What smart people are saying about the AI apocalypse and calls to slow everything down
By
Truman Dickerson
You're currently following this author!
Want to unfollow? Unsubscribe via the link in your email.
…
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei agreed this week to put third-party safety monitors in their companies.
Getty Images
It took the possibility of species annihilation, but AI leaders did something remarkable this weekend: They reached a consensus.
After ex-Anthropic engineer Jacob Coxon's warnings about a looming AI armageddon lit a firestorm among techies and politicians alike, the leaders of the most advanced AI labs came to a tentative agreement — largely via posts on X — that some sort of slowdown is necessary to save humanity.
While they were largely short on details regarding the mechanics of such a thing, and notable China has not weighed in, the American AI industry has reached an inflection point that could impact everything from your phone's chatbot to global politics.
"The stakes are too high for pacing to be an empty exercise — we need to use the time it gives us wisely," Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote in an essay entitled "We must pace the frontier," which was published Saturday.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who has made similar calls in the past, agreed in an X post later that day. So did Elon Musk. Google DeepMind founder Demis Hassabis also offered his support for Amodei's proposals.
Here's a look at what smart people are saying about the AI apocalypse and the methods the leaders of the leading AI labs say are necessary to stop it.
David Sacks, a presidential advisor on science and tech
David Sacks, the former White House AI Czar, had some thoughts about Amodei's proposals to slow down AI.
Matt McClain/The Washington Post/Getty Images
The Trump administration has repeatedly signaled disinterest in regulating AI development as it seeks to keep pace with China. David Sacks, a presidential advisor on science and tech and the former White House AI Czar, reiterated that stance on Saturday, with a bit of a twist.
"Dario has written that we need to 'pace the frontier,' and Sam has agreed. People may be surprised by my response: go ahead," Sacks wrote on X. "But stop pretending you need anyone else's permission."
Sacks browbeat OpenAI and Anthropic in his post, saying that the companies didn't want to slow down for altruistic reasons, but to gain favor in the markets.
"If you do, you'll buy goodwill for the next conversation," he said of a slowdown. "If you don't, we'll know this was just another bid for regulatory capture — or an election-season psyop."
Clément Delangue, Hugging Face CEO
Hugging Face CEO Clément Delangue said he wants AI oversight to be transparent.
Bloomberg/Getty Images
The CEO of Hugging Face, which was itself the victim of a notorious attack in July by OpenAI agents who schemed, communicated, and lied to evade detection, said AI safety can't be left solely to frontier labs.
Hugging Face, as an open-source-focused AI company, has long pushed for models and research to be shared more openly rather than kept behind closed doors.
Delangue said his company was launching what he called the "open alignment initiative," and asked that it be included in Amodei's proposed third-party evaluator program.
"Let's make AI safer by making it more transparent!" he wrote.
Jason Calacanis, investor
Jason Calacanis isn't buying that the apocalypse is coming.
Bloomberg/Getty Images
Investor, host of the "All-In" podcast, and industry expert Jason Calacanis is a lot more dubious than others that AI could actually cause the end of the world.
In an X post, Calacanis said Anthropic and OpenAI, whose most advanced models are not open-sourced, are attempting to kneecap open-source AI companies by pushing for regulations that would be far easier for deep-pocketed incumbents to comply with.
"If you want safety, you want disclosure — and open source is the ultimate disclosure process," he wrote.
In a follow-up post tagging Amodei, Calacanis said, "Don't go crying to the government and beg them to slow down open source models."
Bernie Sanders, Vermont senator
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders says dramatic action is necessary.
Ken Cedeno / AFP via Getty Images
The senator from Vermont proposed legislation on September 3 that would ban the development and deployment of artificial superintelligence and temporarily pause the development of advanced AI systems.
After Coxon resigned from Anthropic and warned that frontier AI labs were "gambling with our lives," Sanders seized on his comments.
"Mr. Coxon is right," Sanders said on X, arguing that the people building advanced AI themselves have said it could pose catastrophic risks.
After Amodei's blog post on Saturday, Sanders called on Trump to make the "deal of the century."
"With the future of humanity at stake, Trump must negotiate a comprehensive treaty with President Xi of China to establish a pause on advanced AI development and a ban on super intelligence," he wrote on X.
Francois Chollet, AI researcher
Francois Chollet, an AI researcher who created Keras, an open-source software library, said on X that he hoped OpenAI and Anthropic were operating in good faith.
"If these efforts are genuine, then oversight must take a more democratic and accountable form, with both national and international components," he said.
He pointed to several signs he said would indicate that calls for more regulation are actually tricks for OpenAI and Anthropic to stifle competition.
The warning signs he mentioned include calls to ban open-sourced AI and to hinder non-frontier research.
Gavin Baker, venture capitalist
Gavin Baker said an executive order could result from Amodei's essay.
