Author: rb809rb

‘Love Story’ Creator Connor Hines Explains His (and Your and My) Kennedy Obsession

Throughout his years of development, Connor Hines was concerned that nobody was even going to notice his passion project. Then, last summer, test shots of stars Paul Anthony Kelly as John F. Kennedy Jr. and Sarah Pidgeon as Carolyn Bessette became an Instagram lightning rod, and he realized that attention wasn’t going to be an issue.

Over its first six episodes, FX’s Love Story has captivated and divided viewers — with debates about historical accuracy, the treatment certain still-living figures have received and, still, the clothing. As a first-time showrunner who’d been fascinated by Bessette and Kennedy long before Ryan Murphy announced plans for their TV treatment, he seems to still be processing his show’s outsized role at the watercooler. “I put it on my bucket list and assumed that I would not be able to write it until much later in my career,” says Hines. “When it was announced that Ryan was doing this new anthology, I pursued the job as I’ve never pursued anything in my life.”

Speaking during a recent episode of The Hollywood Reporter podcast I’m Having an Episode (Spotify, Amazon Music, Apple), recorded before Daryl Hannah took her issues with her own depiction public, Hines spoke about the long process of piecing together two incredibly private lives and why we’re all still so fascinating by America’s most famous family.

***

So how did this become a fascination of yours?

I was obsessed with The Crown and the fact that we don’t have anyone equivalent in the U.S, really, except for the Kennedys — in terms of a dynasty that’s known the world over. I went down a rabbit hole, starting with Joe Kennedy, working my way through the generations. For a while I thought I was going to write something dating back to the beginning of the family. There’s no shortage of stories and trials and tribulations. But reaching John and Carolyn’s generation, specifically their story, I remember texting my manager at the time. I couldn’t believe nobody had done a limited series about the two of them. I put it on my bucket list, assumed that I would not be able to write it until much later in my career. When it was announced that Ryan Murphy was doing this new anthology, I pursued the job. I’ve never pursued anything in my life.

I’d imagine that people haven’t done it before because there’s a certain amount of fear in tackling such a sensitive subject…

Yeah, but I was so struck by the disconnect between the narrative that surrounded their marriage at the time — especially Carolyn — and the woman that her friends described as being this incredibly fun, loving, vivacious woman. Of course, you see a myriad photos of her and she looks quite withdrawn or frightened or shut down. I just thought, “Oh, I want to know who the woman was that nobody got to see, who the woman was before she met JFK Jr.” She had a very storied career at Calvin Klein, starting with folding sweaters at the mall in Boston to being one of his most trusted advisors in the C-suite.

What was your awareness of them growing up?

I grew up right outside of New York City. My dad commuted in every day, so he’d always bring home a copy of the New York Post. I have all of these memories of seeing their photos everywhere. I specifically remember, in Page Six, they always bold the celebrity names. It was constantly their names and images. And I come from two very large Irish Catholic families outside of Boston, so I was already familiar with the Kennedys. My grandmother basically had a shrine to the President and Jackie…

Paul Anthony Kelly as John F. Kennedy Jr., Naomi Watts as Jackie Kennedy Onassis in Love Story.

Eric Liebowitz/FX

Oh, the Kennedy obsession is very real in Irish American families.

One-hundred percent. He was our first Catholic president, which meant a lot to that community. It meant a lot to my grandparents. [Jackie] was just a rockstar in her own. I don’t think people really give her enough credit for the role she played in the Camelot of it all. She specifically crafted that narrative as, I think, a service to her husband. She was so much more savvy than I think people realized. People think of Jackie Kennedy and they think grace, poise and style. But, and I say this in a positive way, she was a very calculated, savvy person. A political operative.

A lot has been said about your decision not to interview anyone in the family, which operates under this rather hilarious assumption that any of them would talk to you.

Correct. In what world would they want to be like, “Yeah, let’s sit down and kiki!” Obviously, the family has been apprehensive about the show — which I understand. But it’s not like I was screening their calls. I think it was understood from the very beginning that there would not be a collaboration between us. That’s best for everybody involved. You have to be as objective as possible when you tell a story. I know myself well enough that if I started developing personal relationships with members of the family, it would’ve absolutely clouded the way that I wrote the show.

This family still looms large in the American psyche, not just because one member is currently involved in decisions that a lot of us don’t agree with. There is a nod to RFK Jr. in one episode, it’s very subtle. But was there any temptation to have more fun with that?

We are already dealing with a sensitive subject matter as it is. I didn’t have much interest in inviting any more controversy or discussion. I thought that was something we should just steer clear of. Plus, I didn’t really to distract from what the show was about. Anything surrounding him would create headlines that I certainly didn’t want. We’re trying to celebrate different members of the family.

The majority of this show is scenes between two of them, John and Carolyn, in private. Talk to me about the process behind the artistic liberties that you take. These are scenarios in which we don’t know what was said, so what guardrails did you establish?

Basically, you do as much research as humanly possible. You nail down a timeline for each episode, and each episode has a milestone — whether it be a wedding or the engagement. You gather as much information about those periods of times, what their friends and family were saying about the state of their marriage. So much of the volatility was captured by the media, but the loving moments between them, the respect and admiration, they had for each other was not making news. Our job was to recreate that. You just had to have an understanding based off of everything you read about where they were in their journey emotionally, where Carolyn was in the journey with her fame and celebrity, where John was with his career, with George, with his family. Take all the variables that were surrounding them, you gain a sense of how they would be feeling about themselves and therefore towards each other. And then, with that, you take a creative liberty and extrapolate as best you can.

Sarah Pidgeon as Carolyn Bessette Kennedy in Love Story.

Kurt Iswarienko/FX

But there was this huge kerfuffle, mostly sartorially, when that test shot came out last summer.

I don’t know what you’re talking about. (Laughs.) I haven’t heard about this. This is the first I’m hearing about the test shots.

So, what happened?

