Blog

  • ‘Lanterns’ Stars Aaron Pierre, Jasmine Cephas Jones on John’s Backstory Episode and How Being Black Informs His Quest to Become Green Lantern: ‘Fear Is Instilled in Our Ancestry’

    ‘Lanterns’ Stars Aaron Pierre, Jasmine Cephas Jones on John’s Backstory Episode and How Being Black Informs His Quest to Become Green Lantern: ‘Fear Is Instilled in Our Ancestry’

    SPOILER ALERT: This article contains spoilers for Season 1, Episode 3 of “Lanterns,” now streaming on HBO Max.

    From the series’ opening scene, “Lanterns” sets up John Stewart’s (Aaron Pierre) calling to one day step into his own as Green Lantern. But it’s not until Sunday’s episode that we learn just how long John has been preparing and training — at the direction of his parents — to one day take Hal Jordan’s (Kyle Chandler) title.

    “It was a gift to have the opportunity to explore each of these characters with such enormous depth,” Pierre tells Variety of filming Episode 3. “It’s not a given that you get to have this much experience with a character, and live this much with a character in your portrayal.”

    In the latest “Lanterns” episode, John is grilled about his difficult life choices by one of the Guardians (Laura Linney) to see whether he’s worthy of replacing Hal. It’s the moment John has been waiting for all his life — the moment he gets to prove exactly why he is worthy of the ring.

    “I know exactly why me,” John says at the beginning of the interview.

    The episode cuts back and forth between John’s tense interview and his upbringing, revealing how John was conditioned to be fearless from a young age. The flashbacks show how desperate his parents become after John Stewart, Sr. (J. Alphonse Nicholson) is tested by the Guardians in the middle of the night, ultimately failing to become Green Lantern because he shows fear. Investing in John’s future is how the family finds salvation.

    As the son of somebody who had real potential to become Green Lantern, both John’s father and Bernadette (Jasmine Cephas Jones), his mother, recognize that if they do everything in their power, John will be the perfect candidate. In order to test him during his childhood, his parents do everything from shooting an apple off his head to leaving him stranded in a dangerous part of town, forcing John to fend for himself. They also lie, and tell him that the Guardians are always watching over him through birds.

    Knowing how everything John has done in his life has been with the goal of one day becoming Green Lantern, including joining the Marines and isolating himself from other people in his life, informed how Pierre played his budding dynamic with Chandler from the beginning.

    “He’s had a wealth of life experience, more life experience than people twice, three times his age have even come close,” Pierre says.

    Jones wanted to show that despite her stern attitude with John and forcing him to grow up, her love for her child always comes through.

    “I really wanted to show that militant side of her, and that she made that decision at a very young age for him, and that is his destiny,” Jones says. “No matter what happens, she’s gonna stick with it.”

    The biggest challenge was showing those moments of vulnerability when her character doesn’t speak, Jones says: “Like telling him to shoot a gun off of his father’s head, but then seeing in her face how much that breaks her.”

    When a young John learns that his parents lied to him about the Guardians always watching over him, he grapples with the reality that he wasn’t chosen, and will have to work harder than most people around him to prove that he’s worthy. At one point, Bernadette even tells him: “Sometimes, a Black man has to raise his own hand. Doesn’t mean you’re not good enough, doesn’t mean you’re not better. It just means they don’t see us.”

    “The importance of having no fear in a society, and also being a person of color in this country, fear is instilled in our ancestry as well,” Jones says. “That was also an important piece to talk about. How do we extract that for him to become the Green Lantern?”

    Nicholson adds: “It’s real, man. Yeah, I know we all want to escape from it but sometimes those questions need to be addressed even in our fictional worlds, right? Why do they make us have these feelings or why do they exist? And so just asking the questions sometimes allows room for people to talk about it. I think that’s what great writers do.” 

    The idea of raising John to be the next Green Lantern is largely born out of his father’s trauma. Investing in his son, and doing everything he can to give John the highest odds possible, becomes the only way he knows how to move forward.

