The Daily

In a speech on Wednesday, President Vladimir V. Putin said that he would require hundreds of thousands more Russians to fight in Ukraine — and alarmed the West by once again raising the specter of nuclear force.The mobilization signals that Mr. Putin is turning the war from one of aggression to one of defense, offering clues about what the next phase of the fighting will involve.Guest: Anton Troianovski, the Moscow bureau chief for The New York Times.Background reading: Accelerating his war effort, Mr. Putin accused the West of trying to “weaken, divide and ultimately destroy” Russia.American and other officials vowed to continue sending military, economic and humanitarian aid to Ukraine.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Last week, nearly 50 Venezuelan migrants showed up, without warning, on the wealthy island of Martha’s Vineyard.Their arrival was the culmination of a monthslong strategy by two of the United States’ most conservative governors to lay the issue of undocumented immigration at Democrats’ doorstep.How has this strategy played out and what has it meant for the migrants caught in the middle?Guest: Miriam Jordan, a national correspondent covering immigration for The New York Times.Background reading: Scores of migrants have been shipped north by southern Republican governors. Here’s what you need to know.Martha’s Vineyard, the moneyed summer resort, has become an unlikely arena in the fight over illegal immigration.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and

Last week, nearly 50 Venezuelan migrants showed up, without warning, on the wealthy island of Martha’s Vineyard.Their arrival was the culmination of a monthslong strategy by two of the United States’ most conservative governors to lay the issue of undocumented immigration at Democrats’ doorstep.How has this strategy played out and what has it meant for the migrants caught in the middle?Guest: Miriam Jordan, a national correspondent covering immigration for The New York Times.Background reading: Scores of migrants have been shipped north by southern Republican governors. Here’s what you need to know.Martha’s Vineyard, the moneyed summer resort, has become an unlikely arena in the fight over illegal immigration.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and

Adnan Syed was accused of the 1999 killing of his classmate and ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee, whose body was found buried in a car park in Baltimore.He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison but has proclaimed his innocence for the last 23 years.Mr. Syed was the subject of the first season of the podcast “Serial,” which painstakingly examined his case and the evidence against him.Yesterday, his conviction was overturned. On today’s episode, the “Serial” team looks at how this happened. Guest: Sarah Koenig, the host and executive producer of the “Serial” podcast.Background reading: Mr. Syed had been serving a life sentence for the 1999 murder of his high school classmate Hae Min Lee. Here is the timeline of his legal journey.A Baltimore City Circuit Court judge vacated Mr. Syed’s conviction “in the interests of justice and fairness.”For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Tim

Adnan Syed was accused of the 1999 killing of his classmate and ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee, whose body was found buried in a car park in Baltimore.He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison but has proclaimed his innocence for the last 23 years.Mr. Syed was the subject of the first season of the podcast “Serial,” which painstakingly examined his case and the evidence against him.Yesterday, his conviction was overturned. On today’s episode, the “Serial” team looks at how this happened. Guest: Sarah Koenig, the host and executive producer of the “Serial” podcast.Background reading: Mr. Syed had been serving a life sentence for the 1999 murder of his high school classmate Hae Min Lee. Here is the timeline of his legal journey.A Baltimore City Circuit Court judge vacated Mr. Syed’s conviction “in the interests of justice and fairness.”For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Tim

The funeral of Queen Elizabeth today will be one of the most extraordinary public spectacles of the last several decades in Britain, accompanied by an outpouring of sadness, reverence and respect.But the end of the queen’s 70-year reign has also prompted long-delayed conversations about the future of the Commonwealth and of the four nations that make up the United Kingdom.Guest: Mark Landler, the London bureau chief for The New York Times.Background reading: In Commonwealth nations with British colonial histories, Queen Elizabeth’s death has rekindled discussions about a more independent future.The loss of the beloved figurehead has left many in Britain anxious and unmoored, unsure of their nation’s identity, its economic and social well-being, or even its role in the world.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture

The funeral of Queen Elizabeth today will be one of the most extraordinary public spectacles of the last several decades in Britain, accompanied by an outpouring of sadness, reverence and respect.But the end of the queen’s 70-year reign has also prompted long-delayed conversations about the future of the Commonwealth and of the four nations that make up the United Kingdom.Guest: Mark Landler, the London bureau chief for The New York Times.Background reading: In Commonwealth nations with British colonial histories, Queen Elizabeth’s death has rekindled discussions about a more independent future.The loss of the beloved figurehead has left many in Britain anxious and unmoored, unsure of their nation’s identity, its economic and social well-being, or even its role in the world.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture

“Nobody’s gonna know. They’re gonna know.”If you’ve been on TikTok in the past year, you’re most likely familiar with these two sentences, first drolly uttered in a post by TikTok creator Chris Gleason in 2020. The post has become a hit and has been viewed more than 14 million times.But the sound is more famous than the video.When uploading a video to TikTok, the creator has the option to make that video’s audio a “sound” that other users can easily use in their own videos — lip-syncing to it, adding more noise on top of it or treating it like a soundtrack. Gleason’s sound has been used in at least 336,000 other videos, to humorous, dramatic and sometimes eerie effect.The journalist Charlotte Shane delves into the world of repurposed sounds, exploring how TikTok and other apps have enabled, as she writes in her recent article for The Times, “cross-user riffing and engagement, like quote-tweeting for audio.” She also considers “what makes a sound compelling beyond musical qualities or linguistic meaning.”While

“Nobody’s gonna know. They’re gonna know.”If you’ve been on TikTok in the past year, you’re most likely familiar with these two sentences, first drolly uttered in a post by TikTok creator Chris Gleason in 2020. The post has become a hit and has been viewed more than 14 million times.But the sound is more famous than the video.When uploading a video to TikTok, the creator has the option to make that video’s audio a “sound” that other users can easily use in their own videos — lip-syncing to it, adding more noise on top of it or treating it like a soundtrack. Gleason’s sound has been used in at least 336,000 other videos, to humorous, dramatic and sometimes eerie effect.The journalist Charlotte Shane delves into the world of repurposed sounds, exploring how TikTok and other apps have enabled, as she writes in her recent article for The Times, “cross-user riffing and engagement, like quote-tweeting for audio.” She also considers “what makes a sound compelling beyond musical qualities or linguistic meaning.”While

It’s March 2013. The G.O.P., in tatters, issues a scathing report blaming its electoral failures on an out-of-touch leadership that ignores minorities at its own peril. Just three years later, Donald Trump proves his party dead wrong. Today, how certain assumptions took hold of both parties — and what they’re still getting wrong — heading into the midterm elections. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

It’s March 2013. The G.O.P., in tatters, issues a scathing report blaming its electoral failures on an out-of-touch leadership that ignores minorities at its own peril. Just three years later, Donald Trump proves his party dead wrong. Today, how certain assumptions took hold of both parties — and what they’re still getting wrong — heading into the midterm elections. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The adoption of electric cars has been hailed as an important step in curbing the use of fossil fuels and fighting climate change. There is a snag, however: such vehicles require around six times as many metals as their gasoline-powered counterparts.A giant storehouse of the necessary resources sits at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. But retrieving them may, in turn, badly damage the environment.Guest: Eric Lipton, an investigative reporter for The New York Times.Background reading: Mining in the Pacific Ocean was meant to benefit poorer countries, but an international agency gave a Canadian company access to seabed sites.Miles below the surface, harvesting metallic nodules may threaten animals found nowhere else on the planet.Here are some of the seabed authority emails and other documents The Times assembled as it worked on its investigation of seabed mining.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock f

The adoption of electric cars has been hailed as an important step in curbing the use of fossil fuels and fighting climate change. There is a snag, however: such vehicles require around six times as many metals as their gasoline-powered counterparts.A giant storehouse of the necessary resources sits at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. But retrieving them may, in turn, badly damage the environment.Guest: Eric Lipton, an investigative reporter for The New York Times.Background reading: Mining in the Pacific Ocean was meant to benefit poorer countries, but an international agency gave a Canadian company access to seabed sites.Miles below the surface, harvesting metallic nodules may threaten animals found nowhere else on the planet.Here are some of the seabed authority emails and other documents The Times assembled as it worked on its investigation of seabed mining.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock f