Bloomberg/Getty Images
Venture capitalist Gavin Baker said an executive order from President Donald Trump "seems likely after all this."
"It is possible to democratize and distribute AI broadly and safely without centralizing it in the hands of a few corporations," he said on X.
Baker said the most concrete development so far is the decision by OpenAI and Anthropic to bring in outside evaluators, a move he said could help the companies show they took reasonable steps to prevent harm.
Still, he cautioned against regulations that would concentrate control of powerful AI systems among a handful of companies. "I do not want a few humans in control of intelligence," Baker wrote.
Aaron Levie, CEO of Box
Aaron Levie said Amodei's goals are "absolute necessities."
Kimberly White/Getty Images for TechCrunch
Aaron Levie, the cofounder and CEO of Box, a cloud content company, said Amodei's goals, as laid out in his essay, are "absolute necessities in AI development."
"It completely stands to reason that we want these systems to be safe and 'aligned,'" Levie said on X.
Levie said he didn't think Amodei is seeking undue regulation that would hobble Anthropic's open-source competitors.
"How we get there — without meaningfully slowing down innovation progress or reducing competition — is one of the most complex questions in the 21st century, but the need is clearly real," he said.
Chamath Palihapitiya, venture capitalist
Chamath Palihapitiya said either way, it will complicate Anthropic's IPO.
JC Olivera/Variety via Getty Images
Venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya said Anthropic is now caught in a contradiction of its own making.
If employees genuinely believe the company's technology could pose an existential threat, he said, that creates major liability and disclosure problems as Anthropic prepares for a possible IPO.
"They do have to choose," Palihapitiya said on the "All-In" podcast. He said Anthropic must either distance itself from Coxon's warnings or accept their implications.
He was also skeptical of the extinction scenarios themselves, saying the chain of events required for AI to wipe out humanity still seemed highly implausible.
Gary Marcus, AI researcher and author
Gary Marcus, the famed AI contrarian, said AI as it exists now poses little threat.
"I am tired of the cosplay and am going to blunt," he wrote on X on Sunday.
"The main kind of AI we need to worry about is general purpose AI agents that are hooked up to the internet. Most of them are unreliable, unable to systematically follow instructions. Coupled with internet access they can hack credentials and websites; given time they can probably do a lot worse," he wrote.
He added that the problem isn't that AI agents are too smart, it's that they are too dumb, which he said is obvious by the way they can't follow instructions.
"We don't (yet) need slowdowns. And we certainly don't need to panic," he wrote. "We just need to take an unsafe product off the market."
Alexandr Wang, Meta's chief AI officer
Alexandr Wang, Meta's chief AI officer, said alignment is fundamental.
Bloomberg/Getty Images
Alexandr Wang, Meta's chief AI officer, said on X that alignment could become the main constraint on how quickly companies can scale increasingly powerful AI systems.
"Alignment is fundamental to delivering personal superintelligence for everyone," he said, using the techie term for AI following human instructions and not going rogue.
Satya Nadella, chairman and CEO of Microsoft
Satya Nadella said Amodei was making sense.
Benjamin Fanjoy/Getty Images
Satya Nadella, Microsoft's CEO and chairman, said he welcomes Amodei's concept of embedded evaluators and "the broader efforts to develop the mechanisms to make this more than just talk."
"The key is that this cannot be controlled by a handful of entities, but must have broad representation across the ecosystem, countries, and fields, including academia," he said on X.
Nadella said that Microsoft will soon publish a "code of conduct" for Microsoft's AI models.
"Any pursuit of superintelligence has to be grounded in the core principle that if the AI we build is not helping humanity and under human control, it's not worth pursuing," he said.
Read next
Truman Dickerson
You're currently following this author!
Want to unfollow? Unsubscribe via the link in your email.
Truman Dickerson is the Weekend News Fellow at Business Insider, based in New York City. He covers trending tech and business news. He previously reported for The Boston Globe's Express Desk. He graduated from Boston University, where he served as editor in chief of The Daily Free Press, BU's student-run newspaper.Contact him at [email protected]
The presentation ceremony for the Women’s Asia Cup cricket final in Dubai became controversial after winners India refused to accept the trophy from the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) President Mohsin Naqvi, who also serves as Pakistan’s interior minister, amid ongoing political tensions between the South Asian neighbours.
… %!s()
India beat Sri Lanka by 72 runs in the final on Sunday to reclaim the crown from the 2024 champions, but the post-match ceremony was delayed by more than 45 minutes as players from both sides waited outside their respective dressing rooms.
The match at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium ended close to 9:50pm (17:50 GMT), but the ceremony did not get under way until 10:40pm (18:40 GMT).
Once the temporary stage for the handing over of awards was set up, Naqvi was seen standing alongside other dignitaries as the ceremony began. Match officials were the first to be presented with their medallions before the Sri Lankan players stepped up for their medals.