It was very preliminary. We were still playing around with the aesthetics for these characters. It wasn’t really anything more than that. Once they were released, I don’t think we anticipated everybody feeling as strongly as they did about the looks. More specifically, I think we just got a sense of how protective and, to some extent, obsessed people still were with the two of them. I’ve been living with this show for four years. I did not think anybody was going to care about it until it came out — and that’s the best case scenario. To have the internet create this massive dialogue surrounding their aesthetics before we even started shooting and have paparazzi show up week one, I was just sort of like, “Oh god, I can’t believe how much people still care about these two.” If anything, it gave me a hope that there was an audience that would be waiting for us when the show came out.

I was shocked at how large that, specifically, the Carolyn Bessette Kennedy fandom is. There are Instagram accounts devoted to her with like half a million followers. Were you aware of that when you decided on her as your point of entry?

I was aware there remains this evergreen presence in the fashion world. She’s a very unique. There are not many people that became as famous as she did that had no interest in fame. We’re so accustomed to people capitalizing on fame, monetizing fame. She was the antithesis of that. She wasn’t going to let you in. She did not give interviews. She did not pose on the cover of any magazines. She did not capitalize on it. If anything, she married him in spite of it. It only adds to the mystique of this woman that, on top of being classically stylish, we never really knew her.

And, despite all that, she remains this hugely famous figure.

But one of the more intriguing parts of telling this story is that she’s so memorialized as this one-dimensional fashion icon. There was just a giant life behind this person and an incredible career and friendships and relationships and a city that she loved and made her own. She was so much more. I appreciate the fact that her legacy has lived on, but she should be remembered for a lot more.

This is a rare Ryan Murphy production in which he does not have a writing or directing credit. Knowing that, and knowing that this was something that he was very interested in, what did he tell you about how he envisioned this project?

He was very influential from the beginning. He just really responded to it, and our visions for the show really aligned. When I gave him the first couple scripts, he was very supportive and encouraging. I think he has a dedication to his audience and that our ability to entertain them is a privilege that shouldn’t be wasted. He just has his finger on the pulse in that he’s well aware that when people are watching a show, they could be turning the channel at any moment or picking up their phone. We have a responsibility to keep people engaged. And when it came to the style and the aesthetic of the show, that’s just Ryan. He’s an incredibly visual person. I was very much fixated on the emotional beats of the show. But when we would meet and talk, he sees everything so vividly in a way that I don’t. In that way, we complemented each other. Ss soon as I would give him pages, he knew exactly how he wanted it all to look.

This is a high-profile project that, in many ways, is introducing you as a writer. And it is a huge moment for your two leads, who were in no way household names going into this. How were they prepped for all of the attention that was going to be on them? On my drive in today, I passed five billboards, that I counted, bearing their images.

That’s certainly not me preparing them. (Laughs.) I have no idea what this must feel like [for them]. That’s more Ryan’s wheelhouse: preparing people for stardom. But I can’t tell you how many days I sat on set, watching the two of them and thinking, “Oh, they have no idea how much their life is going to change.” People are going to want to watch the two of them for a very long time. I’ve never had that experience — working with someone that you’re friends and then thinking, “Oh, these people are going to be superstars.” But they’re taking it all in stride. All they wanted was for people to feel that they did justice to John and Carolyn, because they knew it was a very high bar. And I think people are responding positively.

Paul was cast like at the 11th hour, right?

I was literally asking Uber drivers and people on the street if they wanted to read for John. In my mind, if we didn’t find this person, then this show that I’d spent three years working would not come to fruition. We weren’t just looking for somebody that looks like John, which is hard enough as it is. You have to find somebody who looks like they vacation on Cape Cod, launched a magazine, can command a room and hold court with dignitaries. And their mother is Jackie Kennedy. There were so many variables that an actor had to possess in addition to looking like him. But when he came into the room and people saw him in person, it was like, “Oh, this is what we had in mind.”

You were originally an actor before you started writing. What do you consider yourself at the moment?

I grew up doing theater. I studied at a conservatory in New York after college. Performing on stage was always my first love. But, as you know, you very quickly realize how hard it is showing up to auditions for student films — that you weren’t being paid for — with tyrannical 18-year-old directors from Columbia and NYU. I was thinking to myself, “Oh, I don’t know if this is going to be for me.” Even the things I was booking I didn’t want anyone to see. When I started writing, it flipped a switch. It’s like I get to play every character in the script in my head.

Do you know what’s next for you?

I do, but I’m scared to say it out loud in case it doesn’t come into fruition. But it’s a different genre. I don’t know if I could write another love story right now, because I was so in love with the two of them and this project. I feel like I’m reeling from a breakup.

***

Love Story releases new episodes Thursdays at 6 p.m. PT/9 p.m. ET on FX/Hulu, streaming on Hulu.

March 6, 2026
Is Hollywood Dying?

For well over 100 years, Hollywood’s entertainment industry was the center of the cultural universe – both geographically and as probably one of the greatest brands in history. It had everything: glamour, intrigue, stars and talented people creating some of the most wonderful stories by way of the very best films and television shows ever produced.

People have historically come from all over the world to visit the big studios, to see where the stars lived and died, to be a part of the magic. At the risk of sounding too nostalgic, it was unlike anything else.

I admit I too was enamored and wanted to be a part of it all. After time on Wall Street, I moved to Los Angeles and established The Lippin Group in 1986 with the vision of creating a strategic, business-focused agency that specialized in entertainment and media. Over the last 40 years, we have worked with clients around the world, developed and implemented corporate and publicity campaigns across all platforms as they evolved.

But the Hollywood I experienced when I first arrived on the West Coast no longer exists. From the streaming wars and the rise of YouTube to a global pandemic, labor unrest and disruption generated by AI and M&A — not to mention the political climate and even destructive wildfires — the industry’s view of this “Roaring ’20s” is far different from the last one a century ago. But I believe we are still a long way off from pulling the plug. My optimism stems from this being an inspiring business and an essential part of our culture, something definitely worth saving.

Today, technology is largely seen as the culprit in this whodunit despite it having brought our industry unparalleled progress, including democratized influence, broadband audio and video access and never-before-available revenue opportunities. The issue is that while AI is increasing efficiency at unprecedented levels, it is also forcing us to change the fundamental foundations of the industry: human capital and creativity.

Or at least we think so. Is it possible to have the best of both worlds?

