Research

Voters’ dislike of PAC donations cuts across political lines

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 03 Nov 2025 17:12:52 +0000

Voters’ dislike of PAC donations cuts across political lines Rachel Sauer Mon, 11/03/2025 - 10:12

Bradley Worrell

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� political scientist Michelangelo Landgrave’s research finds Republicans and independents share Democrats’ concerns over corporate donations in federal elections

In a time when political consensus is difficult to find, one topic that cuts across partisan lines is American voters’ disdain for political action committee (PAC) money in federal elections.

That’s one of the key findings of research recently published in the journal Research and Politics, which was co-authored by Michelangelo Landgrave, a University of Colorado Boulder Department of Political Science assistant professor whose research focus includes campaign finance and public opinions on how it can be reformed. The paper was co-authored by Aubree Hardesty, one of Landgrave’s ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� postdoctoral fellows.

Pointing to a 2017 Washington Post story, Landgrave and his co-authors note in their paper that people surveyed for the article said money in politics and wealthy political donors are primary causes of political dysfunction.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� political scientist Michelangelo Landgrave and his research colleagues found that Republicans, Democrats and independents all share concerns over corporate donations in federal elections.

“What we found is that it’s not money itself that people oppose,” Landgrave clarifies. “People are fine with small donations—$5 or $10 from an individual. What they oppose are massive contributions from corporations that ordinary citizens simply can’t compete with.”

As the research paper notes, in the 2024 election cycle, PACs contributed about $5.6 billion to presidential and congressional campaigns, representing about 65% of total contributions.

This distinction—between small, individual donations and large, corporate checks—is central to understanding public opinion on campaign finance, Landgrave says, and voters are concerned that PACs have outsized influence with candidates.

Who’s giving the money?

Voters often view PACs as conduits from special interests, allowing corporations, unions and wealthy donors to channel significant funds into the political system. Landgrave says most PAC contributions come from older, wealthier and disproportionately white Americans. Asian Americans are an emerging group in this donor landscape, but Black and Latino communities remain underrepresented in campaign financing, he says.

“That raises equity concerns,” Landgrave says. “It’s not that older white voters shouldn’t have influence—they should—but so should African Americans, Latinos and especially younger voters. It’s not just about race; it’s about age, class and general representation.”

And while some PACs, such as the National Rifle Association or Emily’s List, are notably partisan or ideological, many are more pragmatic than political, Landgrave says. Companies such as Walmart and McDonald’s often contribute to both Republican and Democratic campaigns—hedging their bets to maintain influence regardless of which party wins, he notes.

Public attitudes: a bipartisan dislike

As the researchers surveyed voters, Landgrave says one of the biggest surprises was the lack of a stark partisan divide on the issue of PAC donations.

“Starting this project, we assumed that there was going to be major partisan differences in public opinion. We assumed that Democrats—much more than Republicans—would be much more concerned about the amount of money in American politics,” he says. “But one of our big findings was that Democrats and Republicans, and also independents, want their politicians to not be accepting this PAC money.”

Again, the underlying concern is that PACs have outsized influence with politicians in return for their contributions, because those donations tend to be larger than those of individual donors, Landgrave says. He notes that previous research has found that less than 1% of Americans give more than $200 in political contributions in a given year. (For their part, PACs can contribute up to $3,500 per candidate.)

“How much influence they (PACs) actually get for their contributions is a subject for debate, but the perception by voters is that it really undermines the democratic values that we have,” Landgrave says. “The underlying concern voters have is that everyone should be able to give, but the amount should be constrained enough that, for example, one person making six figures is not able to make much bigger donations than the guy making $40,000 or $20,000 a year.”

"We assumed that Democrats—much more than Republicans—would be much more concerned about the amount of money in American politics. But one of our big findings was that Democrats and Republicans, and also independents, want their politicians to not be accepting this PAC money,” says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Michelangelo Landgrave.

The study’s findings suggest that swearing off PAC donations can be a winning strategy for Republicans and independents as well as Democrats, Landgrave says.

“While Republicans at the national level have not embraced this idea, these findings lead me to believe that an enterprising Republican candidate could make their name, especially at the primary level, by keeping their same policy positions, but really presenting themselves as this anti-corporate, populist individual,” he says.

Risks and rewards of swearing off PAC money

In recent U.S. election cycles, some candidates have made headlines by vowing not to accept PAC donations, including U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, who during her 2020 campaign said she “swore off PAC money to make a statement.” She was not the only one.

Landgrave’s notes in his paper that 44 candidates (43 Democrats and one Republican) refused PAC money during the 2020 election cycle.

Landgrave says politicians swearing off PAC contributions is a trend that has gained momentum since the mid-2010s, mirroring earlier political reform efforts dating back to the Progressive Era of the late 1890s to early 1920s, when reformers sought to address political corruption that extended to buying political offices.

Today, candidates such as Bernie Saunders, D-Vermont, have successfully built brand identities around refusing corporate donations, drawing support even from those who may not fully align with their policy platforms, Landgrave says.

His research suggests voters place as much weight on a candidate’s campaign finance stance as they do on hot-button issues such as gun control.

“That’s a big deal,” he says. “Gun control is one of the most polarizing, mobilizing issues in U.S. politics. If a candidate’s position on PAC money can mobilize voters to a similar degree, that’s a serious strategic advantage.”

Show me the (small) money

Still, given how astronomically expensive modern federal election campaigns have become, is swearing off PAC money viable moving forward?

Yes, but with caveats, Landgrave says.

He references an earlier paper by one of his co-authors that found that rejecting PAC money can be a powerful campaign message—especially when it’s clearly communicated to voters. That earlier paper noted that candidates who reject PAC money see a surge in small-dollar donations. While those contributions do not fully replace corporate funds, Landgrave says they often make up 70 to 80% of the shortfall.

“It’s a significant substitution effect,” he says. “You lose $1 million from PACs but you might get $700,000 to $800,000 from small donors instead.”

However, Landgrave says this model may not scale indefinitely.

“Right now, if you are the sort of candidate who swears off big corporate influence money, there’s enough donors that care about that to compensate you to a degree,” he says. “What’s unclear is what happens at scale. If every candidate rejected PAC contributions, would enough people change culturally to make up what they’re losing? If there’s only a few thousand people who care about this and do this, it won’t work if everyone rejects the money.”

What do voters actually know?

A common critique of public opinion surveys is that voters don’t really understand the issues they’re being asked about. But Landgrave’s research challenges that assumption when it comes to campaign financing.

“Right now, if you are the sort of candidate who swears off big corporate influence money, there’s enough donors that care about that to compensate you to a degree.”

“We’ve done follow-up work on public knowledge,” he says. “And while voters don’t ace these quizzes, they perform reasonably well. For instance, many people guess that the maximum federal contribution limit is around $3,000. The correct number is $3,500, so they’re close.

Americans surprisingly know the general rules. Maybe not all of the details, but they know more than we probably think.”

In short, the average voter may not be a political scientist, but they understand enough to form meaningful opinions—and increasingly, those opinions lean toward curbing corporate influence in elections, Landgrave says.

Studying union PACs and cultural change

Landgrave says his research on political action committees and campaign finance are ongoing. His next line of research looks at how voters view union-backed PACs, which are structured similarly but are rooted in worker representation.

Initial findings are surprising, he says.

“Americans seem to be OK with union PACs. And what’s even more surprising—so are Republicans. It’s preliminary, but it suggests people view unions differently, perhaps because they’re perceived as bottom-up organizations, rather than top-down like corporations.”

Meanwhile, looking ahead, Landgrave has another topic he would like to pursue regarding PACs and campaigns.

“In addition to the union angle, I would definitely be interested in seeing young Americans’ attitudes toward money in politics,” he says. “I can tell you that, just talking with my undergrad students, they seem even more skeptical of corporate money in politics than previous generations. They’re not anti-money—they’re fine with small donations—but they’re deeply opposed to corporate influence.”

However, Landgrave is skeptical that Congress might one day pass sweeping reform to limit or eliminate PAC donations.

“I don’t see that happening at the federal level,” he says. “The people who reach Congress are, by and large, products of the existing system.”

Instead, he sees more potential for state-level reforms, through voter pressure and ballot initiatives that limit PAC influence—a strategy that he says echoes earlier populist movements, particularly in the Plains and Rocky Mountain regions.

