Revelers across the US brave heat and heavy downpours to celebrate Fourth of July
BY STEVE LEBLANC Published 3:14 PM CDT, July 4, 2023
James Tyler, 19, tilts his head back so the popcorn he is eating on the back of a decorated Jeep won't catch on his artificial Uncle Sam mustache after Tuesday's Independence Day parade in Buffalo Gap, Texas Tuesday, July 4, 2023. (Ronald W. Erdrich /The Abilene Reporter-News via AP)">
BOSTON (AP) — Revelers across the U.S. braved heat and heavy rain to take part in Fourth of July activities Tuesday — celebrating the nation’s founding with parades, fireworks and hot dog eating contests at a time of lingering political divisions and concerns about the country’s future.
In Boston, people dodged raindrops to nab a coveted space on the grassy oval in front of the Hatch Shell along the Charles River ahead of the traditional Boston Pops Fireworks Spectacular. Hundreds of thousands of partygoers typically line both sides of the river for the fireworks spectacular that follows a concert.
At another longstanding celebration, fans of competitive eating crowded to watch Nathan’s Famous Fourth of July hot dog eating contest held in the Coney Island section of New York City.
Heavy downpours interrupted the contest, but after the pause, Joey “Jaws” Chestnut swallowed 62 franks and buns in 10 minutes.
“What a roller coaster, emotionally,” Chestnut said. The 39-year-old from Westfield, Indiana, first competed for the title in 2005 and hasn’t lost since 2015.
New York wasn’t the only state where weather factored into events.
The 10-kilometer Atlanta Journal-Constitution Peachtree Road Race that typically draws thousands of runners in humid summer weather was cut short due to possible thunderstorms.
Farther north, fireworks show in Yankton, South Dakota, was postponed until Wednesday night because lightning prevented crews from setting up the display. In Nebraska, the Omaha Symphony’s Independence Day Celebration that includes a concert and fireworks shows were also postponed until Wednesday night.
New Orleans residents welcomed rain and slightly cooler conditions after days of heat and humidity baked the city. The General Roy S. Kelley fireboat was returning to New Orleans Riverfront for a patriotic water show, sending streams of red, white, and blue water into the air.
President Joe Biden hosted a barbecue for military families at the White House, which was decked out with red, white and blue bunting and big U.S. flags draped over the columns facing the South Lawn. Biden told the crowd gathered how grateful he was for their service. And he talked about how important it was to work to unify the nation.
“Democracy is never guaranteed,” Biden said. “Every generation must fight to maintain it.”
Vice President Kamala Harris was in her home state of California, where she visited a Los Angeles fire station to pay tribute to first-responders who she said risk their lives for their community.
“On this Independence Day, we came by to thank them, and to let them know we think of them all the time,” Harris said.
While the holiday put a spotlight on how Americans carry different views of patriotism, many people embraced the holiday with whimsy and a sense of community.
In Hannibal, Missouri, the hometown of Mark Twain, the Fourth of July weekend coincides with National Tom Sawyer Days. Fence-painting and frog-jumping contests were held.
Altoona, Iowa, dubbed its celebration “CORNival.” In addition to the nod to America’s birthday, the festival marks the 100th anniversary of the first acre of commercial hybrid seed corn, grown and harvested in Altoona in 1923. Twenty 6-foot-high fiberglass corn cob statutes decorated by local artists were being unveiled and will later be placed around the town of 21,000 residents.
In Joppatowne, Maryland, hundreds of people lined up at a Sheetz gas station to pump regular fuel at $1.776 per gallon, WBAL-TV reported. Sheetz set the price per gallon in commemoration of the year the Declaration of Independence was signed, according to a statement posted on the company’s website.
And in the east Tennessee city of Gatlinburg held its annual Independence Day midnight parade early Tuesday. George Hawkins, who created the parade, died Saturday, news outlets reported.
Running events were a feature of many celebrations.
In Lexington, Kentucky, about 2,000 people ran through the city’s downtown. Stephanie Thurman told WKYT-TV that the race had been on her bucket list. “I started these races here in 2019; I turned 50. That was one of the things on my bucket list, so I did that, and ever since then, I was bit by the bug,”
Hundreds participated in Alaska’s Mount Marathon, a grueling mountain race that features steep inclines, loose rock and shale that the top runners seemingly fly over on their way down. It’s an Independence Day tradition in coastal Seward, a town of about 2,500 people south of Anchorage.
Some cities were eschewing firework displays for shows in which drones fitted with lights are coded to create massive, moving shapes in the sky. Los Angeles, Tahoe City, California, Salt Lake City, and Boulder, along with a few other Colorado towns, have opted for the the aerial spectacles that can display an expansive American flag and the year 1776 in red, white and blue. Avoiding explosive fireworks limits the danger of fires in states already devastated by massive burns.