If we approach this with a different mindset anything is possible. One only needs to recall how following AOL’s disastrous acquisition of Warner Bros. a quarter century ago the entertainment industry concluded Hollywood and Silicon Valley were bad fits and the industry just wrote it off to a terrible decision.

Cut to today, with Paramount (with help from the visionary founder of tech giant Oracle, which recently acquired a stake in TikTok), soon to acquire the iconic Warner Bros. studio and its symbol of prestige TV, HBO. The consolidation has elicited Armageddon-like emotions in the creative community. This follows on the heels of Amazon’s acquisition of MGM and its prestigious library and IP, as well as Disney’s deal for 20th Century Fox assets.

While this technological takeover was happening, the industry was too busy to consider what it all meant because it was obsessively focused on meeting Wall Street’s quarterly earnings reports, including its demands for mass layoffs and production cuts to finance massive leveraged mergers. No long-term strategy needed.

Now that our industry is at a crossroads, let’s remember what kept our business on a straight and narrow course over the last 60 to 70 years — predictability resulting from a variety of secondary tiers after TV shows and movies had their network and theatricals runs. The 10 percent of deficit-financed network shows lucky enough to make it past four seasons would enter syndication or the international market with a hundred episodes, with the top sitcoms and episodic dramas poised to make billions of dollars for their creators. Successful theatrical films would go onto earn respectable pay TV and home entertainment dollars, meanwhile.

Streaming changed all of that. With a business model centered around generating tens and hundreds of millions of subscribers rather than ratings, Netflix bought up all the windowing rights so it would have the content in perpetuity.

Having said that, let’s recognize some opportunities:

— Hollywood risk takers must come back and accept less money upfront in exchange for backend rights. In essence, content producers, by foregoing large upfront compensation, could reap the rewards of long-term content ownership over an increasing number of distribution platforms as, for many years, the producers of network television series have done. They have produced their shows at a deficit, later realizing the greatest financial rewards when those shows were distributed in syndication. Taking risks like this would serve as a significant incentive to many producers and increase the supply of great content. And that would help keep Hollywood employed and subscribers pouring into streaming services.

— We have to also find ways to bring predictability back to our industry, while also being flexible so we can let the unpredictability work for us. For example, a serious analysis of content windowing is needed, not to force things to be what they once were, but to best balance consumer expectations with maximum revenues, while not throwing away what works to spite ourselves. Looking at this from a marketing point of view, we need to take a step back and see what works to maximize attention for content that costs billions to make, yet can be promoted so much better. Outside of the industry, I regularly find myself in conversations about the best shows and movies I’m watching, and more time is spent answering questions (What network is it on? How can I watch it? Is it released weekly or all at once?) than talking about the amazing work itself.

I’m not here to criticize the different business models that dictate the disparate strategies of each media company, but rather am espousing the need to find a way to swing the pendulum back to some form of predictability. That would not only make marketing messages easier to convey but allow companies investing so much in this content to maximize their ROI. The result would be increased revenue rather than mass layoffs of the very marketing and publicity teams who are charged with shining a spotlight on it.

And let’s not forget about all of the focus recently on theatrical windows. We are risking losing sight of the marketing benefits of having films in theaters, and the symbiotic relationship theatrical can have with streaming. People who see a giant billboard for a new movie but wait for it to become available on streaming are still seeing the giant billboard for a new movie.

— Let’s figure out how to lean into technology and make it work for us, while also embracing regulation of AI, collaboratively and across borders. We can’t ignore the tools in front of us that can allow us to spend more time strategically and analytically thinking about what’s next to make our business(es) thrive. But we must fight to protect name, image and likeness rights of individuals to ensure that guardrails are up that preserve the truth and punish malicious creation of deepfakes or revenge porn.

— Finally, we must look at the industry more globally than we already are. The world is flatter than ever, and international production is posing a risk to traditional Hollywood via tax incentives, etc., but also brings opportunities in terms of shared storytelling, breaking down cultural boundaries, and eliciting empathy.

Yes, it’s a challenge that productions are moving to other markets. But it’s also an opportunity for us to find amazing stories that we could bring to our audiences wherever they are. The reality is that “international” productions, even if subtitled or dubbed, are so much more accessible than they once were, universal storylines that translate across borders are being embraced, and people, especially younger generations, see all of the above as a net positive, not a burden.

To be successful today, we must take a cue from these consumers, and identify creativity wherever it resides – doing even more business with companies around the world. By the way, we can embrace this reality while also looking to, of course, preserve jobs and opportunities domestically. It isn’t a zero sum game.

The disruption of the entertainment world has been massive, but this isn’t new — Hollywood has faced disruption and claims of imminent extinction before. Can we recover from what has occurred? It is possible but only if the tech world and the traditional studio leaders who still hold high ranking positions in the industry get together and work out ways that are mutually beneficial – and do so with the entire international marketplace in mind. Then, and only then, will we see perhaps the greatest brand revival ever.

Dick Lippin is founder, chairman and CEO of The Lippin Group, a premier communications agency that specializes in representing companies, creators and content.

March 6, 2026
Calls grow for independent probe into deadly Iranian girls’ school attack

‘No excuse for killing girls in a classroom,’ UN experts say, amid push for justice after Minab primary school assault.

Calls are growing for an independent investigation into an attack on a girls’ school in southern Iran that killed 165 young pupils this week, with United Nations experts denouncing the deadly bombing as “a grave assault on children”.

In a statement on Friday, a group of UN experts said girls between the ages of seven and 12 were the main victims of the attack on the primary school in Minab on Saturday – the first day of the United States and Israel’s war against Iran.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“An attack on a functioning school during class hours raises the most serious concerns under international law and must be urgently, independently, and effectively investigated, with accountability for any violations,” they said.

“A strike on a school represents a grave assault on children, on education, and on the future of an entire community,” the experts said. “There is no excuse for killing girls in a classroom.”

Rights advocates have pointed to the Minab school attack as evidence of potential war crimes being committed by Israel and the US in a war that legal experts say was launched in violation of the UN Charter and in breach of international law.