“Our campaign finance system isn’t set in stone,” Landgrave says. “Other countries do it differently. We could, too—if we decided that’s what we want.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about political science? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� political scientist Michelangelo Landgrave’s research finds Republicans and independents share Democrats’ concerns over corporate donations in federal elections.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Marek Studzinski/Unsplash

Students learning dam good lessons from nature's busy builders

Rachel Sauer — Fri, 31 Oct 2025 13:54:40 +0000

Students learning dam good lessons from nature's busy builders Rachel Sauer Fri, 10/31/2025 - 07:54

Rachel Sauer

In a capstone project partnership with the Boulder Watershed Collective, Masters of the Environment students study what it means to live alongside beavers

Beavers are so much more than nature’s most eager builders. In many ecosystems, they play a key role in nature-based solutions to flood control, habitat restoration and fire mitigation.

They are a keystone species that can increase biodiversity in suitable habitats, according to Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), but they also are a source of human-wildlife conflict in Colorado. For example, beavers have been known to build dams and inadvertently flood areas that ranchers or homeowners don’t want flooded.

Jack Carter, Amanda Opp and Colin McDonald (left to right) completed a Masters of the Environment capstone project studying beavers and how they live alongside humans in partnership with the Boulder Watershed Collective. (Photo: Masters of the Environment program)

The question for conservationists, land managers and any human who cares about wildlife, then, is how to live alongside this native species that broadly engenders mixed feelings. It’s a question that University of Colorado Boulder Masters of the Environment (MENV) students Amanda Opp, Jack Carter and Colin McDonald addressed in their capstone project, which they will publicly present today at the 2025 MENV Capstone Symposium.

Partnering with the Boulder Watershed Collective (BWC), Opp, Carter and McDonald examined the social perceptions and ecological impacts of beavers via surveys, research and data collection. They talked with land and wildlife managers across the Front Range to study how public agencies make beaver management decisions, and they participated in two beaver reintroductions, developing a monitoring plan to measure ecological metrics at the sites where the beavers were reintroduced.

“I think we all read the book ‘Eager’ by Ben Goldfarb, about beavers in America and how there was a high reduction in numbers from trapping in the 19^th century,” McDonald explains. “Now there’s a movement to reintroduce them, and we have this thing about ‘coexistence’ as one of those kind of trigger words. We tried to come up with multiple things like ‘living with beavers’ in place of ‘coexistence’ or ‘reintroduction,’ which somehow give off the vibe that your life is going to change by the presence of these animals coming back, which isn’t necessarily the case.”

Back from the brink

Not too long ago, the North American beaver was on the verge of extinction because of 19th-century fashions that required the under fur of beaver pelts. At their population peak before the fur trade began in earnest, there were anywhere between 60-400 million North American beavers, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), but by 1900 there were fewer than 100,000.

As beaver populations began to rebound in subsequent decades thanks to conservation and reintroduction efforts, another issue emerged: Humans had moved into beaver habitat, converting “wildlife-rich wetlands into agricultural lands” and building towns nearby, according to USFWS.

For many years along the Front Range, beavers and humans have lived in an uneasy and sometimes nonexistent détente, so one of the goals of the students’ capstone project was to gather data that might help inform CPW’s beaver conservation and management strategy, which is currently being developed.

Some of the points of conflict that Opp, Carter and McDonald learned about as they collected data included ranchers concerned about losing rangeland to flooding and homeowners who were “very concerned about mosquitoes and thinking that if beavers are creating marshy areas, the risk for West Nile increases,” Opp says.

One of the beaver releases on private land near Nederland in which Amanda Opp, Jack Carter and Colin McDonald participated for their MENV capstone project. (Video: Colin McDonald)

Working with the Boulder Watershed Collective, they learned the nuances of effective conservation, which must include education, collaboration and partnership between stakeholders, Carter says: “Due to conflicts over public infrastructure and Colorado water law, reintroducing beavers is not as easy as it may seem.”

At the beginning of the 20th century, the North American beaver was on the verge of extinction because of 19th-century fashions that required the under fur of beaver pelts. (Photo: Amanda Opp)

“I think BWC, and a lot of people involved with conservation, when they’re conveying the message of ‘Hey, these are beneficial animals,’ they have to meet people where they’re at,” Opp says. “One of biggest concerns in Colorado is fire mitigation, so when we’re thinking about unique solutions, nature-based solutions that might not have been considered in the past, beavers have been a really important pitch: ‘If you have a wet environment with wet soil and healthy grass, you’ll probably have reduced risk of fire reaching your property.’”

Not just a cute animal

The two reintroductions in which Opp, Carter and McDonald participated happened on private land near Nederland, with the landowners inviting BWC to release beavers in ponds or wetlands on their land. Several of the reintroduced beavers came from Aurora, where they had been causing problems, McDonald says, so BWC and Aurora wildlife officers worked together to ensure that the beavers were trapped in families so they could be released together.

“Beavers aren’t endangered anymore, so there’s zero protection for them,” Carter explains, adding that the areas in which the beavers were released are far from settlements, hopefully giving the beavers the greatest chance to thrive.

At one of the relocation sites, the beavers had monitors attached to their tails, enabling researchers and wildlife officials to track their movements, Opp says. And at both locations, the landowners are reporting their visual observations of beaver movement to BWC, which is included in the MENV students’ monitoring plan. Their plan also includes measuring how wide the bodies of water into which the beavers were released become.

For the students, each of whom came to the MENV program as committed conservationists, their work with beavers for their capstone project was about more than busy, charismatic rodents.

“I’m really passionate about conservation and passionate about protecting animals in the wild, and this project instilled in me how rewarding this work is,” Opp says, a sentiment that McDonald echoed, adding that he appreciated learning how to build community partnerships and how to maximize impact at small nonprofits.

“Before this, I don’t think I really appreciated beavers,” Carter says. “I didn’t realize how important they are to an ecosystem. One of the biggest things that’s happening right now is biodiversity loss, and beavers create essential habitats for moose, for certain amphibian species. A lot of amphibians are going down the drain, especially in a state like Colorado, and beavers can help solve that problem.”

“The best way to move forward with all the damage humans have done is to realize we’re not separate from our environment,” Opp says. “We have to do everything we can to protect it, and beavers are a really awesome keystone species that’s not just this cute animal; they can play an important role in solving the climate crisis.”

Jack Carter, Colin McDonald and Amanda Opp (left to right) on their way to release a beaver on private land near Nederland. (Photo: Amanda Opp)

A beaver after being released on private land near Nederland. (Photo: Amanda Opp)

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about environmental studies? Show your support.

In a capstone project partnership with the Boulder Watershed Collective, Masters of the Environment students study what it means to live alongside beavers.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Amanda Opp

Migration no guarantee of bird biodiversity

Rachel Sauer — Fri, 24 Oct 2025 01:11:14 +0000

Migration no guarantee of bird biodiversity Rachel Sauer Thu, 10/23/2025 - 19:11

Cody DeBos

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researchers challenge long-held assumptions about the relationship between bird migration and the process by which new species arise

Every year, billions of birds take to the skies, riding thermal currents and navigating with an innate sense of direction across distances that would humble even the most accomplished commercial pilots.

“Migration is one of the most spectacular natural phenomena,” says Gina Calabrese, an evolutionary biologist and postdoctoral research fellow in the Safran Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Gina Calabrese, an evolutionary biologist and postdoctoral research fellow in the Safran Lab at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��, and her research colleagues, tested the theory that bird migration may be a leading force behind the genesis of new species.

Aside from inspiring awe in bird enthusiasts, this ancient ritual has also sparked many scientific theories. One suggests that migration—by way of dividing populations across different routes and destinations—may be a leading force behind the genesis of new species.

“The idea that this behavior could be a major driver of biodiversity has been an attractive one,” Calabrese says.

But does it hold up under evolutionary scrutiny? That’s what she and a team of co-researchers set out to test in a new study published in Systematic Biology.

Rethinking migration and diversity

Calabrese and her colleagues’ research challenges long-held assumptions about the relationship between migration and speciation, or the process by which new species arise. While scientists have documented cases where migratory behavior appears to be splitting populations, her team wanted to know whether this pattern was widespread enough to have shaped bird diversity at a large scale.

“There’s a body of literature that suggests migration could promote the formation of new species, by isolating populations that use different migratory routes or wintering areas,” she explains. “If this were a widespread pattern, we might expect migratory lineages to be more diverse today than other non-migrating birds.”

To test the hypothesis, Calabrese and her collaborators examined evolutionary trees called phylogenies that map out how present-day bird species are related to one another. Drawing from massive data sets of two avian superfamilies, they used statistical models to estimate how quickly different bird lineages have diversified over evolutionary time. They then compared the rates of speciation in migratory birds to those that make a home in one location year-round.

The results weren’t what they had expected.

“We found no consistent evidence that migratory birds speciate faster than non-migratory ones,” Calabrese says. “This was a surprise—especially given how much attention the idea of migration-driven speciation has received.

“There are clear examples where migration is leading to population splits—those are real,” she says. “But those examples are often recent, and they might not always result in fully separate species.”

