geoff bennett is away. on the newshour tonight. big tech executives are grilled by federal lawmakers, accusing them of failing to protect children online. as it prepares to strike back, the u.s. blames a powerful iran backed militia in iraq for a deadly attack on american troops. and a conservative critic of donald trump on what his possible renomination could mean for the gop and the country. >> the anger and rage, desire to target, willingness to use methods that are

anti-constitutional. the fascination with violence. these are characteristics that are different kinds of politics than in the past. ♪ > major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> cunard is a proud supporter of public television. on a voyage with cunard, the world awaits. a world of flavor, diverse destinations, and immersive experiences. a world of leisure. and british style. all with cunard's white star service. >> consumer cellular, this is sam. how may i help you? this is a pocket dial. somebody's pocket thought i

would let you know with consumer cellular, you get nationwide coverage with no contract. that is kind of our thing. have a nice day. >> the walton family foundation. working for solutions to protect water during climate change so people and nature can thrive together. supported by the john d and catherine t macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station and viewers like you. thank you. >> welcome to the newshour.

senators grilled ceos of top social media companies. hearing about child safety online that was emotional, heated, and contentious. lawmakers tried to get companies to back proposed legislation, but much of the hearing was focused on questions of accountability, including over the deaths of children. lisa desjardins begins our coverage with this report. >> before one word of testimony, a silent statement. family members greeted tech ceos by holding up photos of loved ones. children they say were harmed by social media. senators quickly voiced the sharp sentiment in a packed room. >> mr. zuckerberg, you and the companies before us, i know you don't mean for it to be so, but you have blood on your hands. you have a product that is killing people. >> the ceos of metta, x tiktok, snapchat, and discord arrived after some were issued subpoenas to defend their platforms

against charges they don't do enough to protect kids. >> we partner with nonprofits, law enforcement, and tech colleagues. >> we made 690 thousand reports to the national center for missing and exploited children. >> we made careful product design choices. >> x has zero tolerance toward any feature that features or promotes child sexual exploitation. >> to many parents, the dangers have grown. in 2023 alone, the national center for missing a lady children said it received more than 36 million reports of sexual exploitation of children online. in families site devastating bullying, body image problems, drug trafficking, and suicide they see directly tied to social media. but congress has not passed any of the major bills to restrict the companies or hold them liable since the 1990's. frustrated senators are deeply skeptical of industry led reform. >> coincidentally, several of

these companies implemented commonsense safety improvements within the last week. >> what i'm trying to understand is why it is instagram is only restricting access to sexually explicit content. but only for teens ages 13 to 50. why not restricted for 16 and 17-year-olds, as well? >> my understanding is we don't allow sexually if licit content on the service for people of any age. >> how is that going? >> the ceos stress to collectively employ thousands to monitor content and have forms of age limits and other tools to protect kids. linda of x, formally twitter, said the company is open to change, but wary of stifling legitimate content. >> industry collaboration is

imperative here. x believes the freedom of speech and platform safety can and must coexist. we agree now is the time to act with urgency. >> senators were out of patience and gave ceos little time to respond. furiously saying they've heard enough. >> for years you have been coming in public and testifying under oh there is absolutely no link, your product this wonderful, the science is nascent, full speed ahead while internally, you know your product is a disaster. >> that led to an external moment with tech powerhouse mark zuckerberg. >> would you like to apologize for what you have done to these good people? >> i'm sorry for everything that you have all gone through, knowing you have to go through, the things your family have suffered. >> zuckerberg argued his company is devoted to an leading and safety when a senator said instagram is harmful, he

responded. >> i disagree with that, that is not with the research shows on balance. it does not mean people don't have issues and there are things we need to do to provide the right tools for people. >> much is at stake. a senators are pushing for bills with new restrictions on social media companies, including an end to their protections from lawsuits over content. despite bipartisan support, senators fumed the companies are blocking change. >> we have not passed any of these bills. it is time to pass them. the reason they have not is because of the power of your companies. >> we have been working on this stuff for a decade. you have an army of lawyers and lobbyists that have fought us on this every step of the way. >> a rare bipartisan hearing with senators looking more for momentum than answers. >> no excuses. we've got to bring this to a vote. >> but those future votes on the issue like the senate calendar,