    “He doesn’t want to let his son down. Essentially, he felt like he let himself down, he let his community down, let his wife down, so now it’s up to him to make sure that his son doesn’t feel that way and doesn’t go into the same spiral of depression,” Nicholson says. “It’s really cool to see him protect his son in a really tough way, but it’s tough love.”

    The major turning point in the episode comes when John takes matters into his own hands by shooting an apple off his mother’s head. He’s finally become exactly who his parents raised him to be.

    “It’s him taking a step into his own lane and really showing how fearless he is because that’s a huge risk, right?” Nicholson says. “He showed an immense amount of confidence, and I’m proud as his father to have shown him how to have that confidence early on.”

    As Pierre looks back on filming, one of the most enjoyable parts of the episode was getting to work with the child actors, including Jayce Eiland and Cairo Cash Lee, who play the younger versions of John.

    “They really need to be celebrated, acknowledged and commended for delivering all of the emotion and beyond that was necessary,” Pierre says. “It was very rare that we were working on the same location or on the same day because it’s a completely different timeline, but anytime I had the opportunity, I would definitely give them a fist and just tell them how proud I was.”

  • What are the implications of the US-Venezuela oil deal?

    Opposition in Venezuela as interim leader insists the deal with Washington will help with the country’s recovery.

    A new deal between Caracas and Washington would give US companies access to more than a fifth of Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

    But there’s opposition in Venezuela, as well as debate about whether the plan is legal.

    What could the agreement mean?

    Presenter: Tom McRae

    Guests:

    Jose Chalhoub – political risk and oil analyst

    Cornelia Meyer – commodity specialist and CEO of Meyer Resources

    Francisco Rodriguez – senior research fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research at the University of Denver, former head of the Economic and Financial Advisory of the Venezuelan National Assembly

  • Does photo show Hakeem Jeffries with Epstein?

    Does photo show Hakeem Jeffries with Epstein?

    In August 2026, an image appeared online claiming to show (archived, archived) U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., with the late financier and sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein. 

    According to some posts, the photograph was supposedly taken at an event in 2013. Snopes readers wrote in asking whether the image was real.

    (David J Harris Jr. via Facebook)

    We found that the photo not real, and was generated with artificial intelligence tools. The post was a good example of AI slop — low quality content produced using AI aiming to play the algorithm to go viral and make money.

    August 2026 wasn’t the first time the image went viral. Snopes debunked it months earlier. 

    Performing a reverse image search on Google showed the earliest example of the image was dated Feb. 11 and originated from the X account @DumbFckFinder — a finding supported by the “DFF” watermark to the right of Jeffries’ head. We reached out to the owner of that account hoping to confirm they created the photo, but had not heard back at time of publication. 

    That account describes its output as parody and satire. When Snopes first investigated the image, the account’s bio said it is “an AI-powered meme engine that turns stupidity into content,” reading:

    We use AI to create memes, songs, stories, and visuals that call things exactly how they are — fast, loud, and impossible to ignore. If something looks dumb, sounds dumb, or feels off, we turn it into something shareable.

    (The account’s bio has changed since then.)

    A reverse image search revealed the image had been posted only to social media, and never by prominent news media outlets. Given the scale of the Epstein case, prominent news media outlets would have widely reported this rumor, if true.

    Finally, we ran the image in the post through Google’s Gemini AI. Any image generated by Gemini contains a watermark called a SynthID. Gemini found that “most or all of this image was edited or generated with Google AI.” 

    To avoid errors, we recommend checking for other signs of AI on top of using SynthID screening tools since they can show false positives. In this case, our primary evidence was the X account’s original disclaimer that its output is “AI-powered.” 

    For further reading, Snopes previously reported on another story from the same account of a fake photo with Epstein and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

    For background, here is why we alert readers to rumors created by sources that call their output humorous or satirical.

  • Iran targets Jordan after first US attack in a month

    Iran targets Jordan after first US attack in a month

    The US has launched its first strikes on Iran in a month, hitting sites on Larak Island. Iran hit back targeting bases hosting US forces in Jordan. As Al Jazeera’s Manuel Rapalo reports from Washington DC the US says those missiles were shot down.

