if exposed, an infected person can be contagious without knowing it for up to four days, Anton said.

"When people register their children for school in kindergarten through seventh grade, they provide updates to us and the school districts on the vaccination coverage in their district," Anton said. "Generally the coverage level statewide has dipped down in recent years."

Measles death is uncommon. The last reported measles death of an adult in the US occurred in 2015 when a Washington woman contracted it at a health clinic, CDC data shows. Anton said a child also died of measles in Texas in 2018.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine critic, was confirmed as US Health Secretary this month despite opposition from medical professionals and some members of Congress. He has, however, pledged to maintain existing vaccination programs.

"We are following the measles epidemic every day," Kennedy said during a meeting with President Donald Trump's cabinet at the White House. "Incidentally, there have been four measles outbreaks this year. In this country last year there were 16. So, it's not unusual. We have measles outbreaks every year."

He also mentioned that two people had died in the outbreak, but the Texas DSHS was only able to confirm one death so far.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

• Trump fired General Charles Q. Brown Jr. and nominated Lt. Gen. Dan Caine as Joint Chiefs chairman.
• Caine's background includes combat experience, entrepreneurship, and roles in national security.
• Experts say Caine may be missing important qualifications compared to past picks for chairman.

President Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate venture capitalist and retired Air Force Lieutenant General Dan "Razin" Caine as the new Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, after firing General Charles Q. Brown Jr. from the job Friday night.

While Trump praised Caine as a "national security expert" and "warfighter," he would be an unusual choice for the country's highest-ranking military leader.

The former fighter pilot is "a serial entrepreneur and investor," according to his military biography. He is now listed as a partner at Shield Capital, a venture capital firm.

Dan Caine and Shield Capital did not respond to requests for comment.

Donald F. Kettl, an emeritus professor and former dean of the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, told Business Insider that it was unusual for a president to appoint a retired general to head the joint chiefs, especially one with less experience.

"Experience plus trust are the keys," Kettl said. "A gap in either can create problems in shaping policy and in leading the armed services."

General Brown had previously served as Commander of Pacific Air Forces, US Air Forces Central Command, and as Chief of Staff of the Air Force, with more than 3,100 flight hours as a command pilot. The four-star general and former fighter pilot was also the first African American to lead a branch of the US Armed Forces.

Mark Cancian, a retired colonel and senior adviser with the CSIS Defense and Security Department, said Caine may be missing important qualifications: he was a three star general and did not serve at the highest levels before retiring, unlike Brown who was Chief of Staff of the Air Force before being promoted to Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff. However, based on regulations, Caine could still hold this position legally if the president signs a waiver.

"It's not like Caine is a junior person, but that step to four star is a big one," said Cancian, "He will need to get up to speed and change his perspective from what it had been before, which was more Air Force focused, and that will be an extra challenge though not impossible."

Cancian said the only time he could think someone coming out of retirement to be appointed chairman of Joint Chiefs would be when John F. Kennedy appointed General Maxwell Taylor to the position in 1962. Maxwell, however, was already a four-star general, and his predecessor was not fired.

"The US military is ultimately under civilian control and the President is commander in chief of the military," said Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, "So while it is not common to fire the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the president has that authority."

Who is Dan Caine?

Caine graduated from the Virginia Military Institute in 1990 with a degree in economics and later earned a master’s in air warfare from the American Military University.

He would go on to log over 2,800 hours flying the F-16 fighter jet, including over 150 combat hours, and later served as an associate director for military affairs at the CIA.

Trump has long expressed admiration for Caine. In a 2019 speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference, he recalled meeting Caine in Iraq, when Caine told him that the Islamic State group could be destroyed in as little as a week instead of years.

"'We're only hitting them from a temporary base in Syria,'" Trump said Caine told him. '"But if you gave us permission, we could hit them from the back, from the side, from all over — from the base that you're right on, right now, sir. They won't know what the hell hit them.'"

"General 'Razin' Caine was — he's some general. He's a real general, not a television general," Trump added at an appearance in Miami last Wednesday, where he criticized the current military leadership.

Announcing his nomination on Truth Social, Trump described Caine as "an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a 'warfighter' with significant interagency and special operations experience." Trump also credited Caine for the "complete annihilation" of ISIS during his first term.

Shield Capital announced in January that Caine had joined its team as a "venture partner."

In a press release at the time, the tech-focused firm described Caine as a "distinguished leader" who would bring both military and entrepreneurial experience to the position.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Caine has held a number of private sector roles, including cofounding Texas-based private airline RISE Air.

• I was raised in private schools, and I had my children go to private schools, too.
• However, we couldn't afford a private high school, so they were forced to attend a public school.
• In the public high school, they have amazing opportunities and are better set for college.

I grew up going to private schools. For eight years, my daily uniform was a blue plaid jumper and blouse with a Peter Pan collar. High school loosened some of the reins with only a (relatively strict) dress code to contend with: no jeans, no shirts with slogans, and definitely no short skirts. My private school education continued through my college years at my ivy-on-the-walls East Coast school and even into graduate school. I never knew anything different.

When I had kids, I assumed I'd send them to private schools, too. It felt like the only choice, as that is what I grew up with.

When our family moved to California, and my oldest was ready to start kindergarten, we didn't even consider sending her to public school. Instead, we picked from among a few private schools near where we would be living. Uniforms made the morning hours easy, and I enjoyed the supportive community we found at our small private school.

I had to change my thinking about private schools when my kids entered high school.

Everything changed with high school approaching

As my oldest kid reached eighth grade and it was time for us to consider high school, private school was no longer an option. The tuition cost was too high, and we couldn't afford $20,000+ a year (plus books, lunch money, activity fees, etc.), especially considering that we'd eventually have three kids in high school at once.

We registered our daughter for our local public high school, knowing very little about it. The months leading up to the start of school were filled with anxiety as most of her classmates and friends were continuing at private high schools. I was worried she'd be starting school without knowing a single person.

Luckily, our high school had a summer program that helped with the transition, and two of her former classmates ended up going to her school as well. All of this made the transition a bit easier.

Public school was the right path for my family

I now have two kids in our public high school, and my third will be joining them in the fall. While I initially felt nervous about the unknowns of public school, I can confidently say that public high school was the best thing that could have happened for us.

My son would likely say that the free lunches (including brunch-time cinnamon rolls!) are the highlight of public high school, but I can see many more benefits.

When signing up for electives, I learned that not only did they offer traditional options like art and music classes, but kids could also take woodworking, metalworking, or set-building classes. My son was proud to bring home the metal toolbox he welded for his final metalworking project. I love that these options are available.

When it came time to choose a science class, I was surprised to learn that our school, located in the heart of California's Silicon Valley, has its own on-site farm. The kids can raise pigs, chickens, and other animals as part of their coursework.

My kids raised a pig last year and will do it again this year. They also participated in a community plant sale, and my son joined the school's Milk and Cheese Tasting Team, which competes at regional Future Farmers of America events.

Who would have thought these would be options at our suburban high school?

The public high school is setting my kids up for success in college

For her junior year, my daughter was accepted into our high school's middle college program. This allows juniors and seniors to take their classes full-time at the local community college, setting them up to graduate from high school with college credits or even their associate degree if they are especially motivated. She has no Friday classes, which allows her to work and pay for gas and other expenses.

I know my other kids will follow in her footsteps, allowing them to be better prepared for their college years.

While I never anticipated that my kids would go to public high school, I now see it as a blessing in disguise, as it offered programs we wouldn't have had access to at our local private schools.

• These billionaires have been recognized for their film achievements at the Oscars.
• Some are filmmakers behind commercially successful franchises.
• Others are billionaires who have accumulated their wealth through other avenues.

When thinking about Oscar winners, NFL team owners and computer-science researchers might not immediately come to mind.

But some of these icons of their industries have joined other, more famously creative billionaires to accept Hollywood's highest honors.