remain unclear. for the pbs newshour, lisa desjardins. >> many of those who attended today's hearing were parents who lost a child or whose child was injured. i'm joined by one of them. christine's daughter grace died by suicide in 2012 after being bullied and threatened online. thank you for being here. let me say how sorry we are for your loss. you were in the hearing, you are holding up this picture of grace during that hearing. i want to ask what you thought of the questions from lawmakers, what you heard from senators? >> just being there is a long time coming. finally people are understanding the dangers that are inherent in the social media platforms. so the fact we are having that hearing is wonderful. but bringing all five of the biggest platforms that are hurting kids, it is frustrating

to me it has been so long. and it is clear because of whistleblowers coming forward that they have known it is harmful and have not made the changes that need to be made. today, they were still not willing. the kids online safety act has to pass. it is urgently needed. they need to get on board and join us. >> grace died as a result of the bullying and the threats. tell us what that means. why do you think social media played a role in her death? >> she was a young teen, 14. there was a drug assisted sexual assault first followed by bullying. the bullying was things like i hate you, i hope you see this and cry yourself to sleep and wake up and kill yourself, you might as well, you are a lousy piece of -- cinches should have their fingers cut off one by one while they watch their families burn. this is abnormal.

she was terrorized. there was no way to make it stop. no way to get it taken down. they would make dedicated reporting for a child in distress or in crisis and get things taken care of. >> if it had been in place, do you think race would still be alive? >> i believe we would not be where we are today. >> a number of groups say this can restrict free speech, it chills encryption adoption, or can force platforms to gather more information on kids. do you see any of those as valid? >> i have heard those as well. we have talked quite a bit with the bipartisan sponsors of the bill. senator blumenthal and senator blackburn. i know they have been very

careful to -- they made changes that made more people happy that it is not going to do these things. they will not collect any more information. i know there were questions about lgbtq kids having to chill on them finding things. but it does not restrict information. it goes to the heart of how these platforms are designed and to make sure there are common sense guardrails to stop things happening to children. they know -- the whistleblowers came forward from facebook, two over the last couple of years. one very recently. they brought proof that their internal studies no one knew about proved that they knew the products were hurting the kids and they chose not to do anything about it. >> there's a new generation of

kids growing up extremely online. a new generation of parents trying to figure out what to do, how to keep their kids safe. what is your message to them? >> i'm on the group of parents who just launched a website called parents sos, parents for safe online spaces. all of the parents have lost children to different online harms. so when i say you can be the most engaged parent and not be able to protect them, i mean that. there are lots of bad actors, predators out there. from extortion, which if your viewers don't know what sextortion is, they need to learn what it is. people are pretending to be a child's age, and they end up gaining their trust over time and the minute that they send them an intimate photo of

themselves, it turns around immediately with extortion for money, threats to everyone they know. i met a couple of parents last night who there was only six hours from the time they got the picture, they said we want $5,000. and he is a kid. he doesn't have that. they were six hours from the time this happened to the time he died. >> what do you want people to know about grace? >> she was a great kid. she was born happy, bright blue eyes, smiling all the time. she grew into a really happy kid, she was kind and thoughtful and made us laugh every single day. she had a great sense of humor. she should still be here. but i'm her voice now.

i don't want people to see me. i want people to see her. i want changes to be made so nobody has to go through what we have been through. >> christine, thank you for being here. in the days other headlines, the federal reserve held steady on interest rates, keeping them at a 22 year high. lessee makers hinted cuts might be coming later this year, but not immediately. jerome powell wants further signs inflation will keep falling to the central bank's target of 2%. >> we want to see more good data. it is not that we are looking for better data, we are looking at the continuation of the data we have seen. it is not that the six-month data is not low enough. it is just can we take this with