  • In Latest Threat Of Regulatory Retaliation, Donald Trump Says He’ll Report NBC News’ Kristen Welker To FCC For “Rebuke Or Punishment”

    In Latest Threat Of Regulatory Retaliation, Donald Trump Says He’ll Report NBC News’ Kristen Welker To FCC For “Rebuke Or Punishment”

    Donald Trump went off on NBC News‘ Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker on Sunday, vowing to report her to the FCC for “rebuke or punishment,” even as the agency is defending itself in a lawsuit brought by ABC alleging regulatory retaliation.

    The issue: A comment Welker made about the president’s endorsement record.

    On Truth Social on Sunday, Trump posted, “Kristen Welker, the Unpopular ‘Hostess’ of the once great Meet the Press, now considered Meet the Fake Press, just stated that Donald Trump has ‘mixed results’ on his Endorsements of Candidates, when the recent WINS of Darline Graham and Mike Mazzei, stand at 100% for the U.S. Senate, and 98% for the U.S. House, recently and over the longterm. How can anyone be allowed to say this, working for freely given Public Airwaves? Results are attached. Because of this purposeful inaccuracy, she will be reported to the FCC for rebuke or punishment. Unfortunately, she is not the only one. The Radical Left News is going out of their way to harass, demean, and libel anything ‘TRUMP.’ Their new weapon is to say that my 99% SUCCESS Rate on Endorsements, 100% on Senatorial Endorsements (Many of whom were not even given a shot of winning until I Endorsed!), is either a mixed result, or not very good. In actuality, it is, without question, the strongest Endorsement in the History of Politics.”

    Welker made the comment in an appearance on local Washington, D.C. affiliate WRC-TV on Sunday, not on Meet the Press itself, and said of Trump, “He’s going to loom large over these midterms. There’s no doubt about that. He, of course, has endorsed a slate of candidates in the primaries. He’s had some mixed results, but most recently, his pick of Senator Darline Graham, of course, the sister of the late Senator Lindsey Graham, was successful in her primary battle, so now she takes on Dr. Annie Andrews in South Carolina.”

    If there is a complaint filed, NBC likely would have a simple defense: What Welker said happens to be true. She wasn’t saying that he has a dismal record of endorsements, or even that a majority of his candidates have lost, only that there have been “some mixed results.”

    While Graham won the South Carolina primary last week, some other high profile figures who won endorsements from Trump have recently lost their races. They include Mike Lindell, who lost the GOP primary for Minnesota governor to Lisa Demuth, and Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN), who lost in his reelection bid to primary challenger Charlie Hatcher. Earlier, Rep. Randy Feenstra lost the GOP primary for Iowa governor to Zach Lahn, and Burt Jones lost the Republican primary for Georgia governor to Rick Jackson.

    ABC sued the FCC earlier this month on First Amendment grounds, alleging that some of its regulatory actions are retaliation by the Trump administration over its news reporting and other content. Among other things, the FCC under Chairman Brendan Carr has ordered the network’s eight owned stations to submit its broadcast licenses for early renewal. As part of the lawsuit, the network’s legal team cited Trump’s Truth Social and other threats to use to FCC to punish broadcasters.

    The FCC said in response, “All broadcasters have a legal obligation to operate in the public interest—even Disney.  The FCC has been examining claims that Disney engaged in illegal DEI discrimination for over a year.” A judge will hear arguments in October on the network’s request for a temporary restraining order to halt the FCC’s early license renewal order.

    Trump added in his Truth Social post, “The Press is a Disgrace to our Nation, and I hope that Chairman Brendan Carr, and the fine people of his Commission, will take this Threat to our Country very seriously. Thank you for your attention to this very important matter of Fake Polls and Commentary!”

    NBC News said in a comment, “Kristen is one of the best in the business and we stand by her.”

    An FCC spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment. Anna Gomez, the sole Democrat on the commission, said, “As I’ve said many times, the FCC has no authority to punish journalists this administration doesn’t like. These threats to press freedom are dangerous. They undermine the foundation of our democracy, and they have no place in it.”