The air pollution agency for Southern California issued an alert for potential health problems caused by high levels of airborne particles from fireworks. The particulate advisory by the South Coast Air Quality Management District is in effect through Wednesday in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
The Chicago suburb of Highland Park, where a shooting at least year’s Fourth of July parade left seven people dead, also held a drone show to avoid the startling noise of fireworks.
Gun violence also marred some of the celebratory atmosphere, as shootings left five dead in Philadelphia and three dead in Texas.
Fireworks also led to at least one death, in western Michigan. Nine other people were injured in that fireworks explosion on Monday, the Ottawa County Sheriff’s Department said.
Grammy Award-winning group Boyz II Men, singer Babyface, rock band Chicago and singer Belinda Carlisle will all perform at the 43rd edition of “A Capitol Fourth,” the July 4th concert and fireworks celebration broadcast on PBS. The celebration is happening outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C.
The July 4 event begins at 8 p.m. ET. Watch in the player above.
This year’s Capitol Fourth will be hosted by Fresh Prince of Bel-Air actor and America’s Funniest Home Videos’ Alfonso Ribeiro.
Past Capitol Fourth Concerts have featured television and music stars including singer Patti LaBelle, composer John Williams and actor Steve Martin and the Muppets from Sesame Street.
That's it. Most are decent, hardworking, honest people ..
"Think about it. SIX-TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT of the South were slaveholders while 75 percent of white southerners lived in DEEP poverty.
Yet, much like the Capitol rioters who were prepared to die on January 6, for a grifting con-man who'd never known hunger or had to go without, who (according to some Capitol rioters) USED them, and who even now, in the face of serious charges, is STILL siphoning and pocketing campaign contributions,
110,000 poor "sons of the Confederacy" died on the battlefield (and by some estimates, many more from associated causes) to preserve the wealth of a few slaveholders, killing an estimated 94,000 fellow Americans in pursuit of their "cause."
They were USED by the powers that were. Because, like now, all that was needed was for someone to stoke their hatred for some "other."
Fortunately however, OTHER Americans rose to the challenge - whether to defend Democracy, preserve the Union, or fight for a NOBLER cause. And now, at this point in our country's history, is up to US to rise up for an equally noble cause. "
2020 was important. 2024 even more. Fact beats fake.
U.S. is barred from combating disinformation on social media. Here's what it means
"This Independence Day Let's COMMIT to Saving Democracy"
By Laurel Wamsley, Shannon Bond Updated July 5, 20237:20 PM ET
Visitors stand near screens displaying the Meta logo in Berlin on June 6. Under a U.S. judge's new ruling, much of the federal government is now barred from working with social media companies to address removing content that might contain "protected free speech." Tobias Schwarz/AFP via Getty Images
The government's ability to fight disinformation online has suffered a legal setback that experts say will have a chilling effect on communications between federal agencies and social media companies.
On Wednesday, the Justice Department filed a notice that it will appeal the injunction with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. The government also expects to ask the court to stay the district judge's decision, meaning it would not go into effect while the appeal is heard.
What is this lawsuit about?
The case, brought by the Republican attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana, addresses what has become a highly contested subject: the demands by some conservatives for "free speech" on social media platforms, versus the desire to rein in misinformation and disinformation that could lead to real-world harm.
The AGs' argument ties into a larger Republican narrative that conservatives are being censored on social media for their views. Democrats have faulted the platforms for not doing enough to police misleading and false claims, hate speech, and incitement to violence.
"It's hard to think of a more sweeping ruling," says Evelyn Douek, an expert on the regulation of online speech and a professor at Stanford Law School.
"The injunction enjoins tens of thousands, maybe hundred [of] thousands of federal government employees from having almost any kind of communication with private platforms about content on their services," Douek tells NPR. She notes that while there are exceptions for certain types of criminal content, overall, the "clear message is to have this sort of chilling effect on communication between the government and platforms."
What does the judge's ruling say?
Doughty issued a temporary injunction blocking agencies including the departments of Justice, Health and Human Services, and State, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the FBI and many individual government officials from doing things like notifying platforms about specific posts that may be against their own rules or asking for information about content moderation efforts.
Preliminary injunction ... Judgement ...
The ruling provides exceptions for the government to inform social media companies about posts involving criminal activity, national security threats, and foreign interference in elections.
There are also a couple of pretty broad exceptions: Exercising "permissible public government speech promoting government policies or views on matters of public concern" is permitted, as is interacting with social media companies about posts that are not protected free speech.
The injunction bans interactions such as "meeting with social-media companies for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms".
It also blocks federal agencies from flagging specific posts that contain protected free speech, encouraging social media companies to change their guidelines regarding such posts, or asking the companies to "be on the lookout" for such postings.
Why does this matter?
This ruling severely curtails the federal government's ability to interact with social media companies about what appears on their platforms.
The injunction is written very broadly, potentially banning the Biden administration from even talking publicly about what moderation of social media content could look like.
Does the injunction specify which social media companies the government can't talk to about this content?