confidence we are moving under 2%? that is what we are thinking about. >> officials indicated they could cut rates three times by a quarter point each. but they've given no timetable. in israel, prime minister benjamin netanyahu met with families of hostages still held in gaza. they told him efforts were underway to free captives, but they offered no details. in gaza, israeli military video shows continued heavy combat around the south. gunfire reverberated outside of hospitals. the un's international court of justice has rejected most of ukraine's legal case against russia. today's ruling dismissed claims moscow bank worldview kaner -- ukrainian separatists and discriminated against annexed crimea's. the report found russia illegally invaded ukraine two years ago. but the russians are expected to ignore that ruling. at the same time, the sides swapped 400 prisoners of war. that came a week after the downing of a russian plane

reportedly carrying ukrainian pows. in pakistan, former prime minister was sentenced to another 14 years in prison. this time on corruption charges. he's already serving three years for corruption. yesterday sentenced to 10 years for revealing state secrets. all of this comes days before parliamentary elections. fbi director christopher wray sounded a warning today that chinese government hackers are going after critical infrastructure in the u.s. he told the house hearing electrical grids, transportation, and water treatment plants are targets. >> the risk that poses to every american requires our attention now. china's hackers are positioning on american infrastructure in preparation to wreak havoc and cause real-world harm on american citizens and communities if and when china decides the time has come to strike.

also, the fbi and justice department announced they disrupted a chinese hacking operation that use hundreds of home and office routers in the u.s. to cover their tracks. house republicans are pressing to oust homeland security ella hundred mayorkas over border security. the house homeland security committee approved two articles of impeachment in a party-line vote. the full house can vote next week. republicans say he refused to enforce immigration laws. democrats say it is all a political stunt. a major federal study has tied contaminated water at camp legume in north carolina to sharply higher risk of various cancers. it finds the risk with at least 20% higher for marines stationed there between 1975 and 1985 compared with other bases. it is the largest study of its kind evedone in the u.s. on wall street, stocks sank as the federal reserve signaled

interest rate cuts won't come as soon as the market hoped. the dow jones industrial average lost 317 points to close at 38,150. the nasdaq fell nearly 346 points. the s&p 500 was down 1.6%. still to come. numeral reporting reveals former nfl players were denied compensation for brain trauma. drought lowers water levels in the panama canal, causing a major disruption to global trade. the exploding popularity of a new literary genre that mixes romance and fantasy. plus much more. this is the pbs newshour, from w eta studios in washington, and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. the united states blamed an umbrella group of iranian backed proxies for the weekend attack that killed three u.s. soldiers.

from israel to iran, the middle east is on edge waiting to see how the u.s. response. at an event commemorating the gaza war, iran's revolutionary guard corps commander said he did not want another war, but was not afraid of one. you know that we don't leave any threats unanswered. while we are not looking for work, we don't run away from it. iran's revolutionary guard cord has long supported what iran cause an accident of resistance to conduct for defense against its enemies. in iraq, it includes has below, a member of the umbrella group of islamic resistance in iraq, which the u.s. blamed for the attack on the tower 22's in jordan that killed three u.s. reserve soldiers. but yesterday, he claimed in a statement that iran does not know how it fights and opposes some of the groups attacks. he pledged to suspend military action against the u.s. to avoid putting the iraqi government in

an embarrassing position. >> you cannot take would a group like that says at face value. >> the national security council spokesperson dismissed the self-declared cease-fire of the group and said the u.s. would have multiple responses. >> what we are anticipating here, a one-off. the first time you see it will not be the last thing. >> iran supports the houthis, who openly train for attacks on israeli and u.s. forces. it claims to be fighting for gazans. but many of the ships it has attacked have no connection to israel. today, the u.s. launched its 10th airstrike on a target in yemen and a spokesperson said the groups attacks would continue. >> the yemeni armed forces confirmed they are taking all military procedures within the right to defend dear yemen and in solidarity with the palestinian people. >> for more, we get two

perspectives. an advisor at the state department during the obama administration, now a professor at johns hopkins university school of advanced and international studies. -- was a cia operations officer in the middle east in the 1980's and 1990's. now a senior fellow. thank you very much, welcome both of you back to the newshour. how do you believe the united states should respond to the killing of three u.s. soldiers last week? >> the u.s. should take this directly to the islamic revolutionary guard corps. we should have an updated version of operation praying mantis in 1988, where the u.s. navy quickly destroyed the islamic republic navy. something like that, i think anything short of that is likely to be unsuccessful and we will see iran continue its proxy war strategy.