They also say it is an example of the heavy toll Iranian civilians are paying amid the conflict, which has killed at least 1,332 people so far, according to the latest figures cited by Iran’s state media outlets.

Iran’s UN envoy, Amir Saeid Iravani, told reporters on Monday that the school was “deliberately destroyed” in US-Israeli attacks against the country. “As a result, 165 innocent schoolgirls were martyred. I repeat it – 165 schoolgirls martyred,” he said.

Investigations published in recent days suggest US President Donald Trump’s administration was responsible for the attack.

The Reuters news agency, quoting two unnamed US officials, reported on Thursday that American military investigators believe it is likely that US forces were responsible.

Using satellite imagery as well as verified videos and official statements, The New York Times also said US forces “were most likely to have carried out the strike” as they were attacking an adjacent naval base operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Wednesday that Washington was investigating the incident.

“The Department of War and the United States armed forces do not target civilians,” she said.

A coffin is carried during the funeral of mostly children killed in the attack on the school in Minab, Iran, on March 3, 2026 [Abbas Zakeri/Mehr News Agency via AP Photo]

UN human rights chief Volker Turk told reporters on Friday that, “whatever outcome there will be of the investigations, we hope they will be prompt and that they will be done in full transparency”.

“We also expect accountability to be served because obviously mistakes were clearly made,” Turk said in Geneva, Switzerland, stressing that “accountability is absolutely critical” along with redress and compensation.

“It is a lesson to be learned – a horrible, tragic lesson to be learned – when girls are killed in this way,” he said.

“I hope there will be not only guarantees of non-recurrence, but a review of all the standard operating procedures when it comes to these issues, and especially when it comes to conduct of hostilities.”

Meanwhile, DAWN, a US-based advocacy group, has urged Iran to give the International Criminal Court (ICC) jurisdiction over crimes committed on its territory since the war began.

“From the killing of over 150 students and teachers to strikes on hospitals full of newborns, every day more and more evidence emerges pointing to the commission of grave war crimes in Iran since the start of the war,” said the group’s executive director, Omar Shakir.

“Victims deserve justice. The mechanisms exist and the US has no veto over them.”

Mourners cry during the funeral of 165 schoolgirls killed in the attack on a primary school, in Minab, on March 3, 2026 [AFP]

March 6, 2026
‘Bridesmaids’ Reunion Set for Oscars With Kristen Wiig, Maya Rudolph, Melissa McCarthy and Rose Byrne (EXCLUSIVE)

Rose Byrne is not only going into Oscar night as a first-time nominee for her work in “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You,” but she’ll also be reuniting with her “Bridesmaids” co-stars.

Sources tell me that a “Bridesmaids” reunion is in the works during the ceremony with Byrne, Kristen Wiig, Maya Rudolph and Melissa McCarthy. Final details are currently being discussed.

The occasion will mark the 15-year anniversary of the hit comedy’s release. Directed by Paul Feig, “Bridesmaids” was written by Wiig and Annie Mumolo.

McCarthy earned the first of her two Oscar nominations for supporting actress. Wiig and Mumolo nabbed noms for original screenplay.

As Variety previously reported, Barbra Streisand is in talks to perform at the Oscars in tribute to her “The Way We Were” co-star Robert Redford.

Streisand is “in conversations” to sing during the In Memoriam segment of the ceremony, according to sources. It has not been decided if the In Memoriam segment would be a solo performance by Streisand or if she’d be joined by other artists.

Billy Crystal is set to lead a tribute to Rob Reiner with other stars of the late filmmaker’s movies, including Meg Ryan, appearing on stage at the same time.

Presenters set for the 98^th Academy Awards include Paul Mescal, Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Will Arnett, Priyanka Chopra Jonas, Gwyneth Paltrow, Adrien Brody, Javier Bardem, Kieran Culkin, Chase Infiniti, Mikey Madison, Demi Moore, Kumail Nanjiani, Zoe Saldaña and Rudolph.

Hosted by Conan O’Brien, the Oscars will take place on March 15 at the Dolby Theatre in Hollywood and be televised live by ABC and streamed on Hulu.

March 6, 2026
‘Frankenstein’ Lead Oscar Isaac, ‘La Llorona’ Director Jayro Bustamante Push for Guatemala Film Law

Guatemala is close to enacting its first film law. On March 10, its Congress will be entering into final discussions on Initiative 5906. If it passes, Guatemala will no longer be one of the few nations in Latin America without a legal framework for its audiovisual industry.

Leading the call for international support of this bill is FIPCA, the Ibero-American Federation of Cinematographic and Audiovisual Production, which has already gathered more than 3,500 signatures, including those of Guatemala’s leading voices: Óscar Isaac (“Frankenstein”) and Jayro Bustamante (“La Llorona,” “Ixcanul”) among others in the Ibero-American audiovisual industry.

“If we want to stop losing our talent and our stories, this law is essential. Until now, those of us who have stood out in the arts have been the exception rather than the rule. What truly matters is normalizing the idea that the country should actively support its cultural industries. Those of us who have found a voice in cinema today have done so largely thanks to the backing of film industries abroad,” Bustamante told Variety.

Said FIPCA president Ignacio Rey: “The Ibero-American audiovisual community is closely following this debate. In Latin America, film laws have proven to be effective tools for economic development and job creation. Guatemala is one of the few countries in the region that still lacks a specific legal framework and its approval would allow the country to fully integrate into international co-production networks.”

“For nearly 20 years, we have been fighting for a national film law. At the same time, we have continued making films — pushing against the tide, attending festivals, winning awards and placing our country on the global stage. It’s clear that with proper incentives and safeguards, we could build a strong, sustainable industry that truly contributes to the nation. We know there is still much work ahead, but we are motivated and inspired by these challenges,” said Joaquín Ruano, president of the Guatemalan Association of Audiovisual and Cinematography and FIPCA representative.

The initiative contemplates the creation of a Guatemalan Film Institute, a Film Promotion Fund, a Film Commission operating as a one-stop shop for international productions, a National Cinematheque and a National Higher School of Cinema, among others.