In other words, migration might occasionally set the stage for speciation, but it’s no guarantee.

“Not every population split leaves a lasting imprint in the fossil record or leads to a new species,” Calabrese adds.

“We found no consistent evidence that migratory birds speciate faster than non-migratory ones. This was a surprise—especially given how much attention the idea of migration-driven speciation has received," says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Gina Calabrese. (Photo: Todd Trapani/Unsplash)

One reason for this, she suggests, is that many observed migratory divides are evolutionarily young. These populations may just be starting to diverge, and many might merge again over time. Others may remain distinct but not reproductively isolated.

If the goal is to understand how biodiversity has accumulated over millions of years, a short-term snapshot—whether looking at bird lineages today or thousands of years ago—may not tell the full story.

“This is a good example of how something can be true in some cases but not necessarily explain large-scale patterns,” Calabrese says.

Following evidence, not expectations

Calabrese’s recent work is also a case study in scientific humility. When she and her colleagues first set out to test the migration-speciation connection, they weren’t looking to debunk anything. However, when the results started pointing in a different direction than their hypothesis, they remained committed to following the data.

“I think it’s important that we test assumptions—even appealing ones—with data,” Calabrese says.

The process also gave her a new perspective on how the scientific method plays out in real-world applications.

“I was a little anxious at first, until I kind of really felt like I had a handle on what my results were and felt confident in them. And then at that point, your job is just to tell the story of what your data show,” she adds.

While this study might have raised more questions than it answered, that’s part of what keeps Calabrese curious and driven to study the incredible phenomenon that is migration.

“It’s a little disappointing because you want to believe that what you’re studying today is explaining the answers to your bigger questions,” she says. “But it’s also cool because our findings mean that there’s still a lot to understand about how we get the diversity we see today and there’s still some mystery out there to solve, which is cool to me.”

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Professor Rebecca Safran contributed to this research, as did Kira Delmore, Jochen Wolf and Daniel Rabosky.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about ecology and evolutionary biology? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researchers challenge long-held assumptions about the relationship between bird migration and the process by which new species arise.

Traditional

White

Top image: InstaWalli/Pexels

Exploring Colorado’s untapped geothermal energy potential

Rachel Sauer — Wed, 22 Oct 2025 21:00:33 +0000

Exploring Colorado’s untapped geothermal energy potential Rachel Sauer Wed, 10/22/2025 - 15:00

A major question looms over Colorado’s energy future: Why does geothermal energy—a natural renewable resource—remain virtually untapped?

Assistant Teaching Professor Shae Frydenlund of the University of Colorado Boulder Center for Asian Studies, along with Professor Bri-Mathias Hodge of the Department of Electrical, Computer & Energy Engineering, will examine the technological and social barriers that have held back geothermal development in Colorado.

Learn more about this research

A major question looms over Colorado’s energy future: Why does geothermal energy—a natural renewable resource—remain virtually untapped?

Traditional

White

Research on python hearts has possible implications for human medicine

Rachel Sauer — Wed, 22 Oct 2025 20:30:32 +0000

Research on python hearts has possible implications for human medicine Rachel Sauer Wed, 10/22/2025 - 14:30

Blake Puscher

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� scientists discover the growth of new tissue in Burmese python hearts, which may be transferrable to mammals

Heart disease is the top cause of death in the United States, resulting in one in three deaths in 2023. In addition to being such a vital organ, the adult heart, unlike other parts of the body, cannot heal itself, only adapt to the damage caused by cardiac events like heart attacks.

In cases of minor injuries like skin wounds, damaged tissue grows back as the surrounding cells begin to replicate themselves and ultimately replace what was lost or damaged. Because cells in developed hearts cannot replicate, they must instead change in size and organization to adapt, but this process is itself pathological and will eventually lead to heart failure if the underlying issue is left untreated.

All of this is true in humans, but there are some examples of animals that can grow new heart cells even after the early stages of their development. Newts, zebrafish and spiny mice can all restart the mitotic reproduction of heart cells as adults in response to cardiac injury. In a previous study of hypertrophy—the process adult human hearts use to adapt to damage—in Burmese pythons, University of Colorado Boulder researchers discovered that the snakes’ heart cells can replicate themselves, too, under certain conditions.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� postdoctoral researcher Yuxiao Tan and his research colleagues are studying the mechanism by which pythons' heart cells are enabled to replicate and how it could be transferred to mammals.

Yuxiao Tan, Thomas Martin, Angela Peter, Christopher Ozeroff, Christopher Ebmeier, Ryan Doptis, Brooke Harrison and Leslie Leinwand conducted a recently published follow-up study based on this information, not only discovering a fuller, dynamic model of how pythons grow after meals, but also the mechanism by which their heart cells are enabled to replicate and how it could be transferred to mammals. According to Tan, once this transferability is fully explored, it is possible that the process could be used to treat the tissue damage associated with heart disease.

Hyperplasia vs. hypertrophy

First, it’s important to understand the difference between the kind of growth that allows for regeneration and the kind of growth that normally occurs in the adult human heart. The first form of growth is called hyperplasia and the second is called hypertrophy.

“Hypertrophy means the cell is growing in size,” explains Tan, a postdoctoral researcher in the Leinwand Lab. “Hyperplasia means the cell is dividing, proliferating, so they are growing in numbers.” Hyperplasia happens because of a cellular process called mitosis, while hypertrophy happens because of an expansion in the volume and surface area of cells.

The human heart undergoes both hyperplasia and hypertrophy, but hyperplasia only happens during fetal development; after that, the heart can only grow when its cells increase in size. Both processes cause growth, but hyperplasia can be regenerative, and hypertrophy can be adaptive. Additionally, although hypertrophy is pathological in the context of cardiac injury, it can also be healthy or physiological, in which case it is reversible. The pythons in this study underwent physiological hypertrophy because no injuries were introduced to their hearts.

Growth after meals

Burmese pythons are predators that consume large prey infrequently, sometimes going months or even more than a year without feeding. When they are between meals, their metabolism is slowed to save energy, but once they begin digesting a large meal, it increases massively.

Correspondingly, the python’s organs, including the heart, grow, expanding by 20 to 40 percent over several days. This growth was generally understood to be driven by hypertrophy because the python’s organs return to their normal size almost as quickly as they grow—it is reversible, just like physiological cardiac hypertrophy in humans. However, the researchers discovered that, if fed enough, the python’s heart would not shrink all the way back to what its weight was before feeding.

“Their organs grow after a big meal,” Tan says, “but it’s very transient, very temporary. After one standard meal, if you look at other papers, the organ shrank back to its original size.” Depending on how much and how often the pythons ate, though, the results were different, as the researchers proved by assigning 24 pythons different feeding regimens and observing how those regimens affected them. The pythons were either “Fasted,” “Normal Fed,” “Frequent Fed” or “Frequent Fed/Fasted.”

Burmese pythons are predators that consume large prey infrequently, sometimes going months or even more than a year without feeding. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

“There were frequent feeding regimens, which means we fed them every four days, and they usually average 28 days between meals,” Tan explains. As expected, the Fasted pythons grew the least while the Normal Fed animals grew a bit more and Frequent Fed and Frequent Fed/Fasted pythons grew massively. Meanwhile, although the Frequent Fed and Frequent Fed/Fasted pythons were fed the same amount for eight weeks, the fact that the latter was not fed for four weeks after led to unique results.

While the Frequent Fed/Fasted pythons’ body weight and major organ masses (such as those of the kidney and liver) decreased once they were no longer able to eat so often, the total weight of their hearts remained elevated. This indicates that, while heart growth in Burmese pythons is normally caused by hypertrophy, when they can eat often enough, a different kind of cellular signaling occurs in the heart, and hypertrophic growth is locked in through hyperplasia. So, under the right circumstances, both methods of growth occur, with hypertrophic growth preceding hyperplastic growth.

“It’s a hybrid model,” Tan says. “In the past, we only considered hypertrophy, but in my study, hypertrophy happens first, and then it’s quickly followed up by the hyperplastic process.” Tan says that hyperplasia comes with de-differentiation in this case: The cells that are able to multiply lose their adult functionality during the process.

“During hypertrophy, they don’t want proliferation yet, because cells will de-differentiate and lose contractility. That’s why, at the early stage, when they need the heart to perform, it’s just hypertrophy, but once they complete most of the process, the heart can take a short break, so the cells can divide as well. I propose that’s why hypertrophy happens first.”

Differential gene expression

This leaves an important question: How do Burmese python hearts undergo hyperplasia when adult hearts, including those of these pythons, aren’t normally able to? The answer has to do with the way that genes are expressed by heart cells.