Sri Lanka captain Chamari Athapaththu received the runners-up award from Naqvi and then proceeded to speak about her team’s performance.
However, no individual awards, including Player of the Match and Player of the Tournament, were handed out, and neither was the Indian team called up to receive their medals or the trophy.
India won the tournament for a record-extending eighth time.
The tournament’s official social media accounts did not post any trophy celebration images.
The Indian Women’s cricket team’s social media account posted a group photo of the team and coaching staff in what appeared to be an empty stadium shortly after the conclusion of the award ceremony.
Why did India refuse the trophy?
Images and videos posted on social media showed the Indian team and support staff standing in a circle outside their dressing room ahead of the ceremony. They were not seen near the stage once it got under way, and no explanation was provided for their absence.
Indian cricket team’s head coach Amol Muzumdar said the decision to not accept the trophy was taken by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).
“That stand has been taken by the BCCI, and we stand by it,” he said in his post-match press conference when asked why the Indian team did not appear for the presentation ceremony.
“The tournament is over,” Muzumdar added. “We are the champions, and that’s good enough [for us].”
The tournament’s organisers, the ACC, and the Indian cricket board did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for a comment.
The scene was reminiscent of a similar incident from last September, when India beat Pakistan to win the Men’s Asian Cup at the same venue but refused to accept the trophy from Naqvi, who headed the ACC then, as well.
He is also the chairman of the Pakistan Cricket Board.
Shortly after the row at the men’s final, BCCI Chairman Devajit Saikia confirmed that India’s refusal was based on Naqvi’s presence as the leading figure of the ceremony.
“We have decided not to take the Asia Cup trophy from the ACC chairman, who happens to be one of the main [political] leaders of Pakistan,” Saikia then told Indian media.
India’s players celebrate after winning the Women’s T20 Asia Cup 2026 against Sri Lanka at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium [Courtesy Asian Cricket Council]
Troubled India-Pakistan ties
India-Pakistan relations have been troubled for years. But they plummeted further after armed attackers killed 26 men in Pahalgam, a tourism site in Indian-administered Kashmir, on April 22, 2025.
The Resistance Front (TRF), an armed group which demands Kashmir’s independence, claimed responsibility for the attack. India alleges that TRF is a branch of the Pakistan-based armed group, the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), an allegation Islamabad denies.
Following the attack, the two countries scaled back diplomatic relations, and India suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty.
On May 7, 2025, India launched multiple missile attacks on sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir under what it called Operation Sindoor. India said it struck nine sites in Pakistan, which said dozens of civilians were killed.
Three days later, Pakistan launched Operation Bunyan Marsoos, targeting at least six Indian military sites and killing at least five Indians, according to Indian authorities.
On the same day, the two sides reached a ceasefire agreement, which was announced by United States President Donald Trump.
Has the political tension affected India-Pakistan cricket?
Since the May 2025 hostilities, every meeting of the Indian and Pakistani cricket teams – men, women or junior – has been marred by bitterness between both sides.
During the Men’s Asia Cup of 2025, the Indian team did not partake in the customary handshake with their Pakistani counterparts at the pre-match toss and post-match walkoff. The teams met three times in the tournament, which became hugely political due to the players’ hostile behaviour towards each other.
When Pakistan faced India in the ICC Women’s World Cup 2025 in Sri Lanka, the teams steered clear of handshakes and repeated the practice at the ICC Women’s T20 World Cup earlier this year in England, as well as their group-stage match in the Women’s Asia Cup.
Following the Men’s Asia Cup final fiasco, political experts told Al Jazeera the incident seemed “inevitable” under the tense backdrop.
When is the next India vs Pakistan cricket match?
Both countries will participate in the men’s and women’s tournaments at the upcoming Asian Games in Japan.
While the teams are not grouped together in the early stage as they have received direct entry into the knockouts, the possibility of an India vs Pakistan final remains in both competitions. %!s()
Sara Bareilles on ‘Good Grief’ and Finding Joy in the Tough Stuff: ‘Grief Is the Mothership of This Record, but It Carries Release, Hope, Optimism and Connection’
…
Getty Images for IMDb
She could have called it “Great Grief,” but that would have been immodest. Sara Bareilles‘ “Good Grief,” her first new studio album in seven years, is one of the year’s finest achievements from a singer-songwriter… and its purely musical delights are such that you might feel that way about it even if you haven’t been through some shit, as they say.
If you have, all the better to relate to the record and its sometimes somber, sometimes playful meditations on a whole catalog of grief (and grievances): losing best friends to death at too early an age, dealing with fertility struggles, running to and away from the precipice of love, eroding women’s rights, mental health issues, and the challenges of continuing to believe in the promise of America.