For Bustamante, whose films have represented his country three times in the Oscars’ Best International Feature category (“Ixcanul,”“La Llorona” and “Rita”), the lack of a film law has been a source of frustration for him and his peers. “The prevailing local mindset remains narrow. There are still claims that adding a one-dollar levy to each plane ticket—paid by foreign visitors—would somehow devastate international tourism. Some even argue that public support shouldn’t go to cinema at all, but to AI instead, so young people can make films that way. It is deeply disheartening to face such rigid, hyper-capitalist, free-market thinking.”

Data provided by FIPCA argues that “regional experience offers clear and measurable evidence. In Mexico City, the film industry contributes around 12% of local GDP; in the Dominican Republic, following the implementation of its film law, the sector increased national GDP by 0.32%; in Panama, the audiovisual sector forms part of the creative industries that represent close to 6% of GDP and in Costa Rica, these industries account for approximately 3% of GDP.”

Said Gabriela Sandoval, FIPCA vice president: “The regional figures are clear: where structured audiovisual policies exist — funds, film commissions, incentives — the economic impact is measurable, as a value chain is activated that goes beyond the cultural sphere. Guatemala already has talent and an international track record; what is now under discussion is whether the country chooses to turn that talent into a sustainable development policy.”

FIPCA led the drive to freeze the proposed changes to Argentina’s legislation which would have scrapped the traditional funding mechanism for its film-TV body INCAA. The petition it sent out, signed by nearly 1,000 Ibero-American film industry leaders, helped persuade Argentina’s congress to shelve the proposal and allow for two more years of public debate and advocacy.

March 6, 2026
Kurdish opposition mulls whether to trust Trump after Iran uprising call

Uncertainty over US and Israeli war aims is slowing the Iranian Kurdish opposition groups urged by President Donald Trump to rise up against the Islamic Republic, Kurdish analysts have told Al Jazeera.

From Trump’s call for Iranians to topple their government, to arguments from the United States that it was forced into attacking Iran by its ally Israel, to discredited claims that the strikes on Tehran were somehow defensive, Washington has yet to offer a clear explanation for its attacks on Iran or what its plans might be beyond them.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

That leaves potential allies, including Iranian Kurdish opposition groups, uncertain of what comes next. Of the various ethnic groups within Iran, it is the Kurds who are arguably the most organised and militarily experienced. Opposition sentiment towards the government in Tehran is also widespread.

Iranian Kurdish opposition groups have established political networks, fought rebellions against central government forces, endured repression and splits, and gained combat experience alongside other Kurdish movements from other countries, making them one of the few organised armed challenges to the Islamic Republic.

Kurdish opposition groups have also recently worked to heal divisions between themselves.

The Coalition of Political Forces of Iranian Kurdistan, a forum allowing many of Iran’s Kurdish opposition groups to coordinate activity against the Iranian state from their strongholds in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of Iraq, was announced on February 22, less than a week before US-Israeli strikes began on Iran, killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The strikes have devastated Iran, but many observers believe that a full defeat of the Iranian government is not possible with just air power. But with the US public largely opposed to the Iran war, and particularly the prospect of US soldiers on the ground following the Iraq war in the 2000s, the possibility of Iranian Kurdish forces leading the charge has been raised by Trump himself.

Trump said that he would be “all for it” in comments made on Thursday,

Several US media outlets have already reported that US officials have contacted leaders within the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, where many Iranian Kurdish opposition groups are based, to discuss facilitating a ground operation inside Iran.

Massively outnumbered by Iranian ground forces, estimated at around half a million, Iranian Kurdish opposition groups could likely only muster a maximum of 10,000 fighters, leading analysts to believe that they would be heavily reliant on US or Israeli support, including air strikes and supplying weapons.

However, given the experience of US alliances and the fickle nature of Trump, who has repeatedly shown himself willing to turn on even close allies, it remains unclear whether Iranian Kurds are prepared to risk the prospect of what Tehran warned on Friday would be widespread reprisals.

Iran’s army is estimated to number around half a million, dwarfing the 10,000 or so fighters analysts believe the combined Kurdish groups could muster [File: Vahid Salemi/AP Photo]

Past betrayals

“Kurdish political opposition to the Islamic Republic goes back decades,” Kamran Matin, a lecturer in international relations at the University of Sussex, told Al Jazeera.

“Since the early 1990s, they’ve been pushed into northern Iraq, where they’ve established a kind of modus vivendi with the Kurdistan Regional Government [KRG, or Kurdish region of northern Iraq],” Matin, who is Kurdish Iranian, said. “Given the stakes, any Kurdish offensive on the Islamic Republic would need the KRG’s buy-in.”

“If Trump declares victory halfway through and leaves a wounded republic in place, it will likely have both the means and the desire to punish the KRG and, importantly, the people there,” Matin added. “At the same time, they are not in a position to outright reject Trump’s request.”

The Kurdish experience of past US operations in the Middle East is far from reassuring. In 1991, after President George HW Bush called upon Kurds to rise against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, the ensuing rebellion went unsupported, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths and years of displacement.

Later, during the fight against ISIL (ISIS), Syrian Kurds became key US partners, only to see US support falter during the fallout from the 2017 Kurdish independence referendum in Iraq and again in 2019, when partial US withdrawals from northern Syria exposed Kurdish forces to Turkish offensives, forcing mass evacuations and deepening political marginalisation.

Frantic Kurdish refugees struggle for a loaf of bread during a humanitarian aid distribution at the Iraqi-Turkish border, April 5, 1991 [File: Yannis Behrakis/Reuters]

Despite that, Shukriya Bradost, a Kurdish-Iranian security analyst and researcher at Virginia Tech University, said that there was “cautious hope” among opposition groups that Iranian Kurds would be supported by the US.

“However, there is also concern that if Washington reaches an agreement with the remaining elements of the Iranian regime to end the war, Kurdish groups could once again be sidelined and left alone to face a new central government that might continue the same policies of repression,” Bradost said.

Knock-on effect on Iraq

The majority of the Iranian Kurdish armed opposition groups are based in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, which operates a regional government largely autonomous from Baghdad. Those groups include the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI), the Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK), Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK) and Komala.

The groups have been exiled there since the 1980s and 1990s.