Here are 11 billionaires who have won Academy Awards for movies, documentaries, and short films they've worked on as directors, producers, writers, executive producers, or in other capacities.

Steven Rales

Estimated net worth: $8.3 billion, per Forbes

Rales, the chairman and cofounder of medical manufacturer Danaher, founded the film production company Indian Paintbrush in 2006 and has worked closely with director Wes Anderson ever since.

Rales also owns film distributors Janus Films and The Criterion Collection and has a 20% in the NBA Indiana Pacers.

He won the best live-action short film award in 2024 with Anderson's "The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar," which he produced.

Jeffrey Lurie

Estimated net worth: $5.3 billion, per Forbes

The Boston businessman purchased the Philadelphia Eagles for $185 million in 1994 and has won two Super Bowls since. But Lurie has a background in film, and has produced and executive-produced more than a dozen movies.

His grandfather founded the General Cinema movie-theater chain, which operated 1,500 screens at its peak in 1991 before it was acquired by AMC in the early 2000s.

Lurie has won three Oscars for best documentary as executive producer of "Inside Job" in 2011, "Inocente" in 2013, and "Summer of Soul" in 2022.

Steven Spielberg

Estimated net worth: $5.3 billion, per Forbes

The film director and producer has worked on some of the most successful films of the past 30 years, directing films like "Jurassic Park," "Jaws," and "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial."

He's regarded as the most commercially successful film director of all time and a pioneer of the modern blockbuster, with his films amassing a box-office total of over $10.7 billion over 37 films, as reported by The Numbers.

He won the Oscar for best director in 1999 with "Saving Private Ryan" and in 1994 with "Schindler's List," which also won best picture that year.

Jeff Skoll

Estimated net worth: $5.2 billion

Skoll, who was eBay's first president from 1996 to 1998, founded film production company Participant Media in 2004 to create films that increased awareness of social issues.

He won best picture as executive producer of "Spotlight" in 2016 and "Green Book" in 2019.

In total, Participant Media has won 21 Academy Awards over 86 nominations, including best international film for "Roma."

George Lucas

Estimated net worth: $5.2 billion, per Forbes

The creator of the "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" franchises founded the film production company Lucasfilm in 1971 and sold it to Disney for $4 billion in 2012.

In 1992, he won the Oscars' Irving G. Thalberg Award, which awards "creative producers whose bodies of work reflect a consistently high quality of motion picture production." He was also nominated for best director and best original screenplay for "American Graffiti" and "Star Wars" in 1973 and 1977, respectively.

Oprah Winfrey

Estimated net worth: $3 billion, per Forbes

The TV host and media mogul has been often regarded as the most powerful woman in media and was once the world's only Black billionaire.

She won the Oscars' Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award, which recognizes "outstanding contributions to humanitarian causes" in 2011. She was also nominated for best supporting actress in 1985 for "The Color Purple."

Pat Hanrahan

Estimated net worth: $2.3 billion, per Forbes

The computer graphics researcher, founding Pixar Animation Studio employee, and computer-science and electrical-engineering professor at Stanford University has worked on groundbreaking animation software that led to films like "Toy Story."

He won a scientific and engineering Academy Award in 1993 and two technical achievement Oscars in 2004 and 2014.

Steve Tisch

Estimated net worth: $1.6 billion, per Forbes

The chairman, co-owner, and executive vice president of the New York Giants has produced over 40 films and has worked closely with Columbia and Sony Pictures.

He won the Oscar for best picture in 1995 with "Forrest Gump."

Peter Jackson

Estimated net worth: $1.5 billion, per Forbes

The "Lord of The Rings" and "Hobbit" filmmaker has written, directed, and worked on over 20 films and is the fifth highest-grossing director of all time, with his films surpassing $6.5 billion at the box office, per The Numbers rankings.

In 2004, he won Oscars for best director, best adapted screenplay, and best picture for "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King."

Tyler Perry

Estimated net worth: $1.4 billion, per Forbes

The filmmaker and playwright created the Madea character in 1999 and founded his own production company, Tyler Perry Studios, in 2006. In 2019, he unveiled the new 330-acre studio grounds in Atlanta. His films have made over $765 million at the box office.

He received the Oscars' Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award in 2021.

Richard Anthony Wolf

Estimated net worth: $1.2 billion, per Forbes

The film producer, best known for creating the "Law & Order" franchise, founded Wolf Entertainment in 1988. It has become one of the most prolific companies in the television business.

He won the Academy Award for best short film as a producer with "Twin Towers" in 2003.

• Radically reinventing the Air Force won't win a future fight, its director for force design said.
• The Air Force has been analyzing and wargaming what it'll need to defeat a top adversary.
• The service is now prioritizing how to tailor systems for countering very specific threats.

New fighter jets or bombers won't be enough to win the next war, the US Air Force director for force design, integration, and wargaming said this week.

Instead, the service needs to focus on what specific threats top adversaries like China or Russia pose to Air Force operations to tailor solutions for defeating them.

At a Hudson Institute event on Wednesday, Maj. Gen. Joseph Kunkel, who oversees force design for the Air Force, talked about how the service is evolving its capabilities and strategies at what other leaders have described as a critical time.

Kunkel said that the Air Force has been on a decade-long journey to redesign and reinvent. That conversation started like this: "We probably just need to look at new fighters. We've always had fighters, so let's look at new fighters, and we've always had bombers, so let's look at new bombers."

The US military has fielded new fighters, such as the Boeing F-15EX Eagle II and the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, and new bombers, like the Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider.

But just upgrading to next-generation aircraft isn't enough to prepare the US Air Force and larger Joint Force for future warfare. "When we do the analysis," Kunkel said, "what we find is just reinventing the Air Force doesn't win."

Instead, he said, combat success is more about integrating capabilities and systems together, using autonomy and all-domain sensing, for example. "Those are things that we're finding as game-changers," Kunkel said, because they address specific challenges to the force.

The problems facing the Air Force in a future fight could look similar to the fight in Ukraine today, where the skies are contested, with neither side being able to secure air superiority like what the US and its allies enjoyed in the Middle East.

American adversaries are fielding their own next-gen fighters, and air and missile defense systems are becoming increasingly sophisticated, demanding more from pilots. And there are also growing missile threats, both in Europe and the Indo-Pacific, to bases the service relies on to conduct air operations.

One of the Air Force's priorities in recent years has been Agile Combat Employment, which aims to boost survivability by having air assets operate from unconventional runways and outposts, thus complicating enemy targeting of US aircraft. Bases are fixed, but American adversaries can't target every piece of concrete, every road and highway.

ACE has been a major focus as China has been building an intimidating missile force that could overwhelm US airfields and airpower in a missile strike. The Air Force is now building on this thinking, looking to ideas that go beyond new aircraft.

Kunkel said the Air Force's focus is on something it hadn't really done before: tailoring attributes for capabilities based on the threat. The first step, he said, is to define the threat and how it's impacting US Air Force operations.

When the Air Force understands how potential enemies can pressure both air and ground missions, then it can determine what capabilities it needs to counter specific threats and deliver more than just an upgraded aircraft. Instead, it brings a targeted response.

The Air Force has faced tough questions about generating readiness and maintaining overmatch in a time of great-power competition. And last year, the service announced widespread changes in its focuses, more specifically in how it trains its airmen and develops capabilities needed for various threats.

At the time, then-Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said the service was "moving forward with a sense of urgency to ensure we are ready to deter and, if necessary, win."

• "Tesla Takedown" protests have happened in cities around the country in opposition to Elon Musk's DOGE work.
• Protesters are calling for Tesla owners to sell their stock and cars. Some owners have seen their vehicles vandalized.
• Tesla's stock price taken a hit this month and some shareholders told BI they want to sell their shares.

Criticism of Elon Musk has spilled out from the virtual walls of social networks and into the streets.