In a previous ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� study, researchers showed that the plasma of fed Burmese pythons promoted healthy cardiac hypertrophy in mammals. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

Heart cells are capable of hyperplastic growth in principle—they do it during fetal development to form the basic structure of the adult heart. However, after that early stage of development, the heart changes in many ways, including its cells becoming unable to replicate. These two forms of behavior, or differential expressions of the genes, occur because some of the cells’ genes are inactivated after early development.

The genome is like a set of instructions or code that determines how cells behave, with individual genes being like one item in a list of instructions or a line of code. When a gene is inactivated, it is like an item being crossed out or a line of code being commented out: The information isn’t lost, but the way it is annotated tells cells not to follow that part of the instructions or execute that code. Still, something that is crossed out can be rewritten, or something commented out can be uncommented, and this is true for genes as well; a gene that is inactivated can be reactivated.

“You have genes involved in mitotic pathways,” Tan says, “and when they get activated, that will send cells into a mitotic stage, so the cells will prepare themselves for division.” This differential expression is studied through gene set enrichment analysis. “Enrichment simply means these genes in a cluster of genes are activated at the same time,” Tan explains.

Aside from the masses of Frequent Fed pythons’ hearts remaining elevated, the researchers know that mitosis is happening in the animals’ hearts because they observed signals associated with cellular reproduction and because the process was captured with 3D imaging.

“First of all, you see green, because the pHH3 protein is activated, and that means cells are in the mitotic stage,” Tan explains. “For a non-dividing cell, you wouldn’t see anything. Then the figure shows a cell with two nuclei. Everything has one nucleus, but in that cell, there are two, and they’re pulling apart.” This describes the process of mitosis, where the cell duplicates its DNA in its nucleus, the barrier between the nucleus and the rest of the cell breaks down, and the two nuclei—or sets of nucleus content, which will soon become distinct nuclei—are separated into their own cells.

Implications and future research

Although the researchers have good evidence that something in Frequent Fed pythons’ bodies is triggering hyperplastic growth in their hearts, what it is exactly remains unknown. Tan says that the growth was likely triggered by circulating factors in the pythons’ blood plasma. In an earlier study, the researchers showed that the plasma of fed Burmese pythons promoted healthy cardiac hypertrophy in mammals. Along the same lines, the plasma of fed pythons, and especially that of Frequent Fed pythons, activated hyperplasia.

Could pythons' wild feeding habits inspire new treatments for human heart disease?

“The python plasma started the cell cycle again, so that means there’s something there,” Tan says. “You can translate the snake biology to mammals, because the protein activated mammal cells. It’s hard to say if we could use this for drug development, but that’s provisioned here. You identify the factor, synthesize it, and use that. I think it has the potential to be something, but we just don’t know yet.”

A medicine that can regenerate people’s hearts sounds like it would change the world, but because this study did not involve Burmese pythons with injured hearts, we don’t even know how much they could recover using this process yet, much less how well it would work in humans.

“Once people get a heart attack,” Tan says, “the injuries have already happened, and some cells have died already, which will affect your heart function. You can’t just fully recover and get rid of the scar, but at least if the heart cells are able to grow back, even just a little, that’s going to help your overall cardiac function.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about molecular, cellular and developmental biology? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� scientists discover the growth of new tissue in Burmese python hearts, which may be transferrable to mammals.

Traditional

White

Building a digital home for Arapaho, one sentence at a time

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 13 Oct 2025 15:54:34 +0000

Building a digital home for Arapaho, one sentence at a time Rachel Sauer Mon, 10/13/2025 - 09:54

Cody DeBos

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� linguistics scholar Andrew Cowell helps Arapaho stories find new life online

The Arapaho words beteen, meaning “sacred,” and beteneyooo, “one’s body,” have a special connection for those who speak the language. Their linguistic similarity isn’t a coincidence.

Andrew Cowell, a University of Colorado Boulder professor of linguistics and faculty director of the Center for Native American and Indigenous Studies (CNAIS), says the Arapaho see it as a lesson encoded in the language. “It indicates that the body is sacred and therefore we have to protect it,” he says.

Such examples of cultural knowledge don’t always survive translation. That’s exactly why Cowell’s belief in the importance of preserving Indigenous languages led him to redirect the entire trajectory of his career.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� linguist Andrew Cowell, faculty director of the Center for Native American and Indigenous Studies (CNAIS), has partnered with a host of collaborators including CU students, community partners and native speakers to build digital tools to protect and revitalize the Arapaho language.

It’s also why, for the past two decades, he and a host of collaborators including ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� students, community partners and native speakers, have been building digital tools to protect and revitalize the Arapaho language.

Cowell didn’t originally come to ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� to work on Arapaho, but he has long been curious about Indigenous languages, in part thanks to his personal connection to Native Hawaiian culture through his wife.

“Arapaho was the native language of Boulder, so when I got hired at CU I decided, well, I’ll look into Arapaho,” he recalls. “I started looking into Arapaho more and more and doing more work on the side and eventually decided to switch departments into linguistics so I could focus all my energy on indigenous languages.”

Two databases, one goal

Today, Cowell’s work on Arapaho takes two forms: one, an online lexical database; the other, an unpublished, in-depth text database of natural language conversation and narratives.

The lexical database, freely accessible online, functions like a living dictionary. With more than 20,000 entries and a searchable interface, it’s often used by learners across the Arapaho-speaking world in place of print dictionaries, according to Cowell.

But a larger effort has quietly been taking shape behind the scenes.

The text database, which is not publicly released, contains more than 100,000 sentences of spoken Arapaho. Among them are natural conversations and stories recorded over decades.

“At this point, I’ve got over a hundred thousand sentences of natural speaking that I have not only recorded, but also transcribed into written Arapaho, translated into English, and then it has linguistic analysis attached as well,” Cowell explains.

The database is the backbone of several major projects, all with the goal of making learning Arapaho more accessible and preserving it for future generations. One effort is a student grammar dictionary that focuses on the most useful and common words.

“We’ve gotten a list of the frequency of all the nouns in the language and all the verbs," Cowell says. "We ranked those, and it allowed us to produce a really small student dictionary where we only included words that occurred around 40 times or more.

“It means (students) don’t have to flip through rare and uncommon words they’re unlikely to be really interested in as initial learners.”

A pathway for new learners

Beyond the student dictionary, Cowell and his team are working on developing a scaled curriculum for teaching Arapaho. It guides learners from basics to more complex concepts across sequential levels based on real-world language use patterns.

Young Arapaho dancers (Photo courtesy the Wind River Casino)

“We’ve developed 44 steps of knowledge, and even within that there's 23a and 23b and so forth,” he says. “It’s all based on looking at the text we've collected and looking at the frequency of certain kinds of grammatical features that occur.”

Unlike French or Spanish, Arapaho wasn’t historically taught in a classroom but passed down through families at home. Cowell’s team has had to build an instructional framework from the ground up.

“With Arapaho, no one’s really ever tried to teach it as a second language. Now we’re trying to learn it and teach it, and the databases have allowed us to really produce that scaled curriculum,” Cowell says.

Generations of trust

Ensuring that his work isn’t just academic has been a priority for Cowell since the start. The database project is built on decades of trust between himself and the Arapaho community.

“The one thing Native American communities have often had problems with in the past is someone comes in, does their research, then disappears. Then the community is left wondering what they are getting out of it. In some cases, nothing,” Cowell says. “I worked hard to establish that I really want to learn the language and ensure my work is something that will feed back into the community and help out.”

That commitment has led to rich partnerships, sometimes spanning generations.

“We’re close to having 100 different native speakers represented in our data. At this point we’ve got grandparents and now their kids are working on it,” Cowell says.

A worthy effort

From a linguist’s perspective, Cowell explains, Indigenous languages expand our understanding of what language, and indeed human cognition, can do.

“We’re close to having 100 different native speakers represented in our data. At this point we’ve got grandparents and now their kids are working on it.”

“There are many cases in the history of linguistics where people have made a claim like ‘no language could possibly do this,’ and then someone goes to the Amazon and discovers a language that does it,” he says.

More importantly, the motivating force that has kept Cowell working for over twenty years comes from the Arapaho speakers themselves.

He says, “In my experience, Native American communities are very invested in their language. They see it as really crucial, central to their identity.”

That’s why the full text database hasn’t been released publicly, especially with growing concerns about how the data might be used or exploited by artificial intelligence. Still, Cowell and his team are taking steps toward broader access.

A grant from the National Science Foundation will support the release of 5,000 carefully selected sentences from the text database for public use. The snippets, which have been approved by native Arapaho speakers, will be available online with additional computational linguistic labeling.

As for Cowell, he says that even after 20 years, he never tires of seeing the work evolve. He hopes it shows CU students what’s possible when you follow your curiosity.