Any move in response to Trump’s invitation could have serious consequences for the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, its fragile institutions, and its population of some 5 million people.

A plume of smoke rises near Erbil International Airport in Erbil on March 1, 2026 [File: Shvan Harki/AFP]

On Friday, Iran launched missile and drone strikes targeting the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan.

That followed comments from Ali Akbar Ahmadian, a member of Iran’s Defence Council, who told the semi-official Mehr news agency that Tehran could launch widespread attacks in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq, if local authorities failed to crack down on what he described as US and Israeli-backed rebel groups, allegedly plotting to enter Iran.

“The KRG has been very clear that it does not want to be part of a war with Iran,” Bradost said. “As a non-sovereign entity within Iraq, it is one of the weakest actors compared to sovereign states in the region and has therefore been among the first targets of Iranian retaliation.”

The Kurdish region of northern Iraq has faced repeated Iranian missile and drone strikes in recent years, Bradost said, with the United States offering little in the way of protection during those attacks.

“In addition, after the 2017 Kurdish independence referendum, Washington ultimately supported the Iraqi central government and Iran-backed Shia militia forces that moved against Kurdish-controlled areas,” Bradost continued. “Because of this history, despite the KRG’s long and up-and-down relationship with the United States since the 1960s, there is deep caution about becoming involved in any US or Israeli confrontation with Iran.”

However, despite that caution, as well as the ideological misgivings among many of the leftist Kurdish groups over partnering with the US and Israel, the timing may prove too great an opportunity to turn down.

The years of war that have followed the October 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel and Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza have seen Iran’s network of alliances throughout the region diminish in power. Likewise, the 12-day war of June 2025, allied to the current onslaught against Iran, have arguably made the Islamic Republic as weak as it has ever been.

“They’ve been fighting against the Islamic Republic for about five decades, with 50 years of repression before that under the Pahlavi regime,” Hemn Seyedi, of the University of Exeter, said. “The distrust is very real, but this might be the opportunity they’ve been waiting for.”

Mass protests across Iran in January – when thousands were killed – had shown the strength of feeling against the state, Seyedi said, and he believes many are likely to support a Kurdish rebellion.

“Everything I’m hearing from the Iranian Kurdish opposition in the [Kurdish region of Iraq] suggests we may see something in the next few days,” Seyedi said.

March 6, 2026
In a bid to counter China, Trump hosts a summit for Latin America leaders

Over the past two decades, China has quietly eclipsed the United States as the dominant trading partner in parts of Latin America.

But since taking office for a second term, United States President Donald Trump has pushed to reverse Beijing’s advance.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

That includes through aggressive manoeuvres directed at China’s allies in the region.

Already, the Trump administration has stripped officials in Costa Rica, Panama and Chile of their US visas, reportedly due to their ties to China.

It has also threatened to take back the Panama Canal over allegations that Chinese operatives are running the waterway. And after invading Venezuela and abducting President Nicolas Maduro, the US forced the country to halt oil exports to China.

But on Saturday, Trump is taking a different approach, welcoming Latin American leaders to his Mar-a-Lago estate for an event dubbed the “Shield of the Americas” summit.

How he plans to persuade leaders to distance themselves from one of the region’s largest economic partners remains unclear.

But experts say the high-level meeting could signal that Washington is prepared to put concrete offers on the table.

Securing meaningful commitments from Latin American leaders will take more than a photo op and vague promises, according to Francisco Urdinez, an expert on regional relations with China at Chile’s Pontifical Catholic University.

Even among Trump’s allies, Urdinez believes significant economic incentives are required.

“What they’re really hoping is that Washington backs up the political alignment with tangible economic benefits,” he said.

‘Reinforcing the Donroe Doctrine’

Already, the White House has confirmed that nearly a dozen countries will be represented at the weekend summit.

They include conservative leaders from Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago.

Mexico and Brazil, the region’s largest economies, have been notably left out. Both are currently led by left-leaning governments.

In a post on social media, the Trump administration framed the event as a “historic meeting reinforcing the Donroe Doctrine”, the president’s plan for establishing US dominance over the Western Hemisphere.

Part of that strategy involves assembling a coalition of ideological allies in the region.

But rolling back Chinese influence in a region increasingly reliant on its economy will not be an easy feat, according to Gimena Sanchez, the Andes director at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), a US-based research and advocacy group.

The US “is trying to get countries to agree that they’re not going to have China be one of their primary trading partners, and they really can’t at this point”, Sanchez said.

“For most countries, China is either their top, second or third trading partner.”

China, after all, has the second-largest economy in the world, and it has invested heavily in Latin America, including through infrastructure projects and massive loans.

The Asian giant has emerged as the top trading partner in South America in particular, with bilateral trade reaching $518bn in 2024, a record high for Beijing.

The US, however, remains the biggest outside trade force in Latin America and the Caribbean overall, due in large part to close relations with its neighbour, Mexico.

As of 2024, US imports from Latin America jumped to $661bn, and its exports were valued at $517bn.

Rather than choosing sides, though, many countries in the region are trying to strike a balance between the two powers, Sanchez explained.

Still, she added that the US cannot come empty-handed to this weekend’s negotiations.

“If the US is very boldly telling countries to cut off strengthening ties with China”, Sanchez emphasised that “the US is going to have to offer them something.”

What’s on the table?

Trump has already extended economic lifelines to Latin American governments politically aligned with his own.

In the case of Argentina, for instance, Trump announced in October a $20bn currency swap, meant to increase the value of the country’s peso.

He also increased the volume of Argentinian beef permitted to be imported into the US, shoring up the country’s agricultural sector, despite pushback from US cattle farmers.

Trump has largely tied those economic incentives to the continued leadership of political movements favourable to his own.

The $20bn swap, for instance, came ahead of a key election for Argentinian President Javier Milei’s right-wing party, which Trump supports.

Isolating China from resources in Latin America could also play to Trump’s advantage as he angles for better trade terms with Beijing.

A show of hemispheric solidarity could give Trump extra leverage as he travels to Beijing in early April to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Urdinez pointed out.

Then there’s the regional security angle. The US has expressed particular concern about China’s control of strategic infrastructure in Latin America and the critical minerals it could exploit in the region to bolster its defence and technology capabilities.