    Trump also lashed out at polling. He posted on Truth Social, “THE FAKE POLLS USED BY OUR CROOKED MEDIA ARE OUT OF CONTROL, AND SOMETHING MUST BE DONE ABOUT IT. FCC TO THE RESCUE! President DJT”

    The FCC has a news distortion policy, but advises that its authority “is narrow.”

    “The agency is prohibited by law from engaging in censorship or infringing on First Amendment rights of the press.” the FCC states on its website. Any investigation is supposed to focus on claims that a news report “was deliberately intended to mislead viewers or listeners.”

    The agency says in its guidance, “The FCC does not investigate claims of collateral inaccuracy in news reports or differences of opinion over the truth or validity of aspects of a news program.”

  • 19 rumors about the US Navy, examined

    19 rumors about the US Navy, examined

    Investigating claims US sank unarmed Iranian ship and refused to rescue survivors

    Read More

  • Claim Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is linked to KKK lacks key context

    Claim Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is linked to KKK lacks key context

    • In August 2026, Republicans and right-leaning social media groups attacked Michigan Secretary of State and gubernatorial candidate Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, for supposed possible ties to the Ku Klux Klan via her work at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a prominent civil rights organization. 
    • In April, the Department of Justice indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on charges of fraud and money laundering. Prosecutors alleged the organization misled donors by using their money to pay informants in extremist organizations, including the KKK. 
    • The Department of Justice did not name Benson as a defendant and there is no evidence Benson knew the Southern Poverty Law Center paid informants. 
    • As of this writing, the courts have not ruled in the case. Legal experts have said the charges are politically driven and that the Justice Department has a weak case. 
    • We reached out to Benson’s campaign to ask about the claim and await a response. 

    In August 2026, Republican and right-leaning social media accounts shared posts attempting to tie Michigan Secretary of State and gubernatorial candidate Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, to the Ku Klux Klan. 

    These posts claimed Benson held a leadership role at the Southern Poverty Law Center — a prominent civil rights group known for tracking extremist groups — while it supposedly funneled money to the KKK.  

    “Secretary of State @JocelynBenson must explain to the people of Michigan her involvement with the Southern Poverty Law Center while it funded radical groups like the KKK and others that committed acts of racism against Americans,” said one X post from the official Michigan House Republicans account. 

    Similar posts circulated on Facebook. A conservative dark money group, America Next, ran an attack ad tying Benson to the KKK. Snopes readers searched the website for information about whether Benson was involved with the KKK or if she funneled money to it. 

    These claims are missing significant context. It is true that Benson once served on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s board. However, Snopes previously determined that there was no evidence the SPLC funneled money directly to extremist hate groups. The U.S. Department of Justice has alleged that the SPLC improperly funneled donor money to individual informants in extremist groups, including the KKK. 

    Benson is not named as a defendant in that case, nor is there any evidence she was involved in the SPLC’s now-defunct practice of paying informants. 

    We have not rated this claim as the Justice Department’s court case against the SPLC is ongoing as of this writing. 

    According to a May 2026 report from the The Detroit News, Benson described her role at SPLC as “mostly ceremonial” and said she was not aware of the group’s previous practice of paying informants. Benson also reportedly said the Justice Department’s indictment “smacks of something that’s purely political and retaliatory.” 

    We reached out to Benson for additional information about her time at SPLC and await a response. 

    Conservative groups have long criticized the SPLC for allegedly targeting right-wing groups. In 2025, during President Donald Trump’s second term, the FBI severed ties with the SPLC, claiming it “long ago abandoned civil rights work and turned into a partisan smear machine.”

    Legal experts have called the Justice Department’s case against the SPLC “not a valid indictment” and potentially a “targeted attack.” 

    Benson and the SPLC 

    Benson’s relationship with the SPLC started when she was a 19-year-old unpaid intern who worked as a researcher and undercover investigator. She posed as a freelance journalist to uncover and expose the plans of white supremacist leaders and groups, according to reports of her memoir. 