Variety had an in-depth conversation with Bareilles about the new album and many of the tough or inspiring issues related to it — along with touching on a recently released documentary film that captures some of the making of the record, “Sara Bareilles: Good Grief,” and her first real tour of the 2020s, which has just gotten underway and includes dates Sept. 18-19 at Radio City Music Hall and Oct. 12-14 at L.A.’s Dolby Theatre. (Scroll down to see a full list of tour dates.)
You’ve gone a pretty long time between solo albums now. Of course you’ve had “Girls5Eva” and composing your next stage musical (“The Interestings”) and plenty of other things occupying yout time. Does it feel any different putting this one out into the world now than in times past?
It does feel different. It’s been a minute since I’ve done this. … But I feel pretty peaceful with the “it takes the time it takes” kind of method around this part of my life. I tend towards a pretty hefty amount of time between records anyway. It takes me a long time to have something else to say. It’s been seven years since my last record, and hopefully it was somewhat worth the wait. I was writing about this this morning; I journal every morning. I found so much catharsis and healing in the making of this record, just going through this period of time with the loss of friends and just the hardships that have happened over the last handful of years in my own personal journey. I felt so grateful to get to put some of those experiences somewhere. So it feels like the timing is right on time, for me personally. I’m hoping it lands for the audience in that way as well.
There are “mature themes” on this record. A lot of your audience has sort of grown up with you and dealt with at least some of these same things you’re writing about. Do you suppose you have to have a certain amount of life experience to relate to an album like this? Or if someone is 20 and hasn’t really lost anybody yet in this life, can they still be impacted by it the same way?
It’s like, yeah, did I make an old person’s record? [Laughs.] In some ways, yeah, I think what I was attuned to when I was much younger, in my late teens and 20s, the stuff that really kept me up at night, it usually had to do with matters of the heart, like a fixation on a romantic love. But I do feel like, as like a global community, the world feels like it has, I would say, wisened. I think I mean we’ve all sort of aged up a little bit together. I feel this in my young nieces and my younger sister and friends that I have that are much younger: There is a kind of awareness about things that I was not as attuned to. I don’t know if it’s about the existential drama of life and death, but I do think that there is a kind of antenna turned towards bigger-picture themes than maybe I was quite aware of when I was that age. I see these young people dealing with the climate crisis and watching what’s happened politically and how divided our world feels. And the way they feel amid the emotionality of the drama of your youth — I do feel like there’s a lot of grief in there. And I don’t think anybody ever called it that for me. But I’m really curious to hear feedback about who relates to this and who doesn’t.
This album is kind of bookended with songs at the beginning and end that deal with grief in a more obvious way, maybe, with death and loss. But you touch on a lot of subjects. Is there a way in which you thought of “Good Grief” as kind of a concept album where even the songs that aren’t so overtly about that are also themed to grief?
There’s a line in the sons called “Ladies in a Line,” and the lyric is “Grief is the blanket, and it covers everything.” I do think that grief is sort of like the mothership of this record. It’s like the home base for all of these experiences… I think that what I’ve learned about grief in my own personal relationship to the experience of it is that it’s not just one thing. It carries joy, it carries release, it carries hope and optimism and connection and a lot of really buoyant themes. So yeah, I think that even a song like “Idiot Heart,” which is about wanting to be led to the edge by a kind of an urgency towards love, there is grief in that too, because what we love, we lose. And so I can kind of find it in everything. But I don’t look at it as a somber experience. I just look at it as a really rich experience.
I was recommending the album to a young woman who had lost her mother not that long ago and still has some trauma over that, and when I described it as an album largely inspired by grief, she was like, “Is this gonna destroy me?” And I answered, “No, I don’t think it is, actually.” It’s like, the song about losing your best friend, “Just a Kid,” is so joyful, in its way. That’s followed by “Still Crying,” which is sort of a happy-sounding song, even though it’s about not being able to stop weeping. So the album has this upbeat spirit and does not get bogged down in sorrow, even though it’s kind of unflinching at the same time.
I thought so. Well, thanks for sharing that. I’m really sorry for the loss. Talk about a transformative moment to be going through… I don’t know. I think I was always really afraid of the big feelings, especially when I was younger, just afraid that I wouldn’t be able to hold the bigness of feeling. And it’s been interesting — I think a lot of people relate to that. We’re sort of afraid of sadness and afraid of grief, and it’s so understandable, but there’s a lot of wisdom… a lot to get out of it, too.
The songs that deal overtly with grief on this are not all about the same person, or even all from your personal point of view. You have separate songs for two of your best friends, Chad and Gavin. But the opening number, “Home,” was inspired by a podcast conversation between Stephen Colbert and Anderson Cooper. Which I completely did not realize the first time I listened to the album and wrote something public about it. I did realize that a person in the song talked about being 54 and having a son, but I was still slow in picking up the clues this was not about you…
Sorry!
Not your fault! It should have been clear enough at a point. Anyway, articles like this help fill in the backstory for other people. So, in being inspired by this conversation between Colbert and Cooper, would you say you were recreating what they said in your own words for the song?