Yes. It lists Facebook/Meta, Twitter, YouTube/Google, WhatsApp, Instagram, WeChat, TikTok, Sina Weibo, QQ, Telegram, Snapchat, Kuaishou, Qzone, Pinterest, Reddit, LinkedIn, Quora, Discord, Twitch, Tumblr, Mastodon "and like companies."
What counts as "protected free speech"?
"That's clearly the $64,000 question," says Mark MacCarthy, a tech policy expert and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. But he notes that no one is really disputing that the sort of content the lawsuit identifies the government communicating with tech companies about is protected speech.
"It was pretty clear on the part of everybody involved in this, that the speech involved was clearly protected by the First Amendment," he says. "It was statements about whether the election was fraudulent or accurate. It was statements about whether vaccines worked or not. And while those things maybe have scientific answers, the unscientific answers are clearly protected speech."
The Biden administration says it isn't telling social media companies what to take down or how to set policies, but that it has an interest in promoting accurate information about urgent issues like public health and elections, and curbing the spread of illegal material including terrorism and child sex abuse.
What else is in the injunction?
The ruling also prevents federal officials from working with third parties including the Election Integrity Partnership, the Virality Project, and the Stanford Internet Observatory — three academic research groups that track the spread of online information. Republicans have accused the Biden administration of attempting to outsource its alleged efforts to stifle speech to outside organizations and academics.
How big of a change will this be? Do we know how much the government has been working with social media companies to remove or suppress this content?
Douek says not enough is known about what sort of contact tech companies regularly have with government agencies and officials. "If there's any sort of saving grace or positive of this judgment, it's to sort of shed some light on the kinds of relationships that the platforms have," she says.
Social media companies have a wide range of relationships with governments, she says, from informal conversations to formalized reporting mechanisms to regular private meetings. These interactions accelerated after the 2016 election, reflecting criticism that tech platforms had not done enough to combat Russian efforts to interfere in the presidential race, and again during the pandemic, when officials worried that false and misleading social media posts could erode confidence in vaccines and advice from public health experts.
Douek says it's legitimate to ask about the relationships between platforms and the government and how to balance the government's interest in promoting accurate information against the threat of governmental overreach.
But she says Doughty's ruling is "painting with a very broad brush and saying any and all contact is really problematic. And I think that that goes too far and will have dramatic ramifications for the way that these platforms operate."
MacCarthy says the judge's tone was "a little bit over the top" and "apocalyptic," but the free speech issues involved in the case are real.
"I know it's a matter of the paranoia of the conservative groups that they're being victimized by shadowy agents and the government," he says. "But these are not one-sided partisan issues here. These are issues that everyone should be concerned about."
What does the Biden administration say about this?
The Justice Department is reviewing the injunction and will evaluate its options in the case, a White House official told NPR.
"This administration has promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety, and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections," the official said in a statement. "Our consistent view remains that social media platforms have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects their platforms are having on the American people, but make independent choices about the information they present."
NPR reached out for comment from Meta (the parent company of Facebook and Instagram), Google and Twitter. None had any comment on the ruling.
What happens next?
The Biden administration is appealing the ruling, and the case may ultimately make it to the Supreme Court. The White House has regularly criticized tech companies for not doing enough to combat false and misleading claims about public health and elections on social media. The current conservative-leaning Supreme Court has ruled in favor of First Amendment rights over other considerations recently, including siding with a web designer who did not want to have to work with same-sex couples .. https://www.npr.org/2023/06/30/1182121291/colorado-supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-decision .
[Insert: It is important to note - A web designer who had not designed a web page. And had not been approached by any gay couple. What the Supreme Court's gay wedding website ruling means for LGBTQ rights [...]And, even though Friday’s decision was narrow, some experts said it could be expanded in coming years to slowly chip away at nondiscrimination laws that prevent businesses from discriminating against people based on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age and other protected classes. P - “A hairstylist is expressive, an architect provides an expressive service, a college application essay assistance service is expressive, a photography studio provides expressive services,” said David Cole, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, who argued a case before the Supreme Court involving a Christian baker in Colorado .. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-hears-why-baker-refused-make-wedding-cake-gay-n826706; .. who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple .. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/masterpiece-cakeshop-owner-court-again-denying-lgbtq-customer-n1184656; . P - “So does this mean that a corporate photography studio could refuse to take portraits of women because of the belief that women should not work outside the home? The majority, said Cole, “does not take on that core question, which is, what is the limit of their decision?” Photo Christian website designer Lorie Smith sued the state of Colorado in 2016, arguing that its anti-discrimination law — which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations based on race, creed, disability, sexual orientation and other protected classes — violates her right to free speech under the Constitution’s First Amendment. Smith argued that she should be able to refuse to provide her creative services for same-sex weddings, which go against her religious beliefs. She never faced penalties for refusing a same-sex couple and sued on hypothetical grounds. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172252772]
Even before this ruling, social media companies had already been backing off policies about COVID-19 and election integrity as they have come under pressure from Republican politicians and conservative activists — suggesting how politicized this topic has become and will continue to be.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