    According to Detroit Legal News, Benson moved to Alabama after college to work at the SPLC full time, which reportedly inspired her to go to law school. 

    In 2014, Benson joined the SPLC’s board of directors in an unpaid role, where she remained until at least 2018, according to tax filings.

    “Jocelyn Benson has spent her career advancing the unfinished work of the civil rights movement and expanding economic opportunity, including helping dismantle white supremacist and neo-Nazi extremist networks,” Benson campaign spokesperson Alyssa Bradley reportedly said to Bridge Michigan, a nonpartisan news outlet. 

    In July, Michigan House Republicans said emails from the Michigan Department of State indicated Benson had an ongoing relationship with SPLC. However, news outlets who reportedly obtained the emails said they mostly involved media inquiries about Benson’s time at SPLC. 

    If the emails included information about the informant program or the Justice Department’s indictments, Michigan Republicans certainly would have shared that in their news release. They didn’t. 

    DOJ indictments against SPLC 

    The indictments allege the SPLC secretly paid informants within various extremist groups more than $3 million in total to supposedly defraud banks and donors from 2014 to 2023, overlapping with Benson’s time as a board director. 

    However, as of this writing, Benson’s name does not appear in any of the Justice Department’s SPLC indictments. 

    Contrary to a claim from John James, Benson’s Republican opponent for governor, the indictments also did not claim that the SPLC funneled millions to the KKK, specifically. 

    According to the indictments, more than $3,500 allegedly went to one KKK member, more than $70,000 went to a former KKK member and more than $160,000 was funneled to an informant who “then sent funds to various violent extremist group leaders including the former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.” 

    The SPLC has not contested the existence of the informant program, instead stating it had a “long history” of assisting law enforcement using its informants. 

    “The government is blatantly mischaracterizing our efforts to successfully fight hatred and violent extremism, something we have done for decades,” SPLC’s interim president and CEO, Bryan Fair, said in an April statement. “At one moment, they are appreciating our work in destroying the Klan and now, they are saying the SPLC funded and promoted the Klan.” 

    The bottom line 

    It’s true that Benson worked for the SPLC and it’s true that the Justice Department accused the prominent civil rights organization of defrauding donors by secretly paying informants in extremist groups, including the KKK. 

    However, it’s misleading to claim that Benson has connections to the KKK, particularly because the Justice Department did not name her in the indictments. Furthermore, contrary to the framing of this claim, the SPLC has a long, documented history of fighting white supremacist ideology and filing lawsuits against the Ku Klux Klan. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice has not proven its allegations against the SPLC in court. 

    That’s not to say the SPLC hasn’t received its fair share of criticism from both sides of the aisle — just that there’s far more evidence the SPLC is anti-KKK than pro-KKK. 

  • A Back-to-School Win: MS Office 2019 Is Just $15 With No AI or Monthly Fees

    A Back-to-School Win: MS Office 2019 Is Just $15 With No AI or Monthly Fees

    TL;DR: Get Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2019 for one Windows PC for $14.97 through September 1.

    If you’re getting a student ready for the school year, or just need a reliable Office suite without the bells, whistles, and monthly fees, Microsoft Office 2019 Professional Plus is now just $14.97 (MSRP $229) with instant delivery.

    This version includes all the essentials: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, OneNote, Publisher, and Access. That means you or your student will have everything you need to write papers, build spreadsheets, create presentations, and manage emails without a subscription or cloud dependency.

    Office 2019 is also AI-free, making it a solid choice for students who need to focus on learning the material rather than generating it. For parents, it’s a smart way to give kids the tools they need without giving them access to AI-powered shortcuts.

    The license is a one-time purchase for one Windows PC, and setup is simple. You’ll get instant access to download links and product keys right after checkout.

    Recommended by Our Editors

    Download Microsoft Office for Windows while it’s still $14.97 (MSRP $229) through September 1.

    Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2019

    For Windows


    $14.97
    at StackSocial

    $229.00
    Save $214.03


    Get Deal

    Prices subject to change. PCMag editors select and review products independently. If you buy through StackSocial affiliate links, we may earn commissions, which help support our testing.