>> how do you think the u.s. should respond? >> the united states has stated it does not want a wider war. if it does not want a war, i -- attacking iran directly is not the way to go. even though qatar and has below are backed by iran, there is not evidence iran ordered the attack that killed the three americans. secondly, a direct attack will lead to retaliation. we saw this when the united states killed an iranian general . so during the trump administration, iran reacted with missiles that hit american targets in iraq and had an american been killed, we would have been at war. it goes down to what the u.s. wants to achieve from this attack. does it want to retaliate, deter, or expand the war? >> taking on those points, that

would escalate what you suggested would escalate the war. and there is no evidence iran ordered the attack. >> one, you absolutely want to escalate. the islamic republic has feared escalation. under no circumstances do they want to get into a duel with the u.s., they know they will lose. donald trump's serious mistake was after the droning. and the leader of hezbollah time was with him and also died. it is a creature of the islamic republic you'd he should have responded. the administration has to make up its mind, whether it wants to be effective or wants to retrench. if they do not take this directly to the islamic republic, the odds of this being successful are poor. >> if the u.s. wants to stop the attacks, the point is the

strikes need to be inside iran itself. >> if the united states really wants the current state of conflict to end, it has to end the gaza war. the only time all of these attacks and it was when there was an eight-day cease-fire that was broken at the time by the u.s. the underlying cause of the current escalation is the war. the idea if you hit iranians hard or you hit hezbollah hard, sometime they will back away and the current war in gaza will go as planned. that could be a massive miscalculation. these countries have their own interests in this war, both opportunities and fears. they don't want a larger war. but they aren't going to step back because the u.s. is hitting them in order for the gaza war to be conducted as desired by israel. if we miscalculate thinking that iranians will slink into their whole and don't respond, we may

be surprised. i don't think the evidence shows in the past that when we've hit them hard, they have backed away. that is a convenient reading. when we killed general soleimani, it did not end up with a de-escalation immediately. iranians hit back. president trump at that point decided not to retaliate against a very provocative retaliation. >> let me ask about iraq. the u.s. is in the middle of conversations with the iraqi government that publicly says it wants to leave the country. but they do not put a timetable. should that discussion about the future of u.s. troops play into u.s. decision-making today about how to respond? >> i don't think you could ever allow the u.s. to be held hostage by its bases abroad and forces abroad. no question about it, the u.s.

has bases in iraq. and those that are not properly armed with antimissile batteries. the israelis also have a problem. if the iranians were to unleash, encourage has below to let loose its missiles, the israeli air force i think fairly quickly would destroy those. but it could pincushion tel aviv for a while. it is a real issue. but the overall problem is you cannot let them hold you, essentially extort you. cannot let them black mail you. the iranians have been gaining us and using a proxy war strategy long before the gaza war broke out. it is close to a miracle americans had not died earlier from the numerous attacks that iranian allied militia proxies had launched against us. >> do you think the u.s. should be thinking about the impact against presidents in iraq when it considers how to respond to

this weekend attack? >> yes, they are not iranians, they are iraqis. that organization and its other fellow militias are a political reality. they have significant power in the country. among the population and in the power of government. taking them on directly can undermine the central iraqi government. in other words, the u.s. and iran can go to war with one another, but they have to be mindful the casualty here would be iraq and the united states is trying to maintain troops and forces partly to protect the iraqi government that it has set up. and it is not that straightforward that if you went after the militias, iraq would come out unscathed, as well. >> i only have about 45 seconds. you heard john kirby largely dismissed the statement.

do you also dismiss it? >> yes. they are a creature of the islam or -- republic. they are iraqis, but they have been in league with iran, the revolutionary guard corps has given them a lot of money and training for a cause. essentially the same goal, to kick the u.s. out of iraq. humble the u.s. and the middle east to destroy israel. >> same question to you. should the u.s. take seriously what -- said yesterday, which is a unilateral cease-fire? >> we shall see if they follow through. actions speak louder than words. but i would say perhaps they have realized they've come to the brink of something dangerous and may back away. it does not end the conflict. this will continue while the war is going on in gaza. >> thank you very much to you both.