Demonstrators have gathered in cities around the US in recent days and weeks to participate in "Tesla Takedown" protests of varying sizes. Meanwhile, some Tesla owners have said they have faced insults or vandalism amid the Musk criticism.

Participants of the protests have called for a boycott of the EV giant in response to Musk's involvement with the Trump administration and DOGE's efforts to decrease the size of the federal workforce.

The "Tesla Takedown" effort started on BlueSky, a competitor to Musk's X platform, and now has a dedicated website. The site calls for Tesla owners to sell their vehicles and stock in an effort to "stop Musk now."

The website's organizer, "Bill & Ted" actor and filmmaker Alex Winter, wrote in a RollingStone op-ed that demonstrations have happened at over 100 Tesla showrooms and other locations.

Tesla owner and shareholder David Abrams told Business Insider he's heard about multiple protests but wasn't aware of the "takedown" effort specifically. Abrams said he added "Anti Elon Tesla Club" and "I Bought This Before Elon Went Crazy" stickers to his car window, and is hoping that's enough to keep it from getting vandalized.

"I absolutely want to sell my car and my shares," Abrams said, adding that he's waiting for the stock price to go up and would have sold his car already if it made financial sense.

While boycotts aren't always effective at materially impacting a company's bottom line, Wedbush analyst and Tesla bull Dan Ives wrote in a Monday note that Musk's role in DOGE had a "visible perceived downside impact" on the company's stock. Tesla's share price has dropped this week after figures showed a 45% year-over-year drop in Tesla sales in Europe last month amid Musk's vocal support of Germany's far-right AfD party.

Musk addressed some of the protests while speaking at CPAC last week, calling them "fake rallies" with "hardly any people" and saying the demonstrations didn't have "popular support."

Here's a closer look at some of the protests and anti-Tesla vandalism attempts that have taken place in recent weeks in the US.

Demonstrators gathered in Seattle on Saturday to protest against Musk and Tesla

Protesters gathered at various entrances to the University Village shopping mall in Seattle, as well as outside the Tesla showroom at the mall. Some of the signs called to "boycott Tesla" and "defund Musk."

Protesters rallied in front of a Tesla dealership in Fort Lauderdale

Demonstrators gathered in a line on Federal Highway in Fort Lauderdale in front of the Tesla dealership on Saturday to protest Musk and his work with DOGE. Over 200 people gathered outside of the dealership, local publication Sun Sentinel reported on February 22.

Multiple protests happened in San Francisco

The above image shows protesters gathered on February 17 outside Tesla's Van Ness location in San Francisco. Demonstrators chanted "No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here."

Other protests have appeared outside Tesla showrooms on several occasions recently, some of which clipped posters to the glass doors.

Some of the protests have included stints with cardboard cutouts of Musk

A demonstration outside a Tesla dealership in Virginia on February 25 included an elevated cardboard cutout of Uncle Sam burning in a Cybertruck. Next to the cutout, a woman held a sign with the words "Nobody elected Elon!"

Protesters gathered outside a Tesla dealership in New Jersey

@hollowayryan2025 🚨 They don’t want you to see this. 🚨 We protested outside Tesla Cherry Hill because we’re DONE letting billionaires like Elon Musk and Donald Trump buy our democracy. Musk is pushing Trump’s agenda while crushing workers’ rights and platforming extremists. And we’re supposed to just take it? NOPE. 👀 Comment “🛑” if you’re over it. Share this to keep the momentum going. #ProtestTesla #NoToElon #NoToTrump #BanTheBillionaires #Indivisible #WorkersOverWealth #RejectTheRight #TakeBackDemocracy ♬ original sound - HollowayRyan2025

Rebecca Holloway, who posted the video, told BI that "people are fed up with the unchecked power of the ultra-wealthy" and are responding in their own way.

"The Tesla Takedown movement is about holding powerful people accountable — whether it's Elon Musk normalizing extremism or billionaires using their influence to shape our economy and politics to benefit themselves," Holloway, who posted the video, told BI.

Efforts to convince people to sell their Teslas were also seen in New York

A "sell your car" leaflet with a photograph of Musk's widely criticized gesture during a January 20th event celebrating Trump's election was spotted in Brooklyn.

Demonstrators also gathered in the Meatpacking neighborhood of New York City, and close to 300 demonstrators showed up outside the city at a Mount Kisko Tesla showroom to protest, News 12 Westchester reported.

An anti-Tesla ad made its way to a bus stop in London

London Guerrilla Ad-fare: #Tesla the #Swasticar ... from 0 to 1939 in just 3 seconds #Musk pic.twitter.com/y96FiQ5g1Z

— Peter Speetjens (@PeterBeirut) February 24, 2025

An ad at a London bus stop went viral on social media for displaying Musk in a Tesla with the caption "goes from 0 to 1939 in 3 seconds."

Musk has responded to criticism of his January 20th gesture with jokes on X.

Some of the posters at protests refer to fascism, with posters at the Seattle protest labeled, "Make Nazis afraid again." Others say "Your Tesla paid for fascism."

Some Tesla owners have been subject to insults

Earlier today a group of people (elderly, at that) exited a BMW and as they walked past my Tesla, among other comments, called it a "Swastika car".

I also have seen several recent posts in San Diego of Teslas being randomly vandalized.

Since it appears fewer people than ideal… pic.twitter.com/lHHp6LDAYv

— Jed Bratt (@Jed_Bratt) February 26, 2025

"Look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself how you can live with so much hate in your heart," Jed Bratt said in the post on X addressing Musk's critics.

At a Manhattan protest in Tesla's Meatpacking neighborhood, protesters shouted insults at Tesla vehicles, The Verge reported on Tuesday.

Some owners say their Teslas have been vandalized

One Tesla owner said he came back from a birthday dinner to writing on his car with an expletive aimed at Musk. While he was able to remove the writing, he said it still made him feel "violated" and want to get another truck.

@WholeMarsBlog @SawyerMerritt @Guylouis @elonmusk @Tesla_AI @realMeetKevin @Teslaconomics @Gfilche came back from my birthday dinner to this surprise. Sucks so bad when this happens to your truck even though it’s just a Permanent marker. Fortunately it came out with alcohol but… pic.twitter.com/GBpFsZKE0L

— DrT (@ariteymoorian) February 25, 2025

It's not the first time Teslas have been vandalized. In June, a 35-second video showing a fleet of Cybertrucks spray painted with expletives about Musk went viral.

• Michelle Trachtenberg was found dead on Wednesday morning. She was 39.
• She began her acting career as a child star and is best known for "Buffy" and "Harriet the Spy."
• Trachtenberg's famous friends and former costars paid tribute to the actor.

After Michelle Trachtenberg's death on Wednesday morning, celebrities and fans are paying tribute.

The NYPD told Business Insider that Trachtenberg had been found dead in a luxury apartment in Manhattan near Central Park. No cause of death has been given, and authorities said they're not treating the death as suspicious.

Trachtenberg, who began acting in commercials at age 3, had a decadeslong career in Hollywood, appearing in memorable films like "Harriet the Spy" and "EuroTrip" and TV series like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Gossip Girl." As the news of her death spread, her famous friends and former costars shared their reactions and heartfelt messages online.

Rosie O'Donnell said she wished she could've helped Trachtenberg.

In a statement to Us Weekly, O'Donnell, who played the beloved nanny of Trachtenberg's character in her 1996 film debut "Harriet the Spy," called the younger actor's death "heartbreaking."

"I loved her very much. She struggled the last few years. I wish I could have helped," O'Donnell told the publication.

Michelle Branch shared a photo of Trachtenberg with broken heart emojis.

Branch was a musical guest star on the sixth season of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer."

Shawn Ashmore called Trachtenberg an incredible person.

Ashmore and Trachtenberg dated in the 2000s. In his post about her death, he called it an "incredible loss."