Bolivia, Argentina and Chile, for instance, are believed to hold the world’s largest deposits of lithium, a metal necessary for energy storage and rechargeable batteries.

The Trump administration referenced such threats in its national security strategy, published in December.

“Some foreign influence will be hard to reverse,” the strategy document said, blaming the “political alignments between certain Latin American governments and certain foreign actors”.

But Trump’s security platform nevertheless asserted that Latin American leaders were actively seeking alternatives to China.

“Many governments are not ideologically aligned with foreign powers but are instead attracted to doing business with them for other reasons, including low costs and fewer regulatory hurdles,” the document said.

It argued that the US could combat Chinese influence by highlighting the “hidden costs” of close ties to Beijing, including “debt traps” and espionage.

‘More aspiration than reality’

Henrietta Levin, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, believes that many Latin American countries would prefer to deepen economic engagement with the US over China.

But in many cases, that hasn’t been an option.

She pointed to Ecuador’s decision to sign a free trade agreement (FTA) with China in 2023 after it failed to negotiate a similar agreement with the US under President Joe Biden.

Some US politicians had opposed the deal as a threat to domestic industries. Others had encouraged Biden to reject it due to alleged corruption in Ecuador’s government.

Critics, though, said the resistance pushed Ecuador into closer relations with China.

“ When Ecuador signed their free trade agreement with China a couple years ago, their leader actually made quite clear that they had wanted an FTA with the US and would’ve preferred that,” said Levin.

“But the US didn’t want to negotiate such an agreement, and China did.”

As a result, Ecuador became the fifth country in Latin America to ink a free trade pact with China, after Chile, Peru, Costa Rica and Nicaragua.

For Levin, the question looming over this weekend’s summit is whether the Trump administration will step up and provide alternatives to the economic engagement China has already delivered.

Options could include trade agreements, financing for new development and investments with attractive terms.

But without such offers, Urdinez, the Chilean professor, warns that Trump will face limits to his ambitions of checking China’s growth in Latin America.

“Until Washington is willing to fill the economic space it’s asking countries to vacate, the rollback strategy will remain more aspiration than reality,” said Urdinez.

March 6, 2026
Nvidia Is Probably Done Investing in OpenAI and Anthropic, Says CEO—Why?
In brief

Nvidia signaled the end of its major investments in OpenAI and Anthropic.

The OpenAI-Anthropic feud is escalating fast after a Pentagon deal and federal backlash.

With this decision, Nvidia avoids choosing sides as AI labs clash with each other and Washington.
At the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media, and Telecom conference in San Francisco on Wednesday, Jensen Huang said Nvidia is likely done investing in AI giants OpenAI and Anthropic.

The $30 billion investment it just finalized into OpenAI was a steep drop from the $100 billion deal announced last September, and will likely be the last check. Same for the $10 billion it put into Anthropic in November.

The official reason sounds clean: Both companies appear to be heading toward IPOs later this year, and private deals of this nature close once that window opens.

“This might be the last time we’ll have the opportunity to invest in a consequential company like this,” Huang told the audience.

Granted, late-stage investors write checks right up to the IPO bell all the time, and the original $100 billion OpenAI commitment didn’t shrink to $30 billion because of some procedural IPO rule. Something else changed.

Nvidia now holds stakes in two companies in the middle of an all-out war with each other—and with Washington. Trump ordered all federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s technology after the company refused to let Claude be deployed for autonomous weapons or mass domestic surveillance. Within hours, OpenAI announced its own Pentagon deal—a move Anthropic publicly called “mendacious.”

The public sided with Anthropic. Within 24 hours of the back-to-back announcements, Claude shot to the top of the free app rankings on Apple’s U.S. App Store, overtaking ChatGPT. At the end of January, it was outside the top 100. An Anthropic spokesperson told Decrypt that it saw record signups in the days following the Pentagon’s move.

Meanwhile, the QuitGPT movement had claimed an estimated 2.5 million users taking action against OpenAI—canceling subscriptions or spreading the boycott—by the time the dust started settling.

Nvidia’s relationship with Anthropic was already strained before all this. Two months after putting $10 billion into the company, Dario Amodei stood at Davos and compared U.S. chip companies selling high-performance processors to approved Chinese customers to selling nuclear weapons to North Korea. He didn’t name Nvidia, but didn’t need to either.

There’s also the structural awkwardness of the whole circular economy behind Nvidia’s massive investments in AI startups. Nvidia invests in OpenAI, but OpenAI spends it on Nvidia chips. The circularity drew bubble comparisons.

Source: Bloomberg

What Nvidia is actually doing is getting out of the business of picking sides. It sells GPUs to OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, Google, and everyone else racing for the frontier. The arms dealer doesn’t get to have a favorite army.

Getting caught holding equity on both sides of a Pentagon standoff, in which one investee is increasingly hated and the other gets designated a national security supply-chain risk, is exactly the kind of mess that makes customers nervous.

The IPO story is a convenient door. Huang walked through it.

Daily Debrief Newsletter

Start every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.
March 6, 2026
Crypto Exchange OKX Debuts Social Platform Linking Posts to Trades
In brief

Orbit lets users discuss markets, host livestreams and execute trades directly from posts within the OKX app.

Performance data, including holdings, profit and loss, and trading history, can be displayed in real time using exchange-derived metrics.

The platform won’t initially be available in the U.S., Europe, Singapore, Australia or the UAE.
Crypto exchange OKX said Thursday it is rolling out a native social networking feature inside its trading app that allows users to discuss markets, disclose trading performance, and execute trades directly from posts.

The feature, called Orbit, embeds a real-time discussion layer into the OKX app where users can post trade ideas, host livestreams, and form groups while linking directly to tradable assets through cashtags such as $BTC or $ETH.

The launch reflects a broader push by trading platforms to blend social media with market activity.

Social trading platform eToro pioneered the model in 2010 with its OpenBook platform and CopyTrader feature, while crypto exchanges have since introduced similar tools, including Bybit in 2022 and by Binance on its futures platform in 2023.

