Kelsey Piper
Posts 14
Comments64
Related to this - as a journalist covering global health and development, one thing I struggle to get is accurate information on the ground from developing countries about the effects of US policies and cuts. One thing that EAs in Nigeria are uniquely positioned to do is keep us informed - I'd really value someone going to three HIV clinics in their area in Nigeria, checking if they are open, and if they're open asking them about their funding/how many people go there/how they've been affected by the freezing, unfreezing and cancellation of USAID grants/ whether they have any stories patients are willing to share about the effects of cancellations. Non-results (everything is running smoothly and unaffected) are also valuable.
I'm confused. "render internet related services as requested by the Company from time to time" is not at all a contractual obligation to produce content on an ongoing basis. If there were a contractual obligation to produce content on an ongoing basis, I'd expect the contract to specify how much content, for how long. I'd understand 'internet related services' to mean help with access to the account, authentication, etc. as relevant, not as an ongoing job as a content creator.
I agree that Emerson argues that Emerson alone created content for the site, and that Deck doesn't dispute this, but neither of them seem to actually argue Deck had a contractual obligation to create such content (and reading the contract, I think he clearly did not). Instead, I parse Emerson making this claim as a sort of moral claim to the high ground ("I'm the one doing the hard work here"), not a claim that Deck failed to fulfill contractual responsibilities. I don't see anywhere where Emerson actually alleges breach of terms by Deck, as opposed to alleging that Deck is trying to take advantage of Emerson's hard work by backing out of the contract.
First; the formal employee drove without a license for 1-2 months in Puerto Rico. We taught her to drive, which she was excited about. You might think this is a substantial legal risk, but basically it isn't, as you can see here, the general range of fines for issues around not-having-a-license in Puerto Rico is in the range of $25 to $500, which just isn't that bad.
I have no knowledge specific to Puerto Rico, but my understanding is that by far the most important risk incurred when driving without a license is that an unlicensed driver will also almost certainly be uninsured or be in violation of the terms of their insurance such that their insurance will decline claims related to unlicensed driving they were doing, and therefore that an unlicensed driver would potentially be liable for extraordinary sums of money if they were to get into an accident for which they were at fault. Was this person insured? Did the car insurance policy allow unlicensed drivers? What would have happened if there had been an at-fault car accident with another driver?
That would be amazing! The specific things I am interested in:
For each clinic that was open/available in early January 2025, are they still open now? Do they have access to funding and medication? If they are going to run out, when are they going to run out? Were their operations affected by the funding freezes?
If they were affected, do they have specific patients, or family members of patients who died, who would be willing to talk to American journalists about how they were affected? How much money did they spend annually, and how many people did they provide medication to? Was anything communicated to them about the reasons for the cuts?
My email is kelsey.piper@vox.com; let me know if you have any questions!!!