With the midterm elections a few weeks away, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, forwarded a plan to save his party from the growing backlash over abortion.But the proposal — a federal ban on almost all terminations after 15 weeks — has served mostly to expose the division among Republicans about the issue.Guest: Lisa Lerer, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: Mr. Graham’s effort has reignited debate on an issue that Republicans have worked to confront before midterm elections in which abortion rights have become a potent issue.The rejection of Mr. Graham’s bill was the latest misfire in the party’s struggle to unite behind a clear strategy.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

With the midterm elections a few weeks away, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, forwarded a plan to save his party from the growing backlash over abortion.But the proposal — a federal ban on almost all terminations after 15 weeks — has served mostly to expose the division among Republicans about the issue.Guest: Lisa Lerer, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: Mr. Graham’s effort has reignited debate on an issue that Republicans have worked to confront before midterm elections in which abortion rights have become a potent issue.The rejection of Mr. Graham’s bill was the latest misfire in the party’s struggle to unite behind a clear strategy.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

When President Biden canceled college debt last month, he left untouched the problem that created that debt: the soaring price of college.In the 1980s, the list price of undergraduate education at a private four-year institution could hit $20,000 a year. At some of these schools in the last couple of years, it has topped $80,000. Why has a college education become increasingly costly, and why has that become such a difficult problem to solve?Guest: Ron Lieber, a personal finance columnist for The New York Times and author of “The Price You Pay for College.”Background reading: Instead of making higher education free, the United States subsidizes it later through repayment plans and attempts at debt cancellation. The complexity is disrespectful, Ron Lieber writes in his “Your Money” column.Also from “Your Money”: Student loan borrowers don’t deserve “forgiveness,” they deserve an apology. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by t

When President Biden canceled college debt last month, he left untouched the problem that created that debt: the soaring price of college.In the 1980s, the list price of undergraduate education at a private four-year institution could hit $20,000 a year. At some of these schools in the last couple of years, it has topped $80,000. Why has a college education become increasingly costly, and why has that become such a difficult problem to solve?Guest: Ron Lieber, a personal finance columnist for The New York Times and author of “The Price You Pay for College.”Background reading: Instead of making higher education free, the United States subsidizes it later through repayment plans and attempts at debt cancellation. The complexity is disrespectful, Ron Lieber writes in his “Your Money” column.Also from “Your Money”: Student loan borrowers don’t deserve “forgiveness,” they deserve an apology. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by t

Over the weekend, Ukraine’s military stunned the world. After months of a kind of stalemate, its military took hundreds of miles of territory back from Russia — its biggest victory since the start of the war.How did the war reach this critical point, and what does Ukraine’s success mean for the future?Guest: Eric Schmitt, a correspondent covering national security for The New York Times.Background reading: A lightning Ukrainian offensive in the country’s northeast has reshaped what had become a grinding war of attrition.Stunned by a lightning advance, Russia has acknowledged the loss of the northern region of Kharkiv, which cast doubt on the premise that Ukraine could never defeat it. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

Over the weekend, Ukraine’s military stunned the world. After months of a kind of stalemate, its military took hundreds of miles of territory back from Russia — its biggest victory since the start of the war.How did the war reach this critical point, and what does Ukraine’s success mean for the future?Guest: Eric Schmitt, a correspondent covering national security for The New York Times.Background reading: A lightning Ukrainian offensive in the country’s northeast has reshaped what had become a grinding war of attrition.Stunned by a lightning advance, Russia has acknowledged the loss of the northern region of Kharkiv, which cast doubt on the premise that Ukraine could never defeat it. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The U.S. Open crowned its winners this weekend. But for a lot of fans, this year’s competition was less about who won, and more about a player who wasn’t even involved in the final matches.Serena Williams, who announced last month that she’d be retiring from tennis after this year’s tournament, has made an indelible impact on her sport and left a legacy away from the court that has very little precedent.Guest: Wesley Morris, a critic at large for The New York Times and co-host of Times podcast “Still Processing.”Background reading: At the U.S. Open, Serena Williams laughed, rocked sparkly shoes, rang the bell at the stock exchange, beat two opponents, teared up and said goodbye. Here’s an exploration of her magical last week in tennis.As Ms. Williams played her final matches, women have seen their own lives reflected in the triumphs and trials of the tennis superstar.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Un