“You never know where you’re going to end up and what results are going to come out of something. You just have to trust that research is going to turn out to be interesting. You can’t necessarily predict when or where.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about linguistics? Show your support

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� linguistics scholar Andrew Cowell helps Arapaho stories find new life online.

Traditional

White

Top image: "Two Riders Leading Horses" by Arapaho artist Frank Henderson, ca. 1882 (Photo: Metropolitan Museum of Art)

2025 Nobel Laureate in physics once served as mentor to grad students at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��

Kylie Clarke — Thu, 09 Oct 2025 18:46:26 +0000

2025 Nobel Laureate in physics once served as mentor to grad students at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Kylie Clarke Thu, 10/09/2025 - 12:46

Kirsten Apodaca

Like many rockstar scientists, 2025 physics Nobel Laureate John Martinis spent time in Boulder’s rich scientific ecosystem mentoring graduate students and inspiring others in quantum computing.

In the 1990s, while working as a scientist at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Boulder, Martinis also held the position of a physics lecturer at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��. His university affiliation focused on research collaborations and mentoring graduate students as a research advisor in the Department of Physics.

“It was important to us to build partnerships with NIST scientists, to foster more research collaborations and opportunities for our students,” said John Cumalat, professor of physics and chair of the department at the time of Martinis’ appointment. “John was instrumental in recruiting graduate students to ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��.”

It was important to us to build partnerships with NIST scientists, to foster more research collaborations and opportunities for our students. John [Martinis] was instrumental in recruiting graduate students to ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��.

The Department of Physics history book lists Martinis as a lecturer from 1993 to 1999. He supervised several PhD students, some in partnership with John Price, emeritus professor of physics.

Price fondly recalls his research collaborations with Martinis. When Price was a new faculty member starting out in a related field, Martinis shared his circuit design and building expertise, helped make samples, and provided general guidance and wisdom.

“He was generously helpful with people who had aligned interests and wanted to see everyone do interesting science,” said Price.

While at NIST-Boulder, Martinis worked on fundamental physics and technologies that were critical to the development of quantum devices now used in NIST electronic current and voltage standards.

"John enriched the scientific community not only in quantum computing related electronics, but also in several areas related to low-temperature microelectronics,” said Price.

Much of Martinis’ work at NIST has continued under the leadership of Ray Simmonds (also a physics lecturer) and other group leaders, with physics graduate students continuing to conduct their doctoral research at NIST.

“This is the rich opportunity that our students receive –– it’s not only the classroom instruction, but also the broader scientific community,” said Price.

Among today's quantum information superstars who worked at NIST are Kent Irwin (top left), now at Stanford, who helped to develop highly sensitive single-photon sensors and John Martinis (right). This photo was taken in the 1990s at the NIST-Boulder laboratories. Photo by NIST.

CU’s partnership with NIST has flourished over the years, both through JILA, a joint institute between ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� and NIST, and through the Professional Research Experience Program (CU PREP) which provides research opportunities for students and postdoctoral researchers with scientists at NIST.

Martinis was one of the co-organizers of the inaugural Boulder Summer School for Condensed Matter and Materials Physics with Professor Leo Radzihovsky, which launched in 2000. He has returned to give lectures during the annual school several times since, maintaining connections with colleagues at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��.

Martinis later became a professor at the University of California Santa Barbara, before working for Google and most recently co-founded a quantum computing startup Qolab.

The Nobel

Martinis shared the 2025 Nobel Prize in Physics with John Clarke and Michel Devoret “for the discovery of macroscopic quantum mechanical tunnelling and energy quantization in an electric circuit,” according to the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.

In the 1980s, Martinis was a graduate student in John Clarke’s lab at UC Berkeley, working alongside postdoctoral researcher Michel Devoret. Their experiments focused on electrical components called Josephson junctions – devices made of two superconductors separated by a thin oxide layer that particles ordinarily can’t cross.

Martinis shared the 2025 Nobel Prize in Physics with John Clarke and Michel Devoret for the discovery of macroscopic quantum mechanical tunnelling and energy quantization in an electric circuit.

However, thanks to a quantum effect called tunneling, pairs of electrons can pass through – even though this defies the laws of classical physics.

The idea dates back to 1928, when physicist George Gamow used quantum tunneling to explain why certain materials give off radiation, or alpha decay. Gamow later became a professor of physics at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� and is the namesake to both the Gamow Tower in the Duane Physics and Astrophysics building and to the George Gamow Memorial Lecture Series.

Superconductors, when cooled to very low temperatures, allow electricity to flow without resistance. In this environment, particles behave as one unified wave, all moving together as if they are one.

Through a series of experiments, the team discovered that these large-scale quantum states acted like individual particles, showing behaviors of quantum mechanics like tunneling and discrete energy levels.

This work created the basis for using superconducting circuits to create qubits, the fundamental unit of quantum computers. It laid the groundwork for many researchers and companies now working to build the first operational quantum computers that have the potential to revolutionize technology in many areas, like drug discovery and cryptography.

Want to learn more? ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� boasts five Nobel laureates, four of them in physics. Professor of Physics Paul Beale is interviewed about the 2025 Nobel Prize in Physics at this link.

Get the latest info.

Like many rockstar scientists, 2025 physics Nobel Laureate John Martinis spent time in Boulder’s rich scientific ecosystem mentoring graduate students and inspiring others in quantum computing.

Traditional

White

Hindsight may be 20/20, but people feel more strongly about the future

Rachel Sauer — Fri, 03 Oct 2025 21:57:27 +0000

Hindsight may be 20/20, but people feel more strongly about the future Rachel Sauer Fri, 10/03/2025 - 15:57

Blake Puscher

In reviewing psychological studies, ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Leaf Van Boven and colleagues find that people prioritize thinking about the future over the past

Although time travel has typically been the domain of science fiction, whenever you take a moment to remember the past or imagine the future in detail, you are in a sense travelling through time. In psychology, these processes are called retrospection and prospection. Retrospection is thinking about and creating mental representations of the past, while prospection is the same thing but for the future.

Some work in the field of psychology has suggested that retrospection and prospection are functionally interchangeable, but intuitively, they seem to be very different. After reviewing the research in a recently published paper, Leaf Van Boven, a University of Colorado Boulder professor and department chair of psychology and neuroscience, along with research colleagues Eugene Caruso and Sam Maglio, finds that people think about the past and future differently because of several assumptions that people make about the nature of time (referred to as temporal axioms in the paper), and that people prioritize thinking about the future—a conclusion with implications for how psychological research should be conducted going forward.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Leaf Van Boven, department chair of psychology and neuroscience, finds that people prioritize thinking about the future—a conclusion with implications for how psychological research should be conducted going forward.

Temporal axioms

The assumptions people make about time are called temporal axioms because they relate to time (temporal) and are self-evident (the primary definition of an axiom). There are some philosophies of time that disagree with the axioms; for example, block time theory argues that the past, present and future all exist simultaneously, like different places except separated by time instead of space. However, even if such philosophies are true, the axioms remain valid premises because they describe not only people’s perception of time but also their subjective experiences of the world. The authors propose three temporal axioms—one of direction, one of uncertainty and one of control.

The axiom of direction describes the way all things move through time. Specifically, everything moves only from past to future, with the reverse being—as far as humans know—impossible. For example, if you blow up a balloon with air and then open the end, not only will the air always come out, but it will also be impossible to get the air back in; the balloon can be re-inflated, but it won’t revert it to its original state because it will be filled with different air. In physics, this reality is called entropy, a term for the tendency of all things to progress from states of order to disorder (the collected air disperses) or high energy to low energy (the relatively high pressure inside the balloon is relieved). Entropy defines the direction of time.

The axiom of uncertainty details that as uncertain as people may be about the past, there is at least some information about it, whether in the form of memory or history. Meanwhile, to the extent that the future is known at all, it is because of inference based on information from the past. Therefore, even if people could make predictions with 100% certainty, the uncertainty about the future would be at least as great as the uncertainty about the past, and in reality, it is always greater because people cannot make perfect predictions. “There are always different possibilities for any point in the future,” Van Boven explains, “and there are not different possibilities that actually exist in the past. There were many possibilities, but one of them did happen.”

The axiom of control describes how, because time has direction, the future is more uncertain than the past. This uncertainty creates a sense of control—of being able to choose between different possibilities by acting differently. While there are arguments against people having control over the future, people tend to view the future as more controllable than the past because of its relative uncertainty. Relatedly, according to Van Boven, “people don’t think of themselves as having control over their interpretation of the past, which presents its own set of challenges about how we make sense of what has happened in our lives.”