That’s exactly right. I listened to their incredible conversation on Anderson’s podcast called “All There Is,” and it’s just a beautiful, tender offering. It was very moving to me to hear two men discuss grief in great detail, and how the echoes of loss lived inside their physical homes as children and then as adults. I was really struck by, I think it’s Stephen in the conversation — I have to go back and refresh my memory — but one of them starts talking about just how important it is to tell the story. How important re the stories about our own lives, about what we lose, about just who we are — that’s what we have to gift each other. It became sort of a thematic cornerstone to the record, and the song “Home” is kind of the invitation. It’s the first song for a reason: it’s the invitation into this exchange of stories.
Have you had a chance to talk to either Cooper or Colbert, to tell them that they’re in this song?
Yeah, I’ve shared it with both of them. I got a chance to go on Anderson’s podcast, actually, and I played it for him live on the podcast. He had a beautiful, very emotional reaction to it. And Stephen, I sent it to him via email, and we had a sweet exchange. They both remarked how uncanny it is that a conversation can transmute and become something totally different … that a conversation they had on a podcast would turn into a piece of music. I love that. I love that about music in general, that the seeds for these songs and these ideas come from all kinds of places.
For me, maybe the most powerful number is the second track, “Just a Kid.” It’s a great example of how the personal can be universal, since nearly every line in it is something specific related to your late friend, and we can’t co-sign all of those exact experiences you had of him. Yet it’s all the better for being something so grounded in reality. The lyrics have kind of a fun writing trick where you have quick and sometimes contrary lines, like “My first best friend / I’ll never see again / You never got to get married/ And I hate where you’re buried.” It’s got some mirth as well as being sad, and if you were writing your next musical, it feels like it could be the 11 o’clock number.
Oh, that’s awesome. It was such a love letter to my friend Chad, and there’s a lot of nostalgia in this song, conceptually, in wanting to honor the period of time where we really were attached at the hip. This was like early aughts, and going on tour for the first time, and we were roommates, and we did literally everything together. It’s like a sense memory, a felt kind of timeline. We were listening to a lot of Frou Frou and Counting Crows and the Wallflowers. Like, the soundtrack to our lives was very particular. And so I wanted to dip into the feeling of that time and make it feel like a celebration of his life, which it really ended up being. It’s a heartbreaking lyric for me to sing, because it was born of loss, but it’s so joyful because it just brings his whole essence to mind, and I love getting to sing about him from the mountaintop, so to speak. I love getting to share his legacy in song.
There’s a slightly meta aspect to “Just a Kid” in that you have the chorus, where you’re describing the experience of singing into your phone as you are writing the song on a city street, and not caring what onlookers think. It sounds like you were unafraid to be in front of strangers having this kind of personal musical experience.
Yeah, totally. I was on my way home from the grocery store, and my hands were full, and I just could feel the arrival of this song. But it was more of just a sense of Chad. I felt that there was something like a transmission happening. And I put my grocery bags down and started singing into my phone on the street.
It also brings to mind a couple of times I’ve talked to friends about things like this. And I had an experience with my grandfather where I was singing. I knew he was going to pass, and I was across the country and wouldn’t be able to get there in time, so I was singing “Amazing Grace” into the phone. I just think of all those times, so many people, who we can’t physically be with each other. If you happen to know someone’s at the end, how many people are singing or saying something into a phone and just counting on those telephone wires to carry the love? I guess they’re not telephone wires anymore; they’re digital pixels in the air. But just that idea of crossing a great amount of distance. And I think about that between the living and the dead, but also between the living and the living, too.
Just to take a little bit of a thematic turn: “Hands Off My Body” makes its studio-recording premiere on this album after you debuted it at the Hollywood Bowl a couple of summers ago. Andthat gets into a different kind of grief/anger. Was there was a particular prompt that inspired either that or the other sort of faintly political song, “Heartland,” which seems to be sung from the point of view of the Statue of Liberty.
Yeah. Oh my God, a litany of reasons. “Hands Off My Body,” the seeds of that particular song were actually born after the Iranian women’s movement, after Mahsa Amini’s death and the Women, Life, Freedom movement that I found to be just an extraordinary showing of strength and resilience. And then, in terms of timeline, I had written that song back then, but then Roe v. Wade fell, and abortion rights started getting repealed all over, and women’s health initiatives were stripped away, and the Epstein files come out. It was just one thing after another, after another. I think there is a side of grief that is rageful, and that’s a lot of rage around the oppressive and consistent lack of respect and autonomy for women and their bodies. So I think I’m glad I had a place to put some of that. I still feel rageful about that.