    About Our Expert

  • Finneas O’Connell and Claudia Sulewski Are Married

    Finneas O’Connell and Claudia Sulewski Are Married

    Finneas O’Connell and Claudia Sulewski have officially tied the knot!

    O’Connell, a musician, producer and Billie Eilish‘s brother, and Sulewski, a YouTuber, actress and founder of Cyklar skincare, got married on Saturday in Montecito, California, surrounded by family and friends, according to Vogue.

    The Grammy and Oscar winner knew something was special about Sulewski from the moment they first met on a dating app in 2018. He previously told BuzzFeed that he wrote his song “Claudia” on the first night they spent together. The singer also wrote his 2022 song “Mona Lisa, Mona Lisa” about Sulewski.

    After years together, they got engaged in September 2025 when O’Connell popped the big question during a romantic sunset proposal. “Forever and ever 9.22,” the pair captioned a joint Instagram post at the time.

    Last year, during an appearance on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, O’Connell opened up about the proposal and the challenge of keeping it a secret from Sulewski.

    “I’m very relieved that it happened,” he said. “I feel like it really taught me that I’m not cut out to rob banks or steal cars or something because I was keeping a joyous, happy secret for several weeks, and it ate me alive.”

    Neither O’Connell nor Sulewski has personally shared details about their big day yet, but Vogue reported Sulewski wore four looks throughout her wedding weekend, all designed by Oscar de la Renta, including one for the rehearsal dinner, another for the ceremony, a third look for the reception and the last one for the afterparty.

  • Brutally Honest Emmy Ballot: “‘DTF St. Louis’ Should’ve Been Called ‘WTF St. Louis,’” ‘Widow’s Bay’ Is “Far and Away the Best” Comedy on TV

    Brutally Honest Emmy Ballot: “‘DTF St. Louis’ Should’ve Been Called ‘WTF St. Louis,’” ‘Widow’s Bay’ Is “Far and Away the Best” Comedy on TV

    Per longstanding annual tradition, The Hollywood Reporter granted anonymity to a member of the TV Academy — this year a male Emmy-winning member of the organization’s producers peer group — in return for candor about why he made the choices that he did on his Emmys ballot.

    We share “Brutally Honest Ballots” not because the views of any single member are representative of the views of all 27,000 members; obviously, they are not. Rather, we believe that they can offer interesting and valuable insight into the sorts of things that are on voters’ minds as they decide what and whom to support.

    Unlike many of the other outlets that have shamelessly ripped off this feature without acknowledgment, THR waits until voting has closed before sharing any ballots and views.

    The 78th Primetime Emmy Awards will take place on Sept. 14, and will be preceded by the Creative Arts Emmy Awards on Sept. 5 and 6. Follow THR.com for complete coverage.

    * * *

    BEST DRAMA SERIES

    I skipped The Gilded Age — I’d rather prep for a colonoscopy than watch another period drama. I also did not watch A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms — I’m completely Throne’d out. Your Friends and Neighbors, a dumb show about entitled people who I don’t care about, got nominated over Industry — what the fuck? I’m a fan of Vince Gilligan, but there’s a sort of arrogance to Apple TV shows, including Pluribus, where they’re like, “We don’t really care if you watch. We don’t need to grab you in the first episode.” For a couple of episodes I was like, “Is this show ever going to fucking get going?” And then I bailed. Slow Horses has had better seasons. Task is in the wrong category [more on this later]. I really liked Paradise — I could watch Sterling K. Brown read the phone book, and Shailene Woodley was a great addition. I loved this season of The Diplomat, and as a West Wing fan it was pretty great seeing Allison [Janney] and Brad [Whitford] back together. But The Pitt is the best show on television, made by people who have been working at such a high level for so long that they’ve forgotten more about how to make great TV than most people will ever know. There isn’t a bad piece of casting, or acting, or writing, or directing. And the fact that the show comes back after six months? Some shows go away for years between seasons and when they come back they’ve lost all of their momentum — The Old Man, for instance — but these guys are already well into season three. Just please don’t kill off Noah Wyle!

