Por Lisa Respers France, CNN

Si hubo un lugar donde era seguro que el nuevo biopic de Michael Jackson sería recibido con calidez, fue Gary, Indiana.

El superastro del pop creció allí con sus famosos hermanos. Su casa en la ciudad, mencionada en la canción de The Jacksons de 1989 “2300 Jackson Street”, es ahora una atracción turística. Y una noche de la semana pasada, la única escuela secundaria de la ciudad fue el lugar de un regreso a casa para miembros de la familia Jackson, que viajaron allí para una proyección de la nueva película “Michael”, sobre su exresidente más famoso y protagonizada por su sobrino, Jaafar.

Varios de los hermanos de Michael Jackson, el hijo mayor del cantante, Prince, y uno de los productores de la película, Graham King, asistieron, además de la estrella del filme.

El alcalde de la ciudad, Eddie D. Melton, moderó un panel durante el cual debatieron la realización de la película y el legado de la familia Jackson, pero no todo.

“No creo que haya necesidad de abordar las acusaciones reales”, dijo Melton a CNN por teléfono al día siguiente del evento, refiriéndose a la presunta depredación sexual de Jackson.

Las acusaciones de abuso infantil y abuso sexual a las que Jackson se enfrentó en vida y después de su muerte han dividido durante mucho tiempo a sus admiradores. Está previsto que la película sea igual de polarizadora. Tan seguro como que sus defensores elogiarán la nueva película, otros cuestionarán su enfoque sobre un legado complicado.

Esa ha sido la cuestión insoluble —y en gran medida imposible de ganar— al mirar atrás en la vida del Rey del Pop. Por su parte, Melton dijo que encontró la nueva película “fenomenal”.

Refiriéndose a Michael Jackson, dijo: “Creo que necesitamos celebrar quién es él en nuestros corazones y en nuestras mentes en este preciso momento. Pero también lo que ha aportado al mundo. Su música ha cambiado vidas”.

El biopic de Michael Jackson, dirigido por Antoine Fuqua y con un elenco que incluye a Colman Domingo y Nia Long, quienes interpretan a los padres de Jackson, tiene previsto estrenarse este 24 de abril tras años de retrasos.

La versión original de la película abordaba el caso de 1993 en el que Jackson fue acusado de abusar sexualmente de un niño de 13 años, pero requirió una revisión masiva después de que se descubriera que el acuerdo extrajudicial de aproximadamente US$ 25 millones que se había alcanzado con su acusador y su familia impedía al patrimonio mencionar el caso en cualquier tipo de película sobre Jackson, según un reporte de Puck.

Variety, que habló con fuentes con conocimiento de proyectos similares, informó recientemente que el patrimonio asumió el costo de las nuevas filmaciones, que costaron entre US$ 10 millones y US$ 15 millones.

El patrimonio había estado involucrado en la producción desde el principio y, según se informa, estaba al tanto del guion original. CNN se ha puesto en contacto con representantes del patrimonio.

Jackson, que murió en 2009 a los 50 años, sostuvo su inocencia frente a todas las acusaciones de abuso sexual infantil y otros delitos, incluidos los cargos de 2003 a los que se enfrentó y de los que posteriormente fue absuelto.

El patrimonio de Jackson sigue negando todas las acusaciones en su contra.

A principios de este año, surgieron nuevas acusaciones contra Jackson. En febrero, cuatro miembros —hoy adultos— de una familia que había sido cercana al cantante presentaron una demanda en la que lo acusaron de ser “un depredador sexual infantil en serie” que los drogó, violó, manipuló y agredió sexualmente cuando eran niños.

La demanda también acusa a Jackson de trata sexual, ya que algunos

Análisis por Allison Morrow, CNN

Puede que acabemos de presenciar el caso más flagrante de negligencia laboral hasta la fecha, y es importante, no solo porque es objetivamente gracioso, sino también porque refleja un matiz poco comentado sobre cómo funciona (o falla) la IA generativa en diferentes industrias.