And to speak about “Heartland,” I think as we’ve watched this second Trump administration unfold with such recklessness and cruelty, frankly, I just started thinking about how sad I am that the idea of patriotism has been co-opted. I do still love this country, flaws and deeply problematic history and all, and I grieve that there isn’t more space for that sometimes I believe in the ideals that we’re building towards. So writing a song from the perspective of the Statue of Liberty or from the perspective of the Constitution and these ideas and words on a page that I think are still worth fighting for — it’s complicated. It’s not one thing or another, but I do believe that fighting for the ideas that this country is built on is still a worthy pursuit.
Try to tell a younger person that you are considering putting a flag in the flagpole for a major holiday and that is an invitation to get an incredulous look.
Yeah. I think it’s important to remember that we have to be able to hold both in our minds, that we have to love something that is complicated. And I’m not diminishing the depth to which there are really problematic parts of the way our systems run and the way the country was formed and founded. But I don’t want to throw it all away. So I grieve the feeling that you have to sometimes.
With “Ladies in a Line,” which is a song about feelings coming up at a fertility clinic, I was thinking about how great it would sound in the middle of a musical…
Yeah. I didn’t get that far in my mind about it.
But do you think that writing for the theater has changed the way you write for a singer-songwriter record?
Oh, I’m for sure thinking that it has. It has absolutely made a massive impact on my writing. I just am not thinking, “Am I making a musical out of this material or not?” But no, I feel it deeply. Even just from a form perspective, a lot of these songs don’t follow a more traditional pop song format, which I tended to stick more closely to in my past writing. Lots of these songs are a little more formless, and they’re telling a story. There’s less repetition and less in the way of, like, classic choruses. So that just feels like an evolution of my writing that has definitely been influenced by the theater.
But with that song, I really wanted to name the experience of fertility and what is hard about it and what is universal about it. Well, I don’t know about entirely universal, but it is certainly a very deeply shared experience with millions and millions and millions of women and families trying to conceive all over the world. It just struck me during my own continued journey with fertility that there’s a lot of people here, and I just didn’t have a sense of how many, many, many, many people need support. So even though you’re having this really quite typical, un-unique experience, it can feel very lonely. So my hope was just to — I don’t know — name it. Just name it for the sake of naming it.
In another song, “Capsize Me,” you have a line that perhaps describes how you think of yourself in relation to your audience sometimes: “And the part of me who shudders can be a lighthouse for the others who need to find the shore when they are lost at sea.” That seems to sort of accept responsibility, or at least awareness, that you can be a stand-in or an avatar for a lot of people who are going through heavy experiences and that you’re grateful accept that as part of what you do, whether it’s the initial impulse or not.
Hmm. Yeah. I appreciate you saying that. I take a lot of really deep pride in that piece of it. I don’t know if it’s pride; it’s comfort. I do feel a kind of responsibility to speak really honestly about the places in my life that carry hardship, and the places where I feel fear, and vulnerability, and anxiety, and all of those things. And if my struggles can bring comfort to someone else, I’m so happy to have them. Well, “happy to have them” is maybe an overstatement. But I am willing to have them because I think that it’s a real privilege to get to try to translate some of these experiences into something that might bring a little bit of comfort. That’s my great hope for this record, is that it just brings a little bit of comfort.
In the past, occasionally, you’ve been on social media being public about mental health struggles. Fans might think that there’s such wisdom in your songwriting, and you’re married, and of course you seem like the consummate pro as a musician, to the point of imagiing that you are too together and have too much going for you to have those same issues with it they do. But of course you can be wise and you can be a pro and those things are still not always buffers against being a mess.
Yeah. I feel like the thing I keep learning over and over again is that there is no “you figured it out” plateau. When I was younger, I really, in all my naiveté, thought there was a kind of happiness plateau, that you figure out how to be happy in this life. And it’s been a really mind-opening experience to understand, and then understand yet again and yet again, that there is no plateau, that we’re just on this very dynamic, often volatile, often uncomfortable roller coaster ride of being alive. And sometimes we’re hanging on for dear life, and sometimes we’re thrillseekers with our arms up, enjoying the descent, you know? I really am trying to just embrace all of it, to stay really open and willing to receive what’s kinda coming at me, and coming at all of us.
There are so many things that can be a carrot on a stick — finding love, employment, financial security… and fixing yourself can be a carrot on a stick, too.
Yes. Truly, truly. Nothing to fix.
A question that has less to do with the emotional content of the album and just how you completed it: When we spoke when your documentary was premiering at a film festival some months back, you said that people should be aware that the initial recording sessions that were captured in the doc did not represent the entire recording at all, and the finished product would not necessarily sound like what is in that film, but that it captured a important moment in time. Then, of course, you went on and worked with Aaron Dessner, and did a lot of overdubbing on the raw tracks we see in the movie as well as additional songs. So you felt comfortable having a snapshot of the album in progress, as something that you spent a lot more time on.