    My vote: The Pitt (HBO Max)

    BEST COMEDY SERIES

    I’ve had it with The Bear. It’s not a comedy, it’s never been a comedy, it’s a terrific drama — although I didn’t love the way it ended — and it should be in the drama category. Only Murders in the Building is a big yawn for me. Margo’s Got Money Troubles? I watched one-and-a-half episodes, didn’t get it. I don’t love the stereotypes of Nobody Wants This — it leans into a bit of caricature for both Jews and Gentiles, and that makes me uncomfortable in the world that we’re living in now. I’ve loved Abbott Elementary and Shrinking, but these weren’t their best seasons. Enough of Hacks. This was an easy decision: Widow’s Bay is far and away the best. It came out of nowhere, and it had me from the first episode — it’s funny and clever, and I loved that, like The Pitt, it was put out in the old style of one episode a week, with everyone talking about it the next day and looking forward to the next one. Hiro Murai is probably the best director in television right now.

    My vote Widow’s Bay (Apple TV)

    BEST LIMITED OR ANTHOLOGY SERIES

    Two shows should’ve been nominated in this category that weren’t: I don’t understand how Death by Lightning got overlooked, and I think Task [nominated for best drama series] belongs in this category — it was created as a limited series, it aired as a limited series, and then they decided, “Well, maybe we’ll do another season and have it overlap with Mare of Easttown,” but the reality is that this show ended. If Beef is a limited series — and it is, with a mediocre installment this season — then Task is a limited series. I had a problem with Love Story, just as I did with Winning Time: if you take living people, turn them into characters, and then disparage them, you should be sent to an island and never allowed to make television again. I hated what they did to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Jerry West with Winning Time, and what Love Story did to Daryl Hannah was inexcusable. DTF St. Louis should’ve been called WTF St. Louis — Jason Bateman is lovely, but the show is terrible. Who are you supposed to be rooting for? Sarah Snook was great in All Her Fault, but I grew bored with the way the story was told. I voted for The Beast in Me because the performances were all strong and there were some good scares and twists in it.

    My vote The Beast in Me (Netflix)

    BEST MOVIE

    This category is not “television movie” anymore, just “movie,” which is as close as we’re going to get to them acknowledging that it’s no longer about MOWs [Movies of the Week] and, for the most part, is now just filled with movies that weren’t good enough to get a theatrical release — what a fucking joke. I never heard anything about Miss You, Love You or People We Meet on Vacation, so I didn’t watch them. I refused to watch Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan — first of all, enough of Jack Ryan, and second, I hate Amazon, I don’t buy Amazon products and Jeff Bezos should stay the fuck out of our business. I could only get through half of Heads of State. But Remarkably Bright Creatures is the kind of television movie — not movie — that used to win: a small, quiet story, told beautifully, with wonderful actors. Sally Field is amazing in it, Lewis Pullman is a star, and the melding of puppetry, live and visual effects with that octopus was pretty amazing.

    My vote Remarkably Bright Creatures (Netflix)

    BEST VARIETY SERIES

    I think it’s a stupid rule change [to now ask voters to select “yes” or “no” beside each nominee in this category to indicate if it is worthy of a win, and then award statuettes to any/all nominees that garner 90 percent “yes” votes; if none do, then the single highest-tallying nominee will be declared the winner]. Colbert and Kimmel are both an easy “yes” for me because I think our industry needs to speak up and defend First Amendment rights — what happened to Colbert and Kimmel is inexcusable. “Yes” also to Oliver — it’s a great show and I always vote for him. “Yes” to The Daily Show because of Jon Stewart, whose night [Stewart hosts Monday nights] is appointment television. And I’m sorry, but “no” for Saturday Night Live — it wasn’t a good season, the new people weren’t great, and the old people are getting a bit stale.

    My vote “Yes” for The Daily Show (Comedy Central), The Late Show With Stephen Colbert (CBS), Jimmy Kimmel Live! (ABC) and Last Week Tonight With John Oliver (HBO)