>> in a landmark 2015 settlement, the national football league promised to compensate former players who developed dementia and other brain diseases linked to concussions. since then, the nfl has awarded $1.2 billion to more than 1600 athletes. a washington post investigation found the league saved hundreds of millions of dollars by rejecting payouts to hundreds of retired players suffering from dementia, including many who died. washington post reporter will hobson joins me to discuss his investigation. you reviewed 15,000 pages of documents related to the cases of 100 former players, you spoke to players and widows and doctors. what kind of trend emerged in your reporting about how the nfl viewed and treated these claims? >> we found basically that this

settlement has its own unique ways to find dementia. that is a fundamental moment, many players who are getting diagnosed obviously have the symptoms, they don't meet the settlement standards. they are getting denied for money and medical care that they and their lawyers thought they were going to get. >> the players suffering from cte would get the settlement claims when they developed signs of dementia. your reporting found 1241 players who filed dementia claims based on diagnoses for their doctors, only about 15% were approved. why so many denials? >> the league contends a lot of fraud. that is true. there were a significant number of players who did not have these conditions. but as we documented, a lot of guys out there who indisputably had dementia, went through the process, saw their claims get denied, and had cte confirmed at autopsy. >> you tell the story of irv

cross, former nfl star, barrier breaker as well as being an on-air broadcaster. what happened to him? >> mr. cross, when he went through this process in 2018, he had already been diagnosed with dementia. he was having trouble speaking, maintaining conversation. the doctors even noted his clothing was soiled that day. his wife needed to remind him to change his clothing. he did not score low enough on cognitive tests for the nsf -- nfl settlement definition of dementia. he was told he did not qualify for a settlement payment. he ultimately passed away a few years later of what his doctors thought was a fine disease. an autopsy found it was cte. >> how common is that kind of case question mark >> without being able to review every one of the thousands to see how precisely common, but the nfl is easily saving hundreds of million dollars based on how the settlement was designed. >> you've also reported

previously on the race norming practice negotiated as part of the settlement meaning black players were treating -- treated differently. black payers make up the majority of the league. did any of that impact the diagnoses of the settlement payments? >> they did. mr. cross was one example. part of the reason he did not qualify on the cognitive test score front was his scores were race normed, which is basically test scores were curved and adjusted a little bit based on a formula that assumes black players naturally perform worse on these cognitive tests than white former players. >> how does the nfl and representatives respond to everything you reported? >> the nfl contends the settlement's definition is not more difficult than the regular one, and the doctors who interviewed on that point are mistaken. they also pointed out the center -- settlement is overseen by independent administrative law firm and federal judge. so the nfl is not directly

controlling how loud the claims player. >> fascinating investigation. people can read the full report online. that is will hobson of the washington post joining us. >> my pleasure, thanks. >> with primary season in full swing and a seemingly unstoppable gop nomination for former president trump, judy woodruff explores what another trump nomination and presidency could mean for the republican party and the country. it is part of her series, america at a crossroads. >> it is not even february, and former president trump appears to be on his way to sewing up his third gop nomination to the highest office in the land. >> i want to thank everyone. >> after wins and iowa and new

hampshire, he leading in south carolina and beyond. elected republican leaders are scrambling to climb on board. texas senator john cornyn joined over half of the gop members of the senate. and most of those in the house. >> i have endorsed him wholeheartedly. i think he's the right person that picks the problems. >> we need donald trump. >> but not all those in republican and conservative circles are joining up. including atlantic magazine writer david fromm, former speechwriter for president bush, and longtime trump credit -- critic. >> he's got some skills, one is understanding where the pain points are in people. the things that make them upset. both his friends and enemies. how do you make enemies upset? it is often a great asset or resource to a politician like him to make opponents crazy with rage. >> how does he fit into the tradition of conservative