Yeah. Even with that idea, though, we’re always changing, too. Like, if I finished the record this month, I would probably make a million different decisions. It is the thing that I love about making records, though. It’s like it really is, as you said, just a snapshot. It’s a snapshot of a set of circumstances and the way you are feeling in a moment, and you do the best you can to make something that you think you can live with for a while. But inevitably, you change, and your feelings about the song itself changes. I mean, I’m even noticing that as we prepare to go on tour, where there’s just little things that live differently in the space and time of putting it on stage live. So it will be, yet again, another snapshot of a song that will hopefully go through a lot of evolution in its lifespan.
So, yeah, I feel really good at this stage in my life, and for where I am kind of spiritually and emotionally, about transparency, and just letting people can see where things began. And I appreciate the opportunity to have people trust that I’m gonna try to take you somewhere where I want the song to live. And if anyone’s seen me in concert, they know I keep fucking with these songs till the end of time, so they’re very different now on stage than they were when they were recorded. But that’s part of the fun.
Are you enjoying having that proximity of the album and the film coming out pretty close together, so that a lot of your fans are experiencing the two things pretty close to simultaneously?
I’m loving it. It feels like a giant art project, the whole thing — the album, the tour, the film and this installation we’re doing at Lincoln Center to celebrate the album release. I think we’re taking really good care of the music, which is the thing that matters the most to me. So I think delivering the process of creation and especially getting to tell the backstory a little bit as to where these songs actually came from, to me, it’s really honoring what this whole record is about. Which is, you know, about trying to metabolize and make sense of great loss and great pain, and hopefully turn it into something beautiful.
(To read our previous interview with Bareilles talking about the “Good Grief” documentary, click here. For a review of the “Good Grief” album, click here.)
Sara Bareilles 2026 tour dates: September 9—Boston, MA—MGM Music Hall at Fenway September 12-13 —Washington, D.C.—The Anthem September 15-16 —Toronto, ON—Massey Hall September 18-19 —New York, NY—Radio City Music Hall September 21-22 —Philadelphia, PA—The Met Philadelphia presented by Highmark September 24—Atlanta, GA—Fox Theatre September 25—Cincinnati, OH—Taft Theatre September 27-28 —Chicago, IL—Chicago Theatre September 30—Minneapolis, MN—Orpheum Theatre October 2—St. Louis, MO—Stifel Theatre October 4—Denver, CO—Bellco Theatre October 6—Austin, TX—Bass Concert Hall October 7-8 —Houston, TX—The Hobby Center for the Performing Arts October 12- 14 —Los Angeles, CA—Dolby Theatre October 16-17 —San Francisco, CA—Bill Graham Civic Auditorium October 19-20 —Seattle, WA—The Paramount Theatre
Musk documentary filmmaker Alex Gibney responded Sunday to a documentary legal threat from Elon Musk.
“I reached out immediately… But he clearly wasn’t interested in talking. We made so many formal outreaches to him, and with the exception of his remarks on Twitter, we received nothing back,” Gibney said during a keynote conversation in Toronto.
… %!s()
The veteran doc maker said Musk was heavily lawyered and independently fact-checked, so he’s confident about the veracity of his account of the tech billionaire. But he told the TIFF audience he has “great concern” that Musk may not be widely seen as HBO Max, which picked up the title, is the subject of an ongoing takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery by Paramount, which is led by tech barons like Musk.
Bleecker Street is set to theatrically release the nearly four-hour-long documentary in October and HBO Max is set to stream the film as the WBD takeover remains the subject of political and regulatory pressures. “I do worry about the storm clouds on the horizon and the fact that they (HBO) are in the midst of a takeover battle by Paramount. Larry Ellison, who is cited in the film, is one of Elon’s friends and one of the investors in his takeover of Twitter. And his son David Ellison has shown he’ll twist whatever facts are at his disposal in order to please the Capo dei Capi who happens to be the President of the United States,” Gibney said.
“So that is a deep concern. But so far, so good,” he added. Gibney expects Musk to land on HBO Max later this year or early next year. “It’s a great concern and the consolidation of the media and also the aggressive editorial takeover of the media by the tech barons is really deeply concerning,” he argued.
Gibney’s comments follow the Musk film world premiering in Venice before shifting to TIFF for a North American bow on Monday. The world premiere was followed by attorney Alex Spiro, acting for Musk, sending Gibney and his production team a letter, alleging they had misrepresented facts about the tech mogul.
And Musk himself blasted the film as a “boring … hit piece” on X. The letter — confirmed by The Hollywood Reporter — focuses on what Spiro says is an insinuation in the film that Musk used his Starlink satellites to somehow influence the 2024 presidential election to boost Donald Trump.
Earlier, Jigsaw Productions issued a statement after receiving Spiro’s letter: “Alex Gibney’s films are consistently recognized for their in-depth, fact-driven explorations of influential figures and corporations, coupled with his bold and engaging directorial style. This approach has garnered him international praise, an Academy Award among other accolades, and a reputation that The Times of London recently lauded as the ‘gold standard for fearless journalistic integrity.’ The right to engage in open debate and fact-based examinations of powerful public figures is protected by the First Amendment — something that should be recognized and defended by all Americans, including the associates of Elon Musk, who has proclaimed himself to be a ‘free speech absolutist.’”