The launch comes as OKX pushes further into traditional finance following an investment from Intercontinental Exchange, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, in a deal valuing the exchange at $25 billion and aimed at enabling tokenized stock trading.

OKX said Orbit aims to address a long-standing credibility issue in online trading communities, where influencers often share screenshots of profitable trades without independently verifiable records.

“When you view an Orbit user’s profile, you can toggle at the top between ‘posts’ and ‘performance,’” an OKX spokesperson told Decrypt. “These update in real time and are calculated based on the user’s trading history via the OKX app.”

Under the “performance” tab, users can view a trader’s holdings, total profit and loss, and “trading history (open, closed, and existing positions),” where leverage is also visible.

Those metrics can also be sorted across multiple time frames, including 7 days, 30 days, 90 days, and one year.

Users must first complete identity verification and comply with the platform’s terms of service before accessing Orbit, which is subject to the same KYC, AML, and transaction-monitoring controls applied across the exchange, the OKX spokesperson added.

Still, sharing the data is optional.

“The user can decide whether or not to share performance data, but cannot selectively edit or omit the data shown,” the spokesperson said, adding that the information displayed is derived directly from exchange data and “is not editable by the user.”

Orbit also introduces creator rewards tied partly to follower engagement and activity.

“Follower trading activity is one way to earn rewards,” the spokesperson said, adding that traders can also be rewarded for posting content, livestreaming and building communities on the platform.

The feature won’t initially be available in the U.S., Europe, Singapore, Australia, or the United Arab Emirates, markets where regulators have shown greater interest in social trading and online investment promotion.

The rollout has begun with a limited group of users and will expand after a beta phase.

Daily Debrief Newsletter

Start every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.
March 6, 2026
Olivia Rodrigo, Cameron Winter, Wet Leg and More Unveil New Songs on War Child’s Stellar ‘Help(2)’ Benefit Compilation: Album Review

The first “War Child,” a British-all-star charity album featuring rare tracks from such then-rising-ish stars as Oasis, Radiohead, Blur, Portishead and Massive Attack as well as Sinead O’Connor, Suede and the Stone Roses, arrived in September of 1995 — so long ago that the primary motivation at the time was to support the War Child charity’s efforts in Bosnia. The organization aims to deliver aid, education, mental health support and protection to children affected by conflict around the world; musically speaking, we can remember getting a specially burned advance CD of that album and being very excited about the new songs from Radiohead (“Lucky,” which of course would be a highlight of the “OK Computer” album almost two years later) and Portishead (“Mourning Air,” ditto their self-titled sophomore set).

Much more importantly, the album — recorded in a single day — raised over £1.2 million for War Child.

Some 31 years later, the sequel, “Help (2),” has arrived and was overseen by executive producer James Ford, known for his work with Arctic Monkeys, Depeche Mode, Pulp, Fontaines DC and many others. He put his address book to work here: There are new tracks — nearly all of which were recorded at Abbey Road Studios across one week last November — from all of the above artists (including the first new song from the Arctic Monkeys since 2022) as well as new songs from Olivia Rodrigo, Geese’s Cameron Winter, Arooj Aftab & Beck, Damon Albarn (with Johnny Marr on guitar), Wet Leg, Big Thief, Beabadoobee and many more — a whopping 23 songs in all, the full tracklist appears below. As the announcement notes, “The new album, like the original, speaks to the urgency of the humanitarian situation globally today.”

Bringing a critical take to such a well-intended album is always awkward, but highlights include the Arctic Monkeys’ first new song since 2022, an uncharacteristically low-key “Obvious” from Wet Leg, an unlikely tag-team on the Broadway song “Lilac Wine” from Arooj Aftab and Beck, a sensitive take on Sinead O’Connor’s hard-hitting “Black Boys on Mopeds” from Fontaines D.C., a sweetly soulful “Naboo” from Sampha, Big Thief’s “Relive, Redie” — and probably most of all, Olivia Rodrigo’s gorgeous, hushed take on Magnetic Fields’ “Book of Love,” from their 1999 classic album “99 Love Songs,” which she sings in a tone that summons “Drivers License” flashbacks.

There is also a visual component to the album, for which Academy Award-winning filmmaker Jonathan Glazer acted as creative director, working with Academy Films to assemble a team of creatives and overseeing the filming and art direction for the project. Glazer’s concept was “By Children, For Children”: Each child operated their own small camera and was invited into the studios to film the artists recording without any restrictions, according to the announcement. Glazer’s also team worked with fixers and filmmakers in Ukraine, Gaza, Yemen and Sudan to gather footage filmed by children on the ground in those conflict zones.

Most importantly of all, as the announcement states, “When ‘Help’ was first released, around 10% of the world’s children were affected by conflict. Today, that figure has almost doubled to nearly 1 in 5, or 520 million children worldwide; more than at any time since the Second World War. With conflicts escalating and funding cuts hitting hard, War Child U.K.’s work has never been more urgent and the need for these artists to carry forward the original album’s spirit of collective action could not be more vital.”

“Help(2)” Tracklist:

Arctic Monkeys – “Opening Night”
Damon Albarn, Grian Chatten & Kae Tempest – “Flags”
Black Country, New Road – “Strangers”
The Last Dinner Party – “Let’s do it again!”
Beth Gibbons – “Sunday Morning”
Arooj Aftab & Beck – “Lilac Wine”
King Krule – “The 343 Loop”
Depeche Mode – “Universal Soldier”
Ezra Collective & Greentea Peng – “Helicopters”
Arlo Parks – “Nothing I Could Hide”
English Teacher & Graham Coxon – “Parasite”
Beabadoobee – “Say Yes”
Big Thief – “Relive, Redie”
Fontaines D.C. – “Black Boys on Mopeds”
Cameron Winter – “Warning”
Young Fathers – “Don’t Fight the Young”
Pulp – “Begging for Change”
Sampha – “Naboo”
Wet Leg – “Obvious”
Foals – “When the War is Finally Done”
Bat For Lashes – “Carried my girl”
Anna Calvi, Ellie Rowsell, Nilüfer Yanya & Dove Ellis – “Sunday Light”
Olivia Rodrigo – “The Book of Love”

March 6, 2026