thought in the united states? >> if conservativism means protect things that are precious in america, being mindful the hazards of chain, -- change, setting limits on power, appetite, donald trump is not any of those things. he's exactly the person and the thing conservative thought has always soppe to include. the whole point of conservative politics has been you want to have power distributed. you want to make sure the people who come to power understand the constitutional constraints on power, but also have the character restraints on their own appetites. the anger and rage and desire to target. the willingness to use methods that are anti-constitutional. the fascination with violence. these are characteristics of a different kind of politics than in the past we have called conservatives. >> how do you explain the

loyalty donald trump has today? >> we have seen that kind of loyalty in state-level politicians. mayor curley in boston, who somehow got the support of a certain segment of irish catholic boston. he would long in louisiana. with these kind of leaders do is association -- associate their hurts with other people's grievances. in the use hurts and grievances has permission to break rules. they have convinced people that the people enforcing the rules are cultural enemies. even if i did break the rule, i'm on your side and they are not. i don't think i've ever seen this before on a successful politician who said i want to speak for hurts and grievances across the whole culture, the whole country, and everyone who tries to enforce rules on me is an enemy of yours. >> for someone who's been at the center of conservative thought

of conservatives watching the republican party progress over time, tackle tough issues, do you feel you should have seen something like donald trump coming? >> i did my grieving for my republican party in 2010, 2011, 2012. i can think about this pretty analytically. i went to tea party rally since had not only do i not recognize this -- on second thought, i do recognize this, and it is everything i'm against. that was hard. but when trump came along, i was shocked because he was so personally wicked. but i was not shocked in that it was a completely different thing from what i had seen. >> there is an animosity, a personal nature to the differences people feel about politics. what is the effect donald trump is having on that? if he were reelected, what

effect would it have? >> i wonder whether there is really more division in the country today than other points in the past. remember the feeling of vietnam in the draft. i had families who had trouble sitting down over dinner in 1969. debates over civil rights, the integration of schools in the early 1950's and 1960's. families had difficulty reconciling with that. back then, the political system saw its job as managing. leaders knew this is an incredibly diverse country. rural versus urban. race on race. ethnicity on ethnicity. religion upon religion. sometimes men against women, young against old, rich against poor. all of these potential fault lines. it is the job of the people who meet in the buildings down below here to manage them and say -- while everyone else is getting excited, we keep. and we remember what is important are dams, roads, high schools, defense plans. we are going to make deals based

on that and lower the temperature at the center. but the political circle at the top no longer sees these conflicts as dangerous to manage. they see them as resources to exploit. donald trump is better at this than just about anybody. they take this dangerous stuff and say that will not be something i will try to contain, something i will use for fuel. >> what effect does that have on today's division? >> we will be more fractious, argumentative. all of the demons that exist within any society will not only be liberated by the political system, but encouraged because donald trump will look to his constituency of very upset people to impose his lawless will on the system. i want to get away with watergate, i want to party myself, do the things nixon did and never dared to do. i'm telling you in advance i'm going to do them and i want my followers to frighten the

political system to letting me have them. >> if trump does use the criminal justice system to shut down investigations into his own conduct, including alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election, the consequences will be dire. >> the country will be in the street. we will talk about nothing else. there will be no other policy. we will not be able to a commish anything, there will be resignations in the department of justice. it will be chaos and the chaos will never stop. >> and if joe biden wins reelection, what happens to the current state of our country, our polarized state? sigmund freud said the purpose of psychiatry is to convert hysterical obsessive neurosis into unhappiness. if joe biden wins, we get rich versus poor, urban versus rural, climate change, deficits, trade

with china. not a single problem will be fixed. but we will have a working set of institutions to address the problems and our disagreements will not go away. you will just have non-psychopathic people saying people outside this room disagree a lot. we are going to sit down at the table and find something we can agree on so i can take something to my people and you can take something to yours. >> no guarantee the divisions among, i'm judy woodruff in washington. >> an extreme drought in panama is forcing authorities to substantially scale back shipping through the panama canal. one of the world's key shipping channels. it comes at a time when traffic has also been disrupted near the suez canal, where commercial