Prioritizing proception

The way that people think about the future and past is often understood in terms of psychological distance, which is just what it sounds like: how removed a person feels from an event, whether it is in the future or past. “There are many theories of psychological distance,” Van Boven says, “and within social psychology, one of the more prominent theories is Construal Level Theory, which is the idea that when things are in the distant future, they are interpreted on a more abstract level, whereas when they are in the very near future, we tend to think of them more concretely.”

This principle is fairly intuitive. For example, when you are given an assignment, it may not even feel real until the due date rolls around. However, although people think more concretely and feel more strongly about an event three days in the future than one three weeks in the future, they don’t necessarily think and feel the same about an event three days in the future as one three days in the past. In fact, Van Boven and his colleagues found in their review that people do not.

People pay more attention to getting ready for events in the future, and as soon as they pass, that attention quickly fades so they can refocus on what is coming next, says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Leaf Van Boven.

“When things are in the future,” Van Boven says, “our affective system is highly engaged. As soon as things move into the past, the affective system and our emotional reactions subside.

“A classic example would be, if you have an upcoming presentation, your emotional system will get really jacked up as it’s getting close, and then as soon as it has passed, even if it is still objectively close in time, the affective system down-regulates itself. The same is true with attention.” People pay more attention to getting ready for events in the future, and as soon as they pass, that attention quickly fades so they can refocus on what is coming next.

The underestimation of proception

One question the review raises is why the prioritization of proception isn’t an established psychological principle when research in the field often involves people thinking about real or hypothetical events, which are necessarily either in the future or the past.

“That has to do with research methods,” Van Boven says, referring to the example about the upcoming, stressful presentation: The fact that people feel more strongly about the event when it is in the future and then tend to move on shortly after it happens could be easily demonstrated in a laboratory setting, according to Van Boven. “The problem is getting a scientific understanding of what exactly is changing. There are many confounds in that event moving through time.

“When we have an upcoming presentation, we still don’t know exactly what is going to happen in that presentation. We don’t know what the room is going to be like, we don’t know what the audience is going to be like. There’s a possibility that we might bomb, and that would have negative consequences. What we do experimentally is we try to create these situations where everything is exactly the same, and the only thing that differs is whether you’re thinking of it as something that’s in the future or in the past.” This eliminates all of the temporal axioms except for direction; unlike in real life, in the lab there is no difference in uncertainty or control between past and future.

“This is kind of analogous to an active control placebo in medical research,” Van Boven explains. An active control placebo lacks the active ingredient of the actual medicine being tested but has similar non-treatment effects. This is intended to stop people from subconsciously distinguishing between the placebo and the medicine on the basis of the medicine’s expected side effects. “The carefully controlled study gives you a very precise estimate of how big the effect is for the specific medicine you’re interested in,” Van Boven says, “but that’s not how big the effect is that people experience when they take the medicine in real life, because they’re embracing the placebo effect.”

Changing tense

“People who psychologically prioritize the future are happier and healthier than those who prioritize the past."

This review has a major implication for other research, which has to do with the necessity of taking the difference between prospection and retrospection into account, especially during studies that rely on people imagining different scenarios.

“To a large extent, researchers ignore whether things are in the future versus in the past,” Van Boven says. “It’s just that it has not historically been a dimension that people are really concerned about. So, a very common research approach is to use scenario studies.” Scenario studies involve asking people to imagine different situations, then varying those scenarios to see how it affects people’s responses to them. For example, participants could be asked to imagine two people going on a date, then to say how well it went. The scenario would vary slightly between groups of participants—for example, who paid or how the bill was split may be different in each group’s scenario—and the experiment would measure the effect of this difference on how people viewed the situation.

Often in these kinds of experiments there is an implication as to whether the event already happened or is going to happen, even just based on the verb tense used to describe the scenario, and as Van Boven says, “People have been sort of haphazard in terms of whether they present those kinds of scenarios in the future tense versus the past tense. Part of what our review and framework shows is that there may be ways in which we’re understating the effects of different scenarios when we happen to put them in the past (rather) than when we happen to put them in the future. It may be the case that the tense matters a great deal, and it’s something that we haven’t noticed because we haven’t varied that within our experimental context.”

Changing one’s focus between future and past isn’t just important in the context of research, however. “People who psychologically prioritize the future are happier and healthier than those who prioritize the past,” Van Boven says. Broadly, an orientation towards the future has been associated with positive outcomes in several areas, including financial success, health outcomes and life satisfaction. “So,” Van Boven continues, “the axioms and resulting psychological patterns are not merely oddities or biases; they help people successfully navigate through life.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about psychology and neuroscience? Show your support.

In reviewing psychological studies, ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Leaf Van Boven and colleagues find that people prioritize thinking about the future over the past.

Traditional

White

And the heavyweight champion of TV is ... HBO!

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 02 Oct 2025 23:11:23 +0000

And the heavyweight champion of TV is ... HBO! Rachel Sauer Thu, 10/02/2025 - 17:11

Jared Bahir Browsh

Fifty years after the Thrilla in Manila bout launched HBO as a national broadcasting powerhouse, the network continues to shape modern viewing and entertainment

The Thrilla in Manila, fought 50 years ago on Sept. 30, 1975, in Quezon City, Philippines, was the third bout between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier and is considered by many as one of the best, most brutal fights in boxing history. It also marked a new era in sports media as the first fight broadcast nationally through Home Box Office (HBO).

Television audiences had been limited in what sports they could watch since the 1930s. Broadcast networks had to fit sports in with their other programming, including news and scripted shows, so audiences that wanted to watch at home were limited to regional offerings or national games of the week. In 1948, a fight between Joe Louis and Joe Walcott was broadcast in theaters through closed-circuit television. Theaters were connected through private telephone or coaxial cable, and viewers bought tickets to see the bout projected from a special receiver.

Closed-circuit broadcasts of boxing matches and other sports events peaked in the 1960s and 1970s, earning millions of dollars for event promoters. Ali’s fights in this era were among the most popular closed-circuit events, but others, like the Indianapolis 500, also drew large audiences of sports fans to movie theaters. The famed Rumble in the Jungle between Ali and George Foreman earned $60 million in theater admission in the United States, with fans paying $20 ($130 today) to watch the event live as it occurred across the world in the former Zaire.

Jared Bahir Browsh is the Critical Sports Studies program director in the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Department of Ethnic Studies.

The same year as the Louis-Walcott fight, cable television debuted, connecting rural homes too remote to receive a television signal over an antenna. Northeastern Pennsylvania was a test ground for this form of television, since it was close enough to New York City and Philadelphia to pick up broadcast signals with a strong antenna atop a building or a mountain, then connect households through cable. Later, cities in eastern Pennsylvania like Wilkes-Barre and Allentown were among the first whose residents subscribed to paid cable television outside of major cities like New York.

Businessman Charles Dolan was granted a franchise permit to build the first cable system, Sterling Manhattan Cable, in 1965, obtaining financial backing from Time-Life. A lack of quality programming beyond some events in Madison Square Garden hampered the growth of the system, which cost millions of dollars to install but only attracted a few hundred customers in the city. In 1971, during a cruise to France, Dolan conceived of a network that could be leased to other cable systems, which would air unedited films without advertising and was funded by subscriber costs, tentatively named the “Green Channel.”

Along with convincing Time-Life that this was a viable business, Dolan also had to navigate Federal Communications Commission (FCC) scrutiny, which had limited the programs that could be broadcast on cable due to non-duplications rules and other regulations focused on supporting the broadcast networks. Also, consistent lobbying from movie theater chains and broadcasters hampered cable companies, since customers were bombarded with messages that cable was a threat to both the movie business and to free over-the-air content.

Undeterred, Dolan convinced Time-Life to support the Green Channel, which it did after the FCC gave preemptive authorization to launch a paid television service. Dolan and his Time-Life partners originally planned to launch through the Teleservice cable system in Allentown, but after an agreement to broadcast Philadelphia 76ers games collapsed, they launched through the same service 65 miles north in Wilkes Barre to avoid NBA blackouts. Wilkes-Barre was considered New York Knicks territory, and the network had the right to broadcast Knicks games through its agreement with Madison Square Garden. During this time, Dolan and Time-Life also selected a placeholder name for the network, Home Box Office, as they prepared to launch in 1972. The network was soon made available throughout the northeastern United States by relaying microwaves along towers across the region; some of the earliest programming included movies and New York Rangers hockey.

The following year, Home Box Office, Inc., was spun off from Sterling Communications, with Time-Life increasing its equity in the company. Dolan stepped down as CEO of Home Box Office and Sterling after disagreements with Time-Life, accepting a buyout that enabled him to expand his cable service across Long Island. Time-Life had a tentative agreement with Warner Communications to buy HBO, but ultimately that deal fell through. Time-Life later took over Sterling Communications, but the service continued to struggle, ending in 1973 with fewer than 20,000 subscribers and a high turnover rate as customers found the programming repetitive.