Tengan paciencia conmigo.

El sábado, un abogado de alto rango de uno de los bufetes de abogados más prestigiosos del planeta se disculpó profusamente en una carta dirigida a un juez tras presentar ante el tribunal un documento plagado de errores, incluidas citas falsas, generadas por inteligencia artificial.

“Lamentamos profundamente lo sucedido”, escribió Andrew Dietderich, codirector de la división de reestructuración de Sullivan & Cromwell, en la carta, que incluía una lista de tres páginas donde se identificaban y corregían los más de 40 errores. (Para colmo, Dietderich afirmó que se enteró de los problemas solo después de que la parte contraria, Boies Schiller Flexner, los detectara).

En la carta, Dietderich atribuyó los errores a “alucinaciones” en las que las herramientas de IA “fabrican citas de casos, citan erróneamente a las autoridades o generan fuentes legales inexistentes”.

También afirmó que, si bien la firma cuenta con medidas de seguridad en torno a la IA para prevenir “precisamente esta situación”, dichas políticas no se siguieron en la elaboración de ese documento en particular.

Ahora bien, este no fue ni mucho menos el primer caso (ni probablemente será el último) de abogados de alto nivel que se topan con la furia de la IA.

Este tipo de situaciones ocurren con sorprendente frecuencia, aunque rara vez las vemos en firmas como Sullivan & Cromwell, un bufete de élite de Wall Street cuyos socios, según se informa, cobran alrededor de US$ 2.000 la hora por casos de bancarrota. (La firma no respondió a la solicitud de comentarios).

Pero uno de los aspectos más llamativos de este episodio es cómo pone de manifiesto la brecha de utilidad de la IA.

Tras más de tres años de la euforia desbordante que se desató con el lanzamiento de ChatGPT, resulta evidente que la IA generativa puede ser muy útil para un tipo de trabajador muy específico —los programadores— y puede convertirse en un fiasco vergonzoso para otros.

Esto se debe a que la programación es fundamentalmente determinista, lo que significa que existen resultados de sí o no, correctos o incorrectos. En los trabajos de programación, el software que se desarrolla funciona o no funciona.

Otras modalidades de trabajo de oficina suelen desarrollarse en zonas grises: ¿Cómo creamos un eslogan que refleje nuestros valores? ¿Mi jefe preferirá títulos con o sin serifa en esta presentación? ¿Qué jurisprudencia debo citar para respaldar mejor el caso de mi cliente?

En trabajos que no implican programación, existen distintos grados de funcionalidad que dependen de juicios de valor. (Este boletín, por ejemplo, se publica incluso con erratas, como bien señalan mis lectores habituales). Claro que se puede consultar a un chatbot o usarlo como caja de resonancia, pero no existe una respuesta única e irrefutable a este tipo de preguntas.

Esta distinción entre ciencia y arte es importante, porque actualmente las empresas tecnológicas y los inversores de Wall Street están Read more

By Sebastian Shukla, Claudia Otto, CNN

Berlin, Germany (CNN) — Marie-Louise Eta received a typical German welcome at Union Berlin’s Stadion An der Altern Försterei on Saturday.

“Fußballgöttin!” (“football goddess”) they bellowed in deafening unison.

Eta, 34, was named interim manager of the Bundesliga club last week after the sacking of the under-performing Steffan Baumgart. As a result, her unexpected appointment became a historic milestone as the club smashed through a glass ceiling in men’s professional soccer.

In the April 18 match against Wolfsburg, Eta became the first woman to take charge of a men’s soccer team in any of Europe’s top-five leagues (England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain).

A few days later, after a rain-soaked Monday training session, “Loui” – as her players and staff call her – spoke to CNN Sports about her tumultuous week.

The diminutive but steely Eta said she had looked forward to the weekend. “It was just about getting it right on the pitch from the start… I was just happy when it started,” she said.