shipping has been limited at a widening middle east conflict. stephanie sy looks into the problems for the panama canal. >> the canal with one of the most important waterways in the western hemisphere and carries 5% of the world's maritime trade in 40% of u.s. container traffic. with water levels below normal, authorities are allowing 24 ships to cross a day. that means more delays and higher shipping costs. the authorities deputy administrator joins me from panama. thank you for joining the newshour. describe the severity of the situation at the panama canal. you are operating at a reduced capacity. 24 ships a day. do you expect the volume to go lower in coming days? >> good afternoon, happy to be here.

no, we are forecasting we will stay at 24 until the end of april, beginning of may, when hopefully rainy season starts again. we have to reduce the amount of traffic because we are entering the dry season. we will have no rain whatsoever. we had a very dry season in 2023 because of el niño. he said that all over the world, not only panama. a number of transits and maintaining the 44 foot draft for our clients not to be impacted too much. we have less spots we are trying to get really competitive with the industry, and hopefully we stay at 24 until rates come back in late april, early may. >> what if the rains don't come back? you mentioned the periodic weather pattern el niño. i've also seen quoted meteorologists who say climate change has exasperated a drought

there. do you really see relief coming with the next rainy season? what if it doesn't come? >> we are looking at predictions, they do say el niño is weakening. we are going into april, may, june. we are going to neutral. and may be at the year, october, november, december, la niña effect will come into effect. meaning a lot of rain. that is the perspective of forecasters. we don't think we will have a problem come rainy season next year. if for any reason there is a delay, we might have to addressed draft or contract to maintain the lake until raining season comes in. if it comes in later in that

quarter. >> i want to ask about long-term planning. the lake feeds the panama canal. there are also 30 thirsty cities that draw water from the lake. there is an ongoing drought. are you in a place where you have to plan for an alternative reservoir to make sure the canal can stay functional in years to come, not just this year? >> definitely. we are looking at a very holistic project that is not only an additional reservoir. we have two reservoirs. the lake, which provides portable water for the population and is a regulatory lake. we have two lakes. we are able to fill it to the maximum. so portable water is assured for the population. we are looking at two additional

projects to help increase water saving measures. and we are looking at one that will be built on the western side of the panama canal. we have analyzed the project, provide water for your day. that is a project we hopefully will be embarking in late 24, early 25. >> tell me what your level of concern is. you make it seem like a temporary problem with the el niño weather pattern. yet there is long-term climate change concerns and drought concerns. how do you make sure the panama canal continues to be sustainable? >> we have experienced dry years before. 2016 was a dry year, 2019. 2023 has been dry. we can see there is a pattern change. it has affected the world, not just panama. the mississippi river, the amazon river, argentina.

2023 has been a big impact. we follow noah, we have a chief of stained ability officer for the canal to impact not only the canal, but worldwide policy to go into carbon neutrality, 20 carbon by 2050. not just us, also the industry. we are putting in place policies to help a better environment and reduce the carbon footprint. >> -- with the panama canal authority. appreciate you joining us. >> my pleasure. tiktok popular book talk channel has been buzzing about a new genre called romanticist. spawning whole sections in bookstores.

jeffrey brown visited and talk to arthur rebecca euros to see what is driving the trend. it is part of our alts -- arts and culture series. >> it was nearly midnight at a los angeles bookstore last november and fans could not wait to get their hands on iron flame. the hotly anticipated second novel in a series that began with a breakout bestseller. together, they have sold more than 6 million copies worldwide. author rebecca euros had been writing and publishing for 10 years but had no idea what would ensue when she turned to a story that mixes dragons and magic with romance. >> it was shocking, to say the least. i but -- my publisher was prepared, i was not. not for the platform growth or being recognized or seen in public. that completely shocked me. it is still shocking. >> i'm not really a fan of