The Thrilla in Manila bout between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier marked a new era in sports media as the first fight broadcast nationally through Home Box Office (HBO).

The turning point for HBO came in 1975, when executives made a deal with RCA Americom Communications, a satellite communication company, to relay the HBO signal nationally through UA-Columbia Cablevision. UA-Columbia was a joint venture with United Artists that later took over the entire cable service from Columbia and partnered with Madison Square Garden to form Madison Square Garden Sports Network in 1977, changing its name to USA Network in 1980.

Sports = audience

The partnership between HBO and UA-Columbia, and later the formation of what would become USA Network, showed that even early cable service providers and networks understood live sports would attract audiences. This was confirmed when HBO first transmitted its programming by satellite, debuting the now national network through what is considered by many the greatest boxing match in the sport’s history. Between 1973 and 1980, HBO grew from a regional cable network to a national one, increasing subscribers from 8,000 in the northeast at the start of 1973 to more than 3 million nationally in that seven-year period. HBO’s model was also replicated in local markets through networks like the Z Channel in Los Angeles, which launched in 1974, and Prism in Philadelphia, launched in 1976.

Satellite transmission led to the accelerated growth of cable, with several networks launching in the second half of the 1970s. WTCG became the first superstation in 1976 after Ted Turner learned of the success of the Thrilla in Manila broadcast. He had received approval to buy the Atlanta station six years earlier, and on Dec. 17, 1976, WTCG became the first local station to be retransmitted nationally. The station obtained the rights to broadcast Atlanta Braves baseball games and Atlanta Hawks basketball games—Turner bought the teams in 1976 and 1977, respectively—so when WTCG was renamed WTBS in 1979 and went national, so did the broadcasts for both teams.

The success of WTCG/WTBS led Turner to launch Cable Network News, the first 24-hour news network, in 1980. He launched several other networks through the 1980s and 1990s, including Turner Network Television (TNT) in 1988, Cartoon Network in 1992 and Turner Classic Movies (TCM) in 1994, helping him become the first cable magnate and a billionaire before selling Turner Broadcasting System to Time Warner in 1996—placing TBS and Turner’s other holdings under the same umbrella as HBO.

Competition in sports programming

Boxing had been a cornerstone of HBO’s programming since 1973, when the George Foreman upset of Joe Frazier was made famous by Howard Cosell calling “Down Goes Frazier!” HBO also broadcast the Rumble in the Jungle in 1974 before going national. Many credit “HBO World Championship Boxing” for the sport’s continued growth in the 1970s through the 1990s, even after Ali retired in 1981. The network also launched “Inside the NFL” in 1977, the first league-branded analysis show on premium cable, which was followed by the Major League Baseball-branded “Race for the Pennant” the following year. HBO aired Wimbledon matches starting in 1975 and set a standard for investigative sports journalism with “Real Sports with Bryant Gumble,” which ran for 28 years starting in 1995.

HBO was a fixture in boxing for 45 years, airing its last boxing match in 2018 as it shifted network focus away from sports overall due to competition from sports media companies, including those also owned by Warner Bros. Discovery like CBS Sports and TNT.

ESPN is another sports media company that emerged from the establishment of regional sports cable networks, including the Madison Square Garden Sports Network. It was originally conceived as a Connecticut sports network before founder Bill Rasmussen learned it would be cheaper to broadcast nationally over satellite from Bristol, Connecticut, than regionally, leading to the first national 24-hour sports network launching in 1979.

The same year, a local Columbus, Ohio, children’s cable network, Pinwheel, went national—renamed Nickelodeon for its April 1 launch. Warner-Amex owned Nickelodeon and launched MTV two years later in 1981, three years after HBO’s music video-focused “Video Jukebox” premiered.

Expanding cable

Cable’s growth was still limited through the early 1980s, with many municipalities blocking expansion to protect their own media. The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 helped create regulations that ensured local stations would be available on cable while also requiring that a portion of cable subscriptions fund public, educational and government (PEG) access channels. As cable’s spread accelerated, HBO continued to break ground in television programming and larger culture.

The Sopranos (cast pictured) was one of the industry-changing shows that debuted on HBO duringthe late 1990s and early 2000s. (Photo: HBO)

When HBO launched, there were only a handful of comedy clubs in the United States, with only a few venues to see standup comics outside of New York or Los Angeles. On broadcast television, standup comedy was limited to five-minute sets on late-night and variety shows. HBO’s comedy specials changed the industry when comedian Robert Klein debuted on the network in 1975. HBO helped legendary comedians like George Carlin become stars, while providing viewers exposure to future generations of comedians by creating standup comedy shows like Def Comedy Jam. Other networks and platforms like Comedy Central and Netflix followed this lead and expanded their program offerings through standup programs and specials.

One of the draws of these specials was that they were uncensored. HBO and its sister network Cinemax, which launched in 1980, were unique because they aired uncut theatrical films and adult programming. As HBO spread, advocacy groups tried to block the network in some states, due to what they felt was obscene content. Utah passed several laws to try to block HBO, but ultimately, as a premium network that required a subscription, it was not subject to broadcast obscenity laws and was protected by the First Amendment.

HBO was also a pioneer in unscripted programming, becoming one of the top producers of documentary films and series. From concert films to true crime, the breadth of unscripted programming became an inspiration for reality programming across television and helped advance documentary filmmaking. HBO now releases a documentary film or series nearly every month and helped create a template for documentaries, especially those focused on sports or culture.

As other premium and cable networks encroached on HBO’s programming, the network stayed ahead of the pack and produced its own scripted programming in the early 1980s—including Not Necessarily the News, a satirical news program that inspired series like The Daily Show and HBO’s own Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.

One of the true turning points for HBO and the sitcom genre was the debut of The Larry Sanders Show in 1992. The network saw a number of the comedians that launched their careers through HBO—including Jerry Seinfeld and Roseanne Barr—receive their own shows, so HBO worked with Garry Shandling to create the show based on Shandling’s life. The single-camera, behind-the-scenes, laugh track–free show inspired similar series like 30 Rock, The Office and HBO’s Curb Your Enthusiasm.

The true turning point

The true turning point for HBO came in the late 1990s, when the network helped launch what many consider the age of prestige television. Throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s, HBO debuted a string of industry-changing shows including Oz, Sex and the City, The Sopranos, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Six Feet Under, and The Wire, which inspired other networks to focus on higher-quality scripted programming like The Shield on FX and Mad Men on AMC.

During this time, HBO also launched the first video-on-demand service in 2001 through cable providers, initiating a shift away from appointment television and toward the current streaming environment, which HBO helped expand by launching HBO Go in 2010. Although Netflix launched its streaming service in 2007, HBO Go offered the network’s original programming and pushed Netflix to do the same; Netflix aired its first original series, House of Cards, in 2013.

HBO Go was supported by a new wave of highly produced series that brought cinematic-level production to television. Shows like Game of Thrones and Westworld helped support the continued growth of cinematic sensibilities influencing television production. Even with increased competition from streaming platforms like Netflix and Hulu, HBO continues to be an industry leader despite questions regarding parent company Warner Bros. Discovery’s (WBD) future. HBO Max is the streaming home for the corporation offering HBO programming along with news (CNN), sports (Turner/CBS) and scripted and unscripted programming from across WBD’s many brands.

HBO’s growth from a small regional subscription network to the standard bearer of television internationally can be traced to the network’s national debut. That its first national broadcast happened to be one of the greatest boxing matches in the sport’s history is fitting, considering HBO’s impact on modern television.

Jared Bahir Browsh is an assistant teaching professor of critical sports studies in the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Department of Ethnic Studies.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about critical sports studies? Show your support.

Fifty years after the Thrilla in Manila bout launched HBO as a national broadcasting powerhouse, the network continues to shape modern viewing and entertainment.

Traditional

White

What’s all the buzz about?

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 02 Oct 2025 21:23:44 +0000

What’s all the buzz about? Rachel Sauer Thu, 10/02/2025 - 15:23

Bradley Worrell

In a week celebrating both National Coffee Day and International Coffee Day, ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� scholar and “coffee-ologist” Kate Fischer considers a good cup of joe

By her education and training, Kate Fischer is a cultural anthropologist. But she uses an entirely different descriptor to explain her research focus.

“I sometimes tell people I’m a coffee-ologist,” says Fischer, an associate teaching professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Arts and Sciences Honors Program as well as a seminar instructor in the Miramontes Arts and Sciences Program. While the connection between her chosen career field and area of research might not be clear at first blush, she explains, “My PhD is in cultural anthropology, which allows me to look at coffee from a lot of different angles—from biology and tropical plant science, to agricultural management, to labor conditions on the farms, all of the chemistry and engineering that goes into transforming it (into a beverage), and then the brewing and the baristas in the coffee shops who serve it. So, really it touches everything.”