"Incredibly sad to hear about Michelle's passing. She was an incredible person and I will always remember the years we spent together fondly," he wrote. "She was loving, quirky and would never pass up a law and order SVU marathon:) My condolences to her mother Lana and sister Irene!"

Ed Westwick shared a photo of Trachtenberg as her "Gossip Girl" character.

Westwick played reformed bad boy Chuck Bass and Trachtenberg played fan-favorite antagonist Georgina Sparks throughout all six seasons of The CW teen drama "Gossip Girl."

"So sad to hear of the passing of @MichelleTrachtenberg," he wrote in his Instagram story. "Sending prayers."

David Boreanaz sent prayers to Trachtenberg's family.

Boreanaz played the vampire Angel, the longtime love interest of Buffy Summers on "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and was a series regular on the first three seasons of the show before departing for his own spinoff.

Trachtenberg joined the series as Buffy's sister Dawn Summers in season five.

Kim Cattrall shared a throwback photo of her and Trachtenberg in "Ice Princess."

"Rest in peace sweet Michelle 💔" Cattrall captioned the post.

Trachtenberg's "Buffy" costar James Marsters shared a heartfelt message.

Marsters, who played Spike in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," worked closely with Trachtenberg from the time she joined the series in 2000 as a young teen.

"My heart is heavy today. We have lost a beautiful soul. Michelle was fiercely intelligent, howlingly funny, and a very talented person," the actor wrote on Instagram. "She died much too young, and leaves behind scores of people who knew and loved her."

"My heart goes out to her family who are good people, and are suffering the greatest loss anyone could bear. I hope everyone can give them space to heal in this most difficult time. Godspeed Michelle. You are missed," Marsters added.

• TJX CEO Ernie Herrman says he's excited about the opportunity for businesses like his from tariffs.
• "We've been to the movie before," he said of rising costs. "It's a different headline."
• Herrman also pointed to several ways the off-price retailer is able to soften the impact of tariffs.

Tariffs are shaking up retail, but not all companies are looking at the changes in the same way.

For TJX, CEO Ernie Herrman says he's excited about the opportunity the new trade costs present for businesses like his.

"We've been to the movie before," he said of managing rising costs from inflation. "It's a different headline; it's just the same approach."

Speaking on a fourth-quarter earnings call Wednesday, Herrman said TJX — which owns brands like T.J. Maxx, Marshall's, Sierra, and Home Goods — directly imports only an extremely small percentage of its inventory from China.

As an off-price retailer, the company typically stocks up on merchandise that other retailers have already imported (and paid the relevant duties on) and could not sell themselves.

In other words, most new tariffs aren't coming directly from TJX's pockets. Meantime, higher prices could push US consumers to get even more cautions about paying full price for things — and as long as TJX can sell products for less than their traditional retail counterparts do, Hermann says the company will come out ahead.

"I'm excited about the sales and margin opportunity in this environment, because this is pretty much textbook situation coming up," he said.

In addition, Herrman noted that a large chunk of TJX's sales come from housewares and furnishings, which tend to be more exposed to Chinese tariffs.

To soften the impact of those — and to differentiate TJX's assortment from its competitors— Hermann said the company sources more of its home goods from Europe.

"It creates an umbrella of fashion and brand and quality that other home retailers don't do," he said. "Customers love that piece of our mix."

• BlackRock removed DEI mentions from its annual report amid political pressure.
• The asset manager has faced criticism from Republicans for being too "woke."
• Here's how BlackRock has tried to distance itself from the themes it once championed.

Many big American companies have been quick to respond to President Donald Trump's pushback on DEI, but none of their steps carry more symbolic weight than a retreat by BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager.

An early advocate of diversity, equity, and inclusion, BlackRock has removed all mention of the strategy from its latest annual report. The asset manager and its CEO, Larry Fink, have over the years become targets for Republicans who claim the firm is too "woke."

What was the DEI section in the asset manager's last report has now been reframed as "connectivity and inclusivity" in the Tuesday filing. Last year, it said that it believed "a diverse workforce with an inclusive and connected culture is a commercial imperative and indispensable to its success."

This year it avoided mentioning the acronym or a diverse workforce, just "diverse perspectives."

When reached for comment, a BlackRock spokesman referred to the new paragraph in its annual report that said the firm's approach to "building a connected and inclusive culture is aligned with the firm's business priorities and long-term objectives. Delivering for the firm's clients requires attracting the best people from across the world.

"BlackRock is committed to creating an environment that supports top talent and fosters diverse perspectives to avoid groupthink."

BlackRock has also removed references to a three-pillar strategy, which included phrasing around cultivating a work environment where employees felt "seen, heard, valued, and respected."

The firm left out a section that previously broke down its US employees by gender and ethnicity. In its 2023 annual review, it introduced the statistics with a line saying that "BlackRock views transparency and measurement as critical to its strategy."

Companies have been quick to respond to President Donald Trump's executive order on "radical and wasteful" DEI programs, though a few big names such as JPMorgan Chase and Costco have reaffirmed their commitment to diversity initiatives.

Through his annual investor letters, Fink promoted stakeholder capitalism and environmental, social, and governance investing, becoming the unofficial corporate poster child for the movements. In the last few years, however, Fink has had to tone down his support for ESG and defend against the idea that the firm has an ideological agenda it's forcing on the many companies it invests in through its mutual funds and ETFs.

The firm also has critics on the political left. Climate activists have previously protested outside Fink's home and BlackRock's New York headquarters, calling for a divestment from fossil fuels.

"The only agenda we have is delivering for our clients," he said in 2023 LinkedIn post, which he drafted as a response to being called the "king of the woke industrial complex" in a Republican Party presidential candidate debate.

Here is a timeline of how BlackRock built and then knocked down its reputation as a social and environmental champion:

• Kurkova and Drury filed a complaint against the Fisher Island Club last Thursday.
• The lawsuit says the club's board of directors threatened the couple and unjustly expelled them.
• The Fisher Island Club said the complaint is nothing more than disgruntled former members.

The supermodel Karolina Kurkova and her husband, the real estate broker Archie Drury, are suing the exclusive members-only club on Fisher Island, a private island near Miami that's home to some of the biggest — and richest — players in business and tech.

In their complaint, filed last Thursday in Miami-Dade County court, Kurkova and Drury say the club's board of directors threatened and targeted them to strip the couple of their property interests on the island and prevent Drury from conducting business there. "Doing so allowed the Club Board to continue to engage in their illegal usurpation of control" of the island in hopes that "their wrongful conduct would not be exposed," the lawsuit says. It accuses the club of wrongfully suspending Drury's membership twice and says it ultimately expelled the couple from the club in January. Kurkova and Drury say the club board's actions harmed their reputation and caused them millions of dollars in damages.

"Florida's private clubs and HOAs operate without proper oversight, leaving property owners vulnerable to unfair governance and unchecked power," Melanie Bonvicino, a spokesperson for Kurkova, told BI in a statement. "We believe that the time for lawmakers to act is now by implementing meaningful reforms to address these issues."

Kurkova and Drury, who have three children, bought their first Fisher Island Club membership in 2013 for $250,000. In 2018, they purchased a second membership that was designated for an employee of theirs, according to the lawsuit. Kurkova, best known for her work as a Victoria's Secret Angel, owns six residential units on the island, and Drury was a real estate agent for Douglas Elliman on the island from 2017 through December 2022.

The lawsuit says issues between Kurkova and Drury and the club board started shortly after Drury left Douglas Elliman to start his own brokerage company.

Two of the Fisher Island Club board members, David Chene and Mark Zeitchick, also sit on the board of directors of Douglas Elliman, which Kurkova and Drury's lawsuit says posed "significant conflicts of interest."

The Fisher Island Club said it "denies all of the allegations in the lawsuit as baseless and is firm in the belief that the complaint is nothing more than disgruntled former members. The Fisher Island Club looks forward to defending each of its challenged actions in detail in court filings as appropriate."