romance and fantasy books. >> she and her books are everywhere. alongside authors like sarah j mass, jennifer armentrout, and others who create romance dramas in the midst of epic fantastical worlds. romance and fantasy. now a full-blown sub genre with its own name. >> basically fantasy with a written and romance beam. it speaks to women and brings men and because men love dragons, and finding out. the market is cyclical. it was ready. >> we have all romance. >> the co-owner -- a romance focused independent bookstore she and her sister first opened in los angeles in 2016. and more recently here in brooklyn. >> they see romances the ultimate escapism. both the romance element and a literal different world. sometimes outer space, sometimes

a kingdom that has been invented. we sell a lot of contemporary romance where people have to pay taxes, have a parent dying. >> this is more likely to have dragons. >> it is part of a small but growing network of romance specific bookstores around the country. how do we define romance novels? >> excellent question. basically, there's only two criteria you need. central love story, happy ending. that is one of the things people of so much about romance novels. the comfort of knowing everything is going to work out. >> these days, romance works out in a lot of ways. including contemporary, queer, fantasy, and still, the traditional historical section. drawn -- a genre that may have occupied a small section in a big store.

and a stigma of light second rate literature attached to it. >> i think that attitude has changed a lot throughout my lifetime, the amount of time we have been doing this. it definitely still persists. the thing i have noticed his people in general, especially younger people, are getting much better at identifying how things like misogyny, sexism, racism, homophobia, are impacting the stories that are being told. sold her generations were told this is trashy, this is silly, this should be read under the cover of darkness. why do you think that? who has been telling you this? what has led to you having disbelief? because romance is a huge genre.

>> with nearly a 100 year mass-market publishing history studied by scholars. a professor at laguardia university college in queens. one area of interest for her, how romance novels reflect their times. >> i often say mass-market romance fiction and novels change dramatically, but not dramatically. >> meaning? >> there is always movement. there is always change in popular themes, what kinds of couples, what kinds of understanding of sexuality, gender presentation is valued over time as society changes. the genre changes along with it. because it has this stable core, this hopeful idea people can be happy together, there is no trauma with the change. >> the latest folks also reflects the way the genre has come in and out of public

awareness. >> the house of romance has many rooms in it. fantasy has always been one of those rooms. at least in the american mass-market. there always interesting moments of technological change or like a bestseller suddenly starts to appear because there is a major pr push around it. >> now we have tiktok. leah has no notes about its impact. >> i cannot deny the tangible financial impact tiktok has had on my business. >> you feel it? >> absolutely. in a literal way. i mean people talk about a book on tiktok, then they come and buy a book. >> you see the immediate response? >> absolutely. in a way we did not with instagram, twitter, and facebook. >> she credits tiktok's book immunity for the popularity of her series.

she loves the direct connection to readers. >> we can get the book into your nds by november. >> it is why it took off. i think it is one of the last areas where readers are really in control of what is put out there. publishers cannot control the market or anything. it is word-of-mouth. so if they love the book, they take it and make it their own and off it goes and videos go viral. it is such word-of-mouth marketing you cannot get anywhere else. it is true love of books. >> she thinks it is speaking to this very specific moment in time, one she hopes will last. >> i think coming out of the post-pandemic world, a lot of reading really shot up during the pandemic. so you have people coming in to reading fiction that were not there before. and now we have all of these

wonderful readers we get to give our stories too. >> she's writing book three of the series. eagerly awaited by readers here and around the world. for the pbs newshour, jeffrey brown. >> remember, there's always a lot more online. including a look at how the rise in vaccine hesitancy could spill over to pet owners, and how experts aim to stop it from happening. that is at pbs.org/newshour. that is the newshour for tonight. on behalf of the entire newshour team, thank you for joining us. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour. including jim and nancy pilled there, and the robert and virginia schiller foundation. the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the front lines of social change

worldwide. funding for america at a crossroads was provided by and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour & company." here's what's coming up. tension reigns as president biden ponders how to punish the killing of three american service people in jordan. i speak to u.s. air force vet and former republican congressman adam kinzinger about biden's options at home and abroad. then -- >> this is my first grandchild. it's supposed to be happiness, she says. but i couldn't celebrate. >> born into war. correspondent jomana karadsheh reports on the tens of thousands of new mothers and babies a