Despite being the better team by all accounts, her first foray in the German top-flight unluckily ended with a 2-1 loss to Die Wölfe.

Sexism, hate and misogyny

The appointment, however, has been widely hailed across the soccer world as a major success.

Yet, lurking on social media, the appointment unleashed the all-too-familiar torrent of hate, sexism and misogyny. A brief scroll through the comments on various posts by Union’s social media accounts reveal that hate manifesting online. However, the club has been calling out the trolls.

One response from Union Berlin said: “Is that it? Go back to the kitchen? You’re a disappointment to all the hard working misogynists on here.”

Another: “No worries for you then – she only coaches professional footballers, not sexist trolls.”

When asked about how she has been handling the online abuse, Eta said, “I’m focusing on what I can influence here and that’s the work with the guys on the pitch, the daily football routine. It’s about staying focused and focusing on the thing. That’s what we do every day.”

Philipp Köster, the founder of Germany’s most popular soccer magazine “11FREUNDE” – 11 Friends – said he was not surprised about the vitriol.

“In all social, progressive decisions, there are always people who comment on this appraisal and then let off steam on the Internet. I think it’s important not to pay too much attention to them,” Köster told CNN Sports.

Progressive thinking and undisputed ability

Köster said Eta’s appointment was very much in keeping with Union Berlin’s progressive policies, but that he was “surprised that they said they trusted her with the role … to secure Union in the league because it wasn’t previously hinted at.

“But at the same time when you look at the competence, it is also quite logical.”

Her intelligence and know-how of the Beautiful Game is “undisputed,” he said.

“The much more important is the question of why football needed so long to be confident for a woman to also train a men’s team. So the questions you have to ask yourself are more embarrassing for football than for Marie-Louise Eta.”

The groundbreaking move is also not lost on Eta either. “I know that this has big meaning and certainly also a signal effect on the world,” she told CNN. “I am aware of that.”

Yet for her, the aim is clear: “It’s about getting points and taking care of the football.”

For the handful of hardy fans who braved the torrential ra

By John Towfighi, CNN

New York (CNN) — Brent crude has climbed back above $100 per barrel and the Strait of Hormuz, a critical artery for the global economy, remains closed. But the stock market is brushing off the turmoil.

The S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite hit record highs on Wednesday, resuming a rally despite the rise in oil prices. It’s a stark shift from last month, when higher oil prices sent stocks lower.

The S&P and Nasdaq have rallied more than 12% and 18%, respectively, since their recent nadirs on March 30. The S&P is now up nearly 4% since the war began while the Nasdaq is up nearly 9%.

Markets are forward looking, and Wall Street is trying to look past the war. Investors are leaning in to optimism about US corporate earnings season and betting that the oil shock won’t last long enough to severely hinder economic growth.

Meanwhile, tech stocks are back in favor after sliding earlier this year over nerves about expensive valuations and AI disrupting the software industry. The tech rebound is supporting the market rally.

“The combination of improving Iran headlines, investor exhaustion over the volatility in March and a strong start to earnings season has helped to propel stocks to record highs,” Rick Gardner, chief investment officer at RGA Investments, said in a note.

Back at record highs

While the war has stirred up volatility, earnings results and estimates for US companies — core drivers of stock prices — remain strong.

Wall Street is in the midst of earnings season, with nearly a fifth of companies in the S&P 500 reporting quarterly earnings as of Wednesday morning. Of those companies, 86% beat expectations for earnings per share, a measure of profitability, according to FactSet.

Tech and AI stocks, which lagged the market in recent months, have also rallied: Tech is the best performing sector in the S&P 500 so far this month. The tech sector is estimated to account for 60% of earnings growth this year, according to analysts at research firm Strategas.

The tech sell-off in prior months made those stocks cheaper, creating a buying opportunity for eager investors. Some have scooped up tech stocks despite uncertainty over how a prolonged war with Iran could potentially disrupt supply chains, drive up inflation or impact earnings.