A Range Rover and food delivery gone wrong

Fisher Island is a 216-acre artificial island just south of Miami Beach that's accessible only by boat or helicopter. Residents have included Oprah Winfrey, the tennis player Caroline Wozniacki and her husband — the former NBA player David Lee — as well as Sintavia CEO Brian Neff and Mark Sutcliffe, who founded the software company Redzone. The Fisher Island Club is integral to residents' social life; nearly everyone who resides on the small island is a member. The club facilities include restaurants, private beaches with sand imported from the Bahamas, a beach club and spa, a golf course, and two marinas.

The Fisher Island Club suspended Drury's membership for six months in December 2023 after informing him via email that he had been accused of various forms of inappropriate conduct since 2021 including stealing a white Range Rover owned by another member, threatening and giving the middle finger to another club member, and acting inappropriately to a marina employee. In an email included in a December complaint Drury filed and later withdrew, the club's secretary said Drury came into the marina office in October 2023 "screaming and visibly upset" about where marina staff members were docking a vessel owned by the retired NFL star Tom Brady. The email also said Drury's alleged misconduct included the "general intimidation of Club management and Club members."

In their lawsuit, Drury and Kurkova say the allegations were part of an "orchestrated effort" by the club board and its officers to "target, damage, punish, and ultimately expel" Drury and Kurkova in violation of the club's governing documents and Florida law. They said the misconduct allegations were "patently false or grossly overstated."

They said that the Range Rover incident, for example, was an "innocent mistake" and that Drury only drove the vehicle from a parking garage to an external parking lot before realizing he was in the wrong white Range Rover. The car's owner did not press charges, the lawsuit says.

Two weeks later, on December 24, 2023, on Christmas Eve, Drury was at home on Fisher Island with his hungry 2-year-old daughter, according to the lawsuit. Per his suspension, Drury was not permitted at the time to use the club facilities, including the restaurants. Drury tried to place a delivery order to one of the club's restaurants, but the wait was over an hour, the lawsuit said, so Drury walked to the restaurant, stepped one foot inside, retrieved the food for his daughter, and went home. The club issued Drury a second six-month suspension for what they called "a flagrant violation" of his initial suspension.

In November 2024, the couple received another letter from the board stating that the duo attempted to defraud the club and circumvent its rules by attempting to designate a membership to a tenant, the lawsuit says. Kurkova and Drury said in the complaint that this was permitted under the club's bylaws for residents who own two or more residential units on the island. After an investigation into the matter, the club expelled Kurkova, Drury and their family in January.

The Douglas Elliman connection

The lawsuit accuses Chene and Zeitchick of using their club board positions to benefit Douglas Elliman rather than working in the best interests of the club and its members.

Chene, the chairman of Douglas Elliman's board, is also the cofounder and co-managing partner of the investment firm Kennedy Lewis, which tried to buy "the last remaining significant piece of real estate" on Fisher Island, a 10-acre fuel depot owned by the energy-storage firm TransMontaigne Partners, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit says the board threatened to suspend club members who found out about the negotiations and raised concerns about the potential deal. Ultimately, the developer Related Group landed the deal, but the suit goes on to accuse Chene and Zeitchick of using their board positions to push for Douglas Elliman to exclusively broker the new development in exchange for club benefits.

The Fisher Island club said that "allegations by plaintiffs that certain Club Board members used their influence for personal or corporate gain are patently false, unjustified and are nothing short of scandalmongering."

Kurkova and Drury are seeking a trial by jury against the Fisher Island Club. The lawsuit says Drury had been "a respected and active member of the Fisher Island community," having served on the Fisher Island Community Association board from 2021 to 2023, a position to which he was elected. The lawsuit says Drury also spent six years helping to establish a medical clinic on the island operated by the University of Miami.

In their complaint, the couple accuses the board of abuses of power including violating the club's bylaws, allowing two board members to remain past their term limits, and threatening other members with retaliatory suspensions if they voiced concerns about the board's actions.

In addition to Chene and Zeitchick, the club's board members are Robert Nydick; Andrew Zaro, whose family runs the New York bakery chain Zaro's; and Rafael Llopiz, the CEO of Quik Park, a parking facility operator in New York City.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at [email protected].

• I tried chicken tenders from Popeyes, Chick-fil-A, Whataburger, Raising Cane's, KFC, Bojangles, Zaxby's, Wingstop, and Cook Out.
• Chick-fil-A and KFC's chicken tenders were similar in their breaded texture.
• Raising Cane's impressed me with its crispy-yet-juicy tenders and delicious signature sauce.

Some fast-food chains have built their entire businesses on chicken tenders.

Todd Graves, for example, turned his idea for a chicken-finger restaurant into a billion-dollar business: Raising Cane's. Graves is now the richest person in Louisiana, with an estimated net worth of $9.5 billion, and Cane's is growing rapidly, with more than 800 restaurants in the US and internationally and billions in annual sales, Forbes reported.

But other chains aren't sleeping on chicken tenders — the chicken tender battle is underway, and practically every chain wants in.

KFC revamped its original recipe in October, and this week, Wingstop released new chicken tenders that the chain said will be "lighter" and "crispier" than its previous tenders.

To see which chain might win the battle, I compared chicken tenders from nine fast-food chains from across the country.

Here's how the tenders ranked, from worst to best, based on taste and value.

Of all the chicken tenders I tried, the ones from Whataburger didn't completely wow me.

A three-piece chicken tender cost only $6.97 at Whataburger at the location I visited in Austin.

The chicken tenders were large and perfectly fried.

I thought the tenders could only be described as "classic" — they weren't anything out-of-the-box, but I enjoyed them.

The meat inside was juicy, but I thought the fried coating could have had a bit more crunch.

The chicken tenders tasted good on their own, as well as with ranch dipping sauce. They weren't bad by any stretch of the imagination. However, I did think the other tenders I tried were slightly crispier and had just the slightest hint of more flavor in the batter.

Regardless, for a relatively low price, I'd definitely order these again.

I also ordered chicken tenders from Cook Out, a regional chain I visited in South Carolina.

The three-piece "snack" cost $4.99, not including tax.

The chicken tenders were crispy on the outside.

They were also a good size. I thought the price was also a great deal for the generous portion I received.

However, there wasn't an abundance of chicken meat inside.

These were undeniably classic chicken tenders, similar to the ones from Whataburger, but they were a touch too fried for my liking. However, I thought they were well-seasoned and had a lot of peppery flavor.

Chick-fil-A's chicken tenders were good ... but I really just used them as a vehicle for the chain's Chick-fil-A sauce.

When it's not included in a meal deal, a three-piece chicken tender costs $9.69 at my nearest location in New York City. For a meal, the price bumps up to $17.35, excluding tax and fees.

Some of the chicken pieces looked slightly darker and more fried than others.

There were small bits of fried breading scattered on the outside, which I always love with a chicken tender.

The chicken tenders were nicely fried but still juicy on the inside.

However, they weren't quite as crispy as I expected. I wanted a distinct crunch when I bit into the tenders, but they didn't deliver that. In the end, it's largely up to personal preference.

When I dipped them in the chain's signature Chick-fil-A sauce, the experience was mouthwatering. However, the actual chicken tenders were just alright — it was the sauce that took them over the edge.

My sixth favorite chicken tenders came from Popeyes.

A three-piece tender combo costs $16.89 before taxes and fees. The meal deal included a large serving of fries, a drink, and a biscuit, as well as a choice of dipping sauces. 

The chicken tenders from Popeyes were crispy, flaky, and crunchy.

I really liked the crunchy exterior.

The meat inside was flaky and moist as well.

I also thought the batter was quite flavorful — I could taste hints of seasoning and buttermilk, although they weren't quite as buttery-tasting as the Chick-fil-A tenders.

However, this meal felt expensive for only three chicken tenders, even though they were large.