Musk is Gibney’s most recent film and follows a career making documentaries that investigate powerful institutions and individuals. In Musk, Gibney looks at the tech mogul behind electric cars, space travel, social media, AI and more.
During his keynote, Gibney discussed Elon Musk’s infamous DOGE purge and its impact on the independence and financing of USAID, the foreign aid agency. “When you’re into hundreds of thousands of people who are killed by performative cruelty, it’s really a staggering moral stain on Elon Musk and the federal government,” he argued.
Gibney also discussed Musk’s use of stock manipulation, as well as securing government handouts and energy credits, as part of his exploitation of financial markets. “You’ve got a con artist who has put in the White House another con artist, and they just keep running bigger and bigger cons, because there’s no Department of Justice or FBI to tell them to do otherwise,” he told the TIFF audience.
Gibney is also a producer of Edward Said: Between Worlds, a film about the late Edward Said, the Palestinian scholar, which is also screening at the Toronto Film Festival. “I just find him (Said) such a compelling public intellectual at a time when there’s a dearth of public intellectuals who have engagement with such a sense of humanism, and obviously this is one of the great global scandals of this moment, the genocide in Gaza and the horrific things that are happening on the West Bank,” he said.
Gibney’s other films include the Oscar-winning Taxi to the Dark Side, The Last Gladiators, Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God, The Armstrong Lie and Citizen K. %!s()
Homepage <h2>Accessibility links</h2> <ul> <li> Skip to content </li> <li> Accessibility Help </li> </ul> <a href="https://account.bbc.com/account">BBC Account</a> Notifications More menu Search iPlayer Close menu
iPlayer Navigation
iPlayer Accessibility Help
Home
The Chequered Flag Podcast
2026: Spanish GP Review: Antonelli On Top Again
The Chequered Flag Podcast - 2026: Spanish GP Review: Antonelli On Top Again
Harry Benjamin, Alice Powell and Rebecca Clancy look back on the Spanish Grand Prix, where Kimi Antonelli took another victory to extend his championship lead.
…
Duration33 mins
First shown13 Sep 2026
Available for 26 days
WatchlistAudio DescribedSign Language
Series Navigation
Episodes
More Like This
Episodes Episodes
This episode2026: Spanish GP Review: Antonelli On Top Again
2026: Italian GP Review - History at Monza!Harry Benjamin, Alex Lynn and Rebecca Clancy look back on a dramatic Italian Grand Prix28 mins
2026: Training Like an F1 Driver with Oscar PiastriStepping out of the commentary box and into the gym with McLaren driver Oscar Piastri12 mins
2026: F1 Super-Subs, the Home Grand Prix Curse and the Backstreet Boys’ Driver Band...Harry Benjamin and Nicola Hume investigate why the Antonelli has cause for concern.29 mins
2026: Dutch GP Recap - Is Lando Norris in the Title Fight?Lando Norris makes it two wins in a row at a chaotic Dutch Grand Prix.33 mins
2026: Drifting Ferraris, Kimi Raikkonen Pranks and Supercar Collections...How did former F1 driver Kimi Raikkonen catch out Becky Evans in front of 50,000 people?29 mins
2026: Mid-Season Report: Is Kimi Antonelli Top Of The Class?Harry Benjamin, Alice Powell and Andrew Benson assess the first half of the F1 season44 mins
2026: F1 Drivers As Teletubbies?! F1’s Silly Season Is Here!Harry Benjamin and Nicola Hume dive into the biggest transfer rumours in Formula 127 mins
2026: Belgian GP Race Review: A Tale of Two MercedesHarry Benjamin, Sam Bird and Rebecca Clancy assess what it means for the title fight.28 mins
2026: Has Hamilton changed Ferrari & Harry ‘The Flying Brick’!...Harry Benjamin & Becky Evans are at the go-kart track to unpick the week’s big F1 stories.30 mins
2026: Barcelona GP Reaction: Hamilton Wins For Ferrari!Where does this victory rank among Lewis Hamilton's greatest achievements?35 mins
2026: Chequered Flag Extra: ‘I Travelled to Every Race for a Season!’...Izzy Hammond and Harry Benjamin are joined by superfan Brandon Burgess.29 mins
2026: Canadian GP Review: Ecstasy, Agony and Strategy Blunders...A battle for the ages, strategy blunders and retirements at a dramatic Canadian Grand Prix27 mins
2026: Norris’ Title Advice, Palmowski on F1 Academy Return & Will Antonelli Drop Off?...Will Kimi Antonelli’s hot form continue? We answer your hot takes. 32 mins