Venu Krishna, head of US equity strategy at Barclays, said that he is optimistic about tech and AI and that there are positive signs for the broader market. The underpinnings for the rally include spending on AI and defense, he said, adding that there is “extremely strong” momentum for earnings growth in the US.

“Oil moving around at these levels at this point is not derailing that momentum,” Krishna said. “Let’s see how the earnings season unfolds, but right now, the US is looking quite attractive.”

On March 24, when the S&P 500 was down nearly 5% since the war began, Krishna raised his year-end target for the index from 7,400 points to 7,650, expressing confidence in the market. A year-end target of 7,650 implies a 7% gain from yesterday’s close.

“Investors seem to be growing comfortable with the disruption of the crude and petrochemical markets,” Louis Navellier, founder and CIO at Navellier & Associates, said in a note. “Strong and rising earnings estimates, along with firm retail spending and stable labor markets, trump higher energy prices.”

“Momentum remains positive, and FOMO (fear of missing out) is growing,” Navellier said.

Too far, too fast?

The fierce

By Jacqui Palumbo, CNN

The curator Jeffrey Uslip wants everyone to know that everything is normal.

“This is the smoothest exhibition I’ve curated in 30 years,” said Uslip, who has been working on the US Pavilion at the Biennale Arte 2026 in Venice, which opens in two weeks.

Uslip was insistent on the point. “I also just want to be clear, because I know how people talk, it’s important to know that we have had complete artistic autonomy throughout this process,” he said by phone. Later, by email, he emphasized the process to select the artist — the sculptor Alma Allen — was “exactly the same” as it always was.

There’s a reason Uslip was adamant. Like so much touched by the Trump administration, this year’s US Pavilion, which is partly funded by the government, at the so-called “Olympics of the art world” — has been plagued by controversies and delays. For months, it was uncertain whether the State Department, whose Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs oversees the search, would select an artist to present in Venice at all.

For decades, the US has brought artists from Jasper Johns and Georgia O’Keeffe to Isamu Noguchi and Simone Leigh to the Venice Biennale, a 131-year-old international exhibition where, every two years, the world’s nations present ambitious contemporary art shows in architectural pavilions to visitors around the globe.

This time, the usual process was upended and new players empowered — including Allen, who has had a steady but quiet career, prompting a string of “Who is Alma Allen?” headlines when he was announced; Uslip, whose last major exhibition in the US ten years ago was marked by scandal and accusations of racial insensitivity; and pavilion commissioner Jenni Parido, a former pet supply shop owner organizing the show with her new nonprofit, the American Arts Conservancy. Not much is known about the group, aside from the fact that it is soliciting donations for the endeavor on its website.

No one knows quite what to expect this year, with extreme delays, including the fall government shutdown, resulting in just six months to fundraise and plan an exhibition that typically takes more than a year and millions of dollars to organize. It is complicated by the fact it is also coinciding with the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States, and has become part of a larger effort for President Trump to project an image of “American exceptionalism” through the arts.

Many in the art world have been watching — though often to rubberneck.

“This will certainly be taken up by historians,” said the contemporary art historian and Columbia University professor Alexander Alberro, who lectures on the Venice Biennale. “It is something that’s representative of the moment. It’s not an accident, given what’s happening elsewhere in the country.”

A motley crew

Exactly who selected Allen and Parido as artist and commissioner remains unclear.

That task has usually depended on the National Endowment of the Arts (NEA) — which, like so much of the federal government, has been gutted by the Trump administration. The group normally convenes a federal advisory committee of leading curators, museum directors and other experts to vet applications and recommend the artist and its commissioner, which is typically a major museum or other arts nonprofit that organizes the show and fundraises the exorbitant costs. (The State Department provides $375,000, a third of which goes to facility upkeep).

Recent pavilions have been historic and widely celebrated firsts, including Leig