I thought the chicken tenders from Bojangles were flavorful and super crispy.

A four-piece chicken tenders combo, including fries, a medium drink, and a biscuit, cost me $12.97, excluding taxes and fees.

I thought the chicken tenders were a good size.

The texture and flavor of the breading made them taste like a cross between the chicken tenders from Chick-fil-A and Cook Out. 

The breading was peppery, just the right thickness, and perfectly encased the juicy white chicken meat inside.

I also thought the price was fair considering how much food I received. The chicken tenders paired perfectly with honey mustard but were also tasty on their own.

I would definitely order these again.

KFC's original recipe chicken tenders really impressed me with their taste and value.

I ordered a four-piece tender meal for $13.04, excluding taxes and fees, in Brooklyn, New York. I thought this was an excellent value for the amount of food I received. 

The tenders were well-breaded on the outside, though the breading wasn't as crispy or crunchy as others I tried.

The breading stuck closely to the chicken tenders, rather than having a thick or crunchy texture.

However, the chicken tenders paired well with the chain's honey mustard and new comeback sauce. The breading had a tasty, very peppery flavor to it that was unique compared to the other chicken tenders I tried.

The chicken tenders were flavorful and contained an impressive amount of white meat chicken.

However, the slightly less crispy texture of the breading meant they didn't come out on top when compared to the last three chains I tried.

Wingstop's chicken tenders came in third place.

Wingstop recently revamped its chicken tenders, and I was excited to try them out.

The chain sells its chicken in various flavors, from original hot to hickory-smoked barbecue and mango habanero. However, I ordered these chicken tenders plain.

I ordered a five-piece chicken tender combo at my local Wingstop in Brooklyn, New York. It cost $14.99 and came with a drink, dipping sauce, and a regular side of fries.

The chain also sells four chicken tenders, which come with one dipping sauce, for $10.39, plus tax and fees.

The chicken tenders were large and well-breaded.

The chicken tenders were deep golden in color and evenly fried, with small clumps of fried breading adding even more texture to every bite.

These tenders were filled with real chicken.

The chicken tender easily tore apart with every bite, which is something I look for. The breading itself was slightly peppery, but not overly flavorful. They paired well with Wingstop's signature ranch — my favorite of any fast-food ranch — and the chain's honey mustard.

Wingstop delivered great classic tenders, though the breading didn't pack as much flavor as the top two chains I tried. Nevertheless, I'd definitely order these again.

My second favorite chicken tenders came from Zaxby's.

A five-piece chicken tenders combo came with fries, a small drink, coleslaw, and a piece of Texas toast. I also asked for a side of honey mustard and Zaxby's famous Zax sauce. My meal cost $14.77, excluding taxes and fees.

The breading of the chicken tenders was very similar to Chick-fil-A's in consistency, flavor, and texture, but I thought these chicken tenders had more chicken meat.

The breading was crispy and flavorful, with a slight sweetness.

The chicken tenders held their own without sauce but were really taken to the next level when dipped in the tangy Zax sauce.

Zax sauce tastes similar to Cane's sauce I tried from Raising Cane's, but I found it to be just ever-so-slightly less flavorful, and creamy. I also thought that it didn't have the same kick.

However, the chicken tenders really impressed me. They were a good size, extremely flavorful, and addictingly delicious. I found myself craving even more than the five chicken tenders I was given, which is rare for me.

In the end, it was a really tough call on whether I preferred Zaxby's or Raising Cane's chicken tenders.

But my favorite chicken tenders came from Raising Cane's.

My six-piece meal cost $16.59, including tax, but a three-finger combo that includes three chicken fingers, fries, Cane's sauce, Texas toast, and a regular drink costs $9.59, excluding tax and any additions or swaps. 

The chicken tenders were super crispy.

The chicken tenders were also thick. After biting in, I could actually see the strips of white chicken underneath, which, in my experience, you don't always find with fast-food chicken tenders.

The chicken tenders were crispy and juicy on the inside — I had to give them the win.

I tried the tenders on their own and with the Cane's sauce. On their own, the tenders were simply everything one could ask for: thick, juicy, and crispy on the outside.

However, the chain is famous for its chicken-complementing sauce, and after biting in, I could definitely see why. It had a slight kick to it, and it was creamy and surprisingly tangy. It paired perfectly with the chicken and was unlike any other sauce I've ever tried.

In the end, Raising Cane's took home the win for me with the chain's near-perfect chicken tenders and fair prices.

• The back row of an airplane has a bad reputation, but I actually prefer it on long-haul flights.
• Some long-haul planes don't have bathrooms in the back, so it's the quietest spot.
• Plus, it's close to the galley for stretching, and it's my best chance at sitting by an empty seat.

Picking a seat for a long-haul flight is daunting.

It's a tiny space I'll call home for eight-plus hours, and every seat has its pros and cons.

Do I want a window seat where I can rest my head against the plane's wall? Maybe, but then I'll have to bother strangers when I need to use the restroom.

Do I splurge for a higher cabin class? Probably not. While business class is a luxury, I'd rather spend money on the trip — not on the flight. 

The one decision I don't struggle with is picking the row I want to be in. For that, I head all the way to the back of the plane.

I've discovered the last rows are the quietest spots

On shorter flights, the bathroom is one of the biggest gripes about the back row of a plane. Constant flushing, concerning noises, and unwelcome smells often accompany the last row of a domestic flight.

For flights with a bathroom in the back, that's the last place I want to be. But on recent long-haul carriers, the bathrooms haven't been in the back of the plane.

For example, on a flight from Denver to Tokyo, I boarded a Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner with three bathrooms for economy-class passengers, all located at the front of economy.

This means every passenger walks to the front of the cabin instead of the back to use the bathroom.

Since I was sitting toward the back half of the cabin, only a few passengers disrupted me by walking through the aisle for the 12-hour flight.

I realized it would've been even quieter if I had been farther back since the only people heading to the back of the aircraft were flight attendants and passengers stretching their legs. 

There are other perks of the back row, including more storage

Through experience, I've learned that my best chance of getting accessible overhead storage is if I'm in the back of a plane because I get to pass every potential opening for my carry-on bag.

On the flip side, I've been on a few flights where all the overhead storage was filled near my seat. This meant my bag had to go behind me, and when the plane landed, I had to wait for other passengers to disembark before grabbing my bag.

I didn't even experience the major perk of sitting in the front — quick disembarkation.

It's a minor inconvenience, but I'd rather chill in the back of the plane and wait for everyone to deplane without getting frustrated about when I can access my bag. 

Empty middle seats in the back are a win in my mind

Another perk of the back of the plane is galley access. For long-haul flights, I stretch my legs every few hours. It helps my body adjust to cramped quarters and keeps me from feeling claustrophobic.

Typically, I do light stretches in the plane's galley (as long as the flight attendants don't mind). Sitting in the back lets me know when the galley is packed and empty, and I can assess the best time to stretch.

If I'm in the front, I might not realize the galley is crowded and head back there anyway. 

Finally, the back of the plane is my best chance of sitting next to empty seats. 

From experience, it seems like airlines typically fill seats from front to back. If there are any open seats, they're usually in the last rows of the plane.

This was the case on my latest flight from Denver to Germany. The front half of the plane was much more crowded than the back half. Luckily, I snagged a row with an empty middle seat and enjoyed a bit of extra legroom for the 10-hour flight.

The same thing happened on both long-haul flights to and from Tanzania. I was one of the lucky passengers to have empty middle seats, and I attribute that to being in the back of both aircraft. That extra space was a major luxury during the longest journeys of my life.

That potential alone is worth sitting in the back for every long-haul flight.

So, while plenty of people are eager to be at the front, you'll almost always find me in the back of a plane.

• Elon Musk said on Wednesday that DOGE "accidentally" cut Ebola prevention funding.
• The apparent error occurred as DOGE implemented cuts to USAID.
• Musk said that DOGE "won't be perfect."