For those who really, really love their coffee—including Fischer—this week was a special one, as Monday was National Coffee Day in the United States and Wednesday was International Coffee Day.

Kate Fischer, a ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� associate teaching professor and cultural anthropologist, researched coffee in Guatemala and Costa Rica during her PhD studies.

With two days this week devoted to celebrating all things coffee, it seemed like the perfect time for Colorado Arts and Sciences Magazine to ask Fischer about her thoughts on what makes for a good cup of java, the appeal of both new specialty coffees and old standards like Folgers and the pros and cons of becoming a coffee connoisseur. Her answers have been lightly edited and condensed for space.

Question: How did you come to be a self-described coffee-ologist?

Fischer: I started as a barista back in the day, and I had so many questions. Some people might have been happy to search online for answers; other people, like me, go and get PhDs to get their questions answered (laughs). And then still have questions.

My initial research was in Guatemala and then later in Costa Rica, where I lived for a year and a half while working on my PhD, looking to get the bigger picture of coffee. I was really fascinated by the idea that you could have this same crop grown in so many places, with some similarities but also many differences.

Question: How is it that coffee has become such a big part of the American experience when it’s not native to this country?

Fischer: Coffee has been a part of the United States for a really long time, but it particularly took off around World War II. Its ubiquity came from the fact that it became a part of soldiers’ rations, so when they came back from the war they were used to it and, as a result, we saw big increases in demand. With modernized packaging and shipping, it became easier to sell on store shelves.

It became this sign of a modern family to have your coffee in the home. Even if they weren’t drinking it as a kid, kids grew up with the smell of it in the parents’ and grandparents’ home. Even people who tell me they don’t enjoy the taste of coffee say they like the smell, because it brings back a lot of memories for them.

Question: Is there any data on how many Americans regularly drink coffee? And how coffee consumption today compares with past years?

Fischer: This year’s National Coffee Association report tells us that 66% of American adults drink coffee daily, which is more than any other beverage, and up nearly 7% compared to 2020. The average coffee drinker drinks three cups a day. While it’s up since 2020, over time our consumption of coffee has dropped, because there is so much more competition now.

Question: There is a perception that young people today don’t like coffee. As someone who teaches young adults, do you believe there is any validity to that idea?

Fischer: Again, I think one of the big things is that today there’s so much more competition in terms of drinks, especially ready-to-go drinks. In the 1980s, your big competition was soda and maybe tea. Today we have kombucha, boba tea, Monster and Celsius energy drinks and so many other choices, so the overall coffee share is probably a bit less.

"I encourage people who are interested in coffee not to get overwhelmed or turned off by some of those gatekeepers who have their opinions of what good coffee tastes like. There are lots of different ways to enjoy coffee," says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� coffee researcher Kate Fischer.

When I ask my students, especially first-years, how many of them drink coffee every day, it’s just a couple. Many of them have had other caffeinated beverages. But when I ask how many of them drink coffee at some point during the week, then it’s nearly everybody. So, it might not be every day, but they are drinking coffee at some point during the week. With juniors and seniors, there’s a definite increase in caffeine consumption, particularly coffee.

Question: How do you explain the appeal of coffee to people who don’t drink it or who say they don’t like coffee?

Fischer: For people who don’t love the taste of coffee, it is more of a caffeine delivery vessel, and maybe a sugar delivery vessel for people who like the lattes with the crazy syrups and other things in them. They want to hide the taste, but caffeine and sugar are strong appeals. For the people who really get into their coffee, there is the sensory side of it, like the way it’s roasted and ground, and how different preparation methods can make the same coffee taste very different.

I think a lot of people, when they say they don’t like coffee, really it’s bad coffee they don’t like. They don’t like hotel coffee, or dining hall coffee, or really dark roast coffee. There are so many other good alternatives to those types of coffee if they are willing to try them.

Question: What do you think makes for a good cup of coffee? Is it the beans? The grinding? The brewing process? Something else? Are there any commonalities?

Fischer: All of the above. What makes good coffee is a topic I’ve been looking at for a long time, and it has led me down many rabbit holes.

There are a lot of ways that people try to be empirical about what makes good coffee, which, as a cultural anthropologist, I tend to challenge the notion that you can be empirical about something as subjective as taste, but there are objective pieces to it.

The Specialty Coffee Association has come up with a grading system. For a long time, it was a numeric scale, and they said, ‘Here’s how you’re going to prepare this coffee,’ and they had this whole checklist of things like the roast level, the grind size and all these different things. And then there is a specialized tasting, called cupping, where experts look at these different attributes and score them. And people are trained to do this, judging coffees on a straight scale of totally bitter to totally sweet, and anybody who has a trained palate will agree on this. They’ve done all kinds of blind tests on this and they are very consistent in their judgments. Today it has evolved to include more holistic assessments that do a better job of separating out objective qualities from preferences.

But really, the answer is: The best cup of coffee is the one you like the best. Like anything else, it’s a preference.

"For the people who really get into their coffee, there is the sensory side of it, like the way it’s roasted and ground, and how different preparation methods can make the same coffee taste very different," says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� scholar Kate Fischer.

Question: Do you have thoughts on specialty brands, such as Death Wish Coffee, that are designed to give you a huge jolt of caffeine and basically assault your senses?

Fischer: At that point, is it really any different than drinking a Red Bull or other energy drink? With something like Death Wish, that’s absolutely a branding style and choice of who they’re aiming it at, and I think they are trying to capture the energy drink crowd by giving them a drink that’s more (caffeine) concentrated.

Ultimately, I think that’s about knowing your customer and what the buyer is looking for. So, if you’re trying to sell that customer who wants Death Wish a fruity, really light, delicate coffee, you’re probably not going to do very well.

Question: Alternatively, there are those who just like basic black coffee without any special flavorings or other enhancements. Anything you would say to them to encourage them to broaden their horizons, coffee-wise?

Fischer: There are a lot of people out there who say, ‘I don’t want my coffee to taste like cranberries’ or these other descriptors. They want coffee to taste like coffee, which for them might be something like Folgers. My father, for example, wants a nice, simple, comfort-food version of coffee, and for him, Folgers is comfort food. And for me, it’s just bitter and sad and needs a lot of help to disguise what it is. Which is not what I want in my coffee.

I try not to judge people for liking what they like when it comes to coffee, but developing a palate for coffee does ruin you. I’ve tried not to be a coffee snob, but once you’ve had the really good stuff and you know what it can taste like, it’s hard to go back.

Question: With two major events celebrating coffee this week, will you personally be doing anything to celebrate?

Fischer: I hadn’t planned to, but now I’m thinking I should. I would just encourage people to drink coffee and learn something about where it came from. With coffee, it’s one of those things that can be as complicated or as simple as you want it to be.

Also, I encourage people who are interested in coffee not to get overwhelmed or turned off by some of those gatekeepers who have their opinions of what good coffee tastes like. There are lots of different ways to enjoy coffee.

And it’s OK if coffee is not your thing. I don’t understand it, but it’s OK.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about arts and sciences? Show your support.

In a week celebrating both National Coffee Day and International Coffee Day, ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� scholar and “coffee-ologist” Kate Fischer considers a good cup of joe.

Traditional

White

Research

Voters’ dislike of PAC donations cuts across political lines

Related Articles

Students learning dam good lessons from nature's busy builders

Related Articles

Migration no guarantee of bird biodiversity

Related Articles

Exploring Colorado’s untapped geothermal energy potential

Related Articles

Research on python hearts has possible implications for human medicine

Related Articles

Building a digital home for Arapaho, one sentence at a time

Related Articles

2025 Nobel Laureate in physics once served as mentor to grad students at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��

Related Articles

Hindsight may be 20/20, but people feel more strongly about the future

Related Articles

And the heavyweight champion of TV is ... HBO!

Related Articles

What’s all the buzz about?

Related Articles

Research

Voters’ dislike of PAC donations cuts across political lines

Related Articles

Students learning dam good lessons from nature's busy builders

Related Articles

Migration no guarantee of bird biodiversity

Related Articles

Exploring Colorado’s untapped geothermal energy potential

Related Articles

Research on python hearts has possible implications for human medicine

Related Articles

Building a digital home for Arapaho, one sentence at a time

Related Articles

2025 Nobel Laureate in physics once served as mentor to grad students at ���Ҵ�ý�ƽ������

Related Articles

Hindsight may be 20/20, but people feel more strongly about the future

Related Articles

And the heavyweight champion of TV is ... HBO!

Related Articles

What’s all the buzz about?

Related Articles

2025 Nobel Laureate in physics once served as mentor to grad students at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��