To make his point that the White House DOGE office wouldn't be perfect, Elon Musk said on Wednesday that that staffers briefly cut Ebola prevention funding while an outbreak raged in Uganda.

"I should say also, we will make mistakes. We won't be perfect," Musk told President Donald Trump's cabinet. "When we make mistakes, we'll fix it very quickly. So, for example, with USAID, one of the things we accidentally canceled very briefly was Ebola prevention."

Trump had asked Musk to speak about DOGE's efforts during the first cabinet meeting of his second term.

Musk said "there was no interruption" in Ebola prevention. He said DOGE needs to move "very quickly" to stay on track to achieve its goal of cutting at least $1 trillion.

"I think we all want Ebola prevention," he said.

This is not the first time Musk has said DOGE may make mistakes. During a previous appearance with Trump in the Oval Office, Musk said he "would not bat 1,000." DOGE has also edited or even removed examples from its "wall of receipts" of spending cuts after reports raised questions about its accuracy. In one instance, DOGE claimed to have canceled a contract worth $8 billion. The contract was actually for $8 million.

On Tuesday, the White House revealed that Amy Gleason, a US Digital Digital Service employee during Trump's first term, is leading DOGE on an interim basis. Musk remains closely linked to DOGE, as evident by Trump's decision to have him speak during a cabinet meeting.

There is an ongoing Ebola outbreak.

Uganda's health ministry official declared on January 29 that there was an Ebola outbreak linked to the Sudan virus. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a travel notice earlier this month, restating that no US Ebola cases have been reported. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) conducted a number of health-related programs around the world.

Musk previously said that USAID was put "through the wood chipper." It is now being reorganized under the State Department. A State Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia, a Democrat, criticized Musk's apparent admittance of the oversight.

"An average person who did something as incompetent as 'accidentally cancelling Ebola prevention' wouldn't be applauded, they'd be fired," Beyer wrote on X. "Musk is failing up in this administration because he didn't earn his job, he bought it. It's corrupt, and risks Americans' health and safety."

• Michelle Trachtenberg has died, an NYPD spokesperson confirmed to Business Insider.
• The 39-year-old actor was known for roles in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Gossip Girl."
• She made her film debut as a child actor in 1996, playing the title role in "Harriet the Spy."

Michelle Trachtenberg has died at age 39.

A spokesperson for the New York Police Department told Business Insider that Trachtenberg was found dead at One Columbus Place, a luxury high-rise apartment complex near Central Park in Manhattan. Police had responded to a 911 call at about 8:01 a.m. and found Trachtenberg unconscious and unresponsive. She was pronounced dead at the scene.

The New York Post and ABC earlier reported the news, citing police sources.

According to the authorities, the death is not being treated as suspicious. A cause of death hasn't been determined.

A representative for Trachtenberg didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

The former child actor was best known for her roles in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "Harriet the Spy," and "Gossip Girl."

Born on October 11, 1985, Trachtenberg began her career as a child actor at age 3. She started off in commercials, with her first on-screen appearance in an ad for Wisk detergent.

After bit parts in the second season of "Law & Order" and "Clarissa Explains It All," Trachtenberg landed her first regular role as Nona F. Mecklenberg in the second season of "The Adventures of Pete & Pete," appearing on the show from 1994 to 1996. She also appeared on the soap opera "All My Children."

Trachtenberg's breakthrough came when she was cast as the title character in "Harriet the Spy," which marked her feature film debut. Her performance as the titular 11-year-old aspiring sleuth won Trachtenberg a Young Artist Award for best leading performance in a feature film.

As a young teen, Trachtenberg returned to the small screen with "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," in which she played Dawn Summers, the younger sister of the title character played by Sarah Michelle Gellar.

Trachtenberg's character was introduced in the show's fifth season and quickly became a pivotal part of the teen supernatural drama, earning her a Teen Choice Award nomination for choice TV sidekick in 2001 and maintaining a main role through the series finale in 2003. For many fans, Dawn Summers remains the role for which they know Trachtenberg best.

However, her time on the popular show was not without its difficulty.

In 2021, Trachtenberg said there had been a rule that series creator Joss Whedon wasn't allowed to be in a room alone with her. She made the claim, which Whedon later denied in a New York Magazine interview, amid reports of Whedon's alleged history of abusive on-set behavior from other former "Buffy" stars like Charisma Carpenter.

Trachtenberg remained close with several of her "Buffy" costars, including her former on-screen sister, Gellar. In January, she posted a throwback photo of herself with Gellar in honor of Woman Crush Wednesday. "Slay all day! Always loved this twinning photo of us!" she captioned the picture.

After "Buffy" concluded, Trachtenberg continued to appear on TV and in film throughout the 2000s, with recurring roles in the series "Six Feet Under," "Weeds," and "Robot Chicken" and memorable appearances in movies like "Ice Princess," "EuroTrip," and "17 Again."

In 2008, Trachtenberg landed her second career-defining role, as conniving rich girl Georgina Sparks in The CW series "Gossip Girl."

Trachtenberg's Georgina appeared in a recurring capacity through each of the series' six seasons, quickly becoming a fan-favorite as she battled for supremacy against Leighton Meester's Blair Waldorf.

The actor called Georgina, which earned her another Teen Choice Award nomination for choice TV villain in 2012, one of her favorite roles and relished playing a villain. "It's definitely a lot more fun than playing the good girl. I love the reaction you get. I never understood why some actors don't want to play villains or evil characters," she told Seventeen magazine in 2009.

In 2022 and 2023, she returned as Georgina in the second season of the "Gossip Girl" sequel series on Max. It was her last credited on-screen appearance.

Additional reporting by Natalie Musumeci.

• Donald Trump is threatening publishers again.
• A New York Times editor who's out with a new book says we need to take him seriously.
• A landmark free speech case could be at risk.

Donald Trump, who is used to suing journalists and media companies about stories he doesn't like, says he's going to do more of it.

In a post published on his Truth Social platform Wednesday, Trump vowed to "sue some of these dishonest authors and book publishers, or even media in general," arguing that they make up stories about him and "a big price should be paid for this blatant dishonesty."

"I'll do it as a service to our Country," Trump added. "Who knows, maybe we will create some NICE NEW LAW!!!"

Trump is presumably referring to the newest book by Michael Wolff, an author who chronicled Trump's first term and is back at it with "All or Nothing: How Trump Recaptured America," which is out this week. Trump complained about the book in an earlier Truth Social post this week. I've asked Wolff and the White House for comment.

Complaining about people who say or publish unflattering things about him, threatening to sue them, and actually suing them are nothing new for Trump. And up until recently, it was relatively easy for media companies and journalists to shrug off those complaints and threatened suits. Even when Trump did lodge a claim, he rarely won in court.

But in Trump 2.0, it's getting harder to dismiss a Trump rant about the media. Since his election this past fall, he has already extracted a settlement from Disney and ABC over a defamation suit he filed last year, and he's in discussions with CBS and Paramount to settle another suit, this one over allegations of "election interference" because he didn't like a "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris. He has lodged a similar lawsuit against Gannett and its Des Moines Register.

How a key free speech ruling could be at risk

And while Trump's threat to create a law about defamation seems like a reach — in the US, laws are hard to pass, even when the same party controls the White House, the House, and the Senate — the direction he's headed is worth taking very seriously.

That's the underlying message of "Murder the Truth," a coming book from The New York Times' editor David Enrich, which details an ongoing push to tear down the legal underpinnings that support freedom of speech in the US. Enrich is specifically focused on New York Times v. Sullivan, a 1964 Supreme Court ruling that established the basic framework for defamation law in the US: In short, it should be very hard to successfully sue someone because you don't like what they say.

As Enrich notes in his book, this was both a landmark ruling and a popular one, cherished by free speech advocates across the political spectrum. But that has started to change in recent years.

There are multiple reasons for that, but the main one is Trump himself, Enrich told me on this week's episode of my "Channels" podcast.

On the campaign trail in 2016, Trump mused about wanting to "open up our libel laws, so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money." Which, again, was easy to dismiss at the time, for multiple reasons. But Trump kept coming back to the idea — and as we're seeing now, he has already had success on the payments front.

Next up: a potential showdown at the Supreme Court, where Justice Clarence Thomas has already said he's eager to revisit NYT v. Sullivan, as has his fellow Justice Neil Gorsuch. So Trump could end up getting his way without passing a new law.

There's been a slew of news about Trump and his allies battling with the press in recent weeks — see his fight with The Associated Press over the Gulf of Mexico/Gulf of America, and his dustups with the press corps over who gets to ask questions at press conferences and who gets to participate in the White House press pool.

And those stories unsettle me and other observers. But they're ultimately about access, not about limiting what the press — who, as Elon Musk likes to remind us, is everyone now — actually says, writes, and publishes. Threatening lawsuits, filing lawsuits, and extracting settlements from lawsuits are very much about that. Actually changing the law to make those suits that much more powerful is something that should alarm all of us.

• Netflix's Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson fight and NFL games drove surges in daily signups, data shows.
• These 2024 events were among Netflix's early entries into live sports.
• The new subscription data shows the live sports strategy is paying off for the streaming giant.

Live sports are paying off for Netflix, new subscription data shows.

The company had big spikes in daily signups during major live events last year, according to media-subscription research firm Antenna. These included the Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson fight and NFL games on Christmas Day.

Netflix brought in 1.4 million US signups for the boxing match, while the Christmas games drove 700 million, per a report Antenna published Tuesday.

Alongside live sports, Antenna said Netflix's password-sharing restrictions, which rolled out in the US in 2023, have helped boost signups by limiting the number of people who can use one account.

"It was a good start for Netflix into its foray of live acquisition sports," said Jonathan Carson, Antenna's CEO, in a webinar about the report.

Netflix is pursuing more live sports and events. The streamer kicked off a deal with the WWE this year and landed exclusive US rights to the FIFA Women's World Cup for 2027 and 2031. The company wants more NFL rights, too, content chief Bela Bajaria told the podcast "The Town with Matt Beloni."

Netflix highlighted sports in January as it announced a record 19 million new subscribers. The company called the Paul-Tyson fight the most-streamed sporting event ever and the NFL Christmas Day games the two most streamed NFL games in history.

Carson at Antenna said Netflix's subscriber leap shows an industry giant that has been around for as long as Netflix can still drive better business results with new tools and strategies.

"When Netflix announced that they were getting into these live events, these big moments in time, there was a question as to whether these could drive big surges of acquisition," Carson said. "The results have been pretty impressive."

Users who signed up for live sports weren't as loyal as other Netflix subscribers

Driving signups is half only the battle. Netflix also needs to keep these new customers around.

Antenna found that 79% of the US subscribers who signed up for the Paul vs. Tyson fight stuck around one month later. That's lower than Netflix's overall benchmark of user loyalty, which is 86%, per Antenna.

However, it was still higher than the benchmark for loyalty at other premium subscription streaming services that Antenna tracks. 21% of users who signed up to watch the fight canceled their subscriptions within a month of subscribing. Its competitor set, which includes streamers such as Paramount+ or Hulu, saw 26% of users cancel in a similar timeframe.

Antenna's data also showed other positives for Netflix:

• Netflix was one of five streaming subscriptions that grew gross additions by double digits year over year in 2024. It also captured 15% of gross additions in the category, in line with Hulu and behind Paramount+'s 17%.
• Netflix had the highest retention rate for a standalone service, with 74% of users who subscribed from July to September sticking with the service after three months. Its retention rate was second only to Disney and Warner Bros Discovery's bundle, which had an 80% retention rate during the period.

• I ate at Chili's for the first time after seeing people rave about the food on TikTok.
• I ordered a Triple Dipper appetizer sampler, the Bacon Rancher burger, and a molten chocolate cake.
• I enjoyed most of the food but thought the meal was overpriced.

Growing up in Brooklyn in the early aughts, I didn't have access to many fast-casual chain restaurants. My time was mostly spent in small pizza shops strategically located next to Blockbusters and family-owned diners.

However, I never felt like I was missing out — until 20 years later, when my social media algorithms somehow became a display of Chili's fandom.

Although I'm still not exactly sure how this happened (maybe it was my boyfriend whispering "Take me to Chili's" into my phone when I wasn't looking), the videos of Triple Dippers and Nashville hot mozz pulls succeeded, and I found myself at Chili's for the very first time.

Here's what I thought of my first visit to the chain.

The popularity of Chili's is undeniable.

Chili's is a fast-casual chain restaurant with over 1,600 locations worldwide. Unlike many of the restaurant's competitors, Chili's has recently seen a rise in popularity, especially among young diners.

When I asked my boyfriend — a die-hard Chili's fan — to come with me to try some menu items, he agreed and insisted on driving out to the best Chili's we could find within driving distance.

For me to have the real experience, he said, the Chili's could not be in a strip mall; it had to be a stand-alone structure. So, we made our way to Long Island.

When we got there, I was disappointed by the appetizers.

We knew we had to start with the $17 Triple Dipper, an appetizer sampler that's become so popular that the CEO of Chili's parent company Brinker International said it accounts for 11% of the brand's sales.

Many TikTok users have been loving the Nashville hot mozz, which is Chili's take on a classic mozzarella stick that's tossed in hot sauce. So, we included those in our Triple Dipper, along with boneless wings and Southwestern egg rolls.

Our four-person booth was cozy, and I had a lot of fun ordering in Chili's lingo. However, none of that seemed to matter when the food arrived.

I expected the Nashville hot mozz to be fiery and gooey, but was instantly disappointed. I didn't even experience the TikTok-famous cheese pull. Now, I'm sure this doesn't always happen — but this cheese was nowhere near hot enough to pull. The flavor was good and tangy, but nothing felt hot or Nashville about it.

However, the boneless Buffalo chicken wings were very good. I was impressed with the quality of the chicken and loved the ranch dipping sauce that so many rave about.

Unfortunately, though, the Southwestern egg rolls were another miss for me. Although there was nothing inherently bad about them, they were pretty forgettable.

The entrées were good but felt a bit pricey.

Oddly enough, the item I was least looking forward to trying — the Bacon Rancher burger — was my favorite part of the meal.

I enjoy everything on it (patties, bacon, ranch, American cheese, sautéed onions, and pickles), but I assumed it would be too much together. The combo turned out to be perfect, but the price could have been better.

At $19.50, I couldn't help thinking I could get something just as good at a mom-and-pop joint, which I'd also rather support over a chain.

Other members of our party got Chicken Crisper combos ($15), the star of which are really just bigger versions of the boneless wings. Still, I was pleasantly surprised by the quality of the chicken when I tried a bite.

The combos also came with white-cheddar mac and cheese and fries, which felt excessive to me.

I enjoyed the molten chocolate cake.

What could be bad about molten chocolate cake? The $10 dish, topped with vanilla ice cream in a chocolate shell with caramel drizzle, was warm and flavorful — so much so that I couldn't help but push the limits of my lactose intake.

We split the decadent treat four ways, and even that was a struggle after the heavy meal and endless Diet Coke refills we'd enjoyed.

Overall, I didn't think Chili's provided a great value.

To be honest, after trying Chili's for the first time, I didn't get the hype. In my opinion, the quality and value just didn't add up.

For $21 — two dollars more than I spent on a burger at Chili's — I could walk up 10 blocks and have one freshly made at a restaurant that uses quality meat from the butcher next door.

Plus, the Nashville hot mozz taught me not to believe everything I see on TikTok. As I learned the hard way, not all cheese pulls are created equally.