Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

What a Year on Ozempic Taught Johann Hari

News Feed
Friday, June 7, 2024

In the fall of 2005, Johann Hari, then a young columnist for The Independent who was struggling with his weight, described a trip he said he’d taken to a wellness spa in the foothills of the Carinthian Alps. After spending just four days there on a cleansing diet that consisted almost entirely of drinking tea—Hari could not bear to stay a moment longer—he’d lost seven pounds. “The cravings for lard had leeched out of my system,” he marveled in his write-up, noting that he hadn’t yet regained the weight.Hari tells this Alpine-detox story once again in Magic Pill, his fourth and latest book, released last month—but the anecdote now appears to hold a different lesson. Instead of maintaining his new diet, he seems to relapse: “When I got home, I felt like a failure,” he now says of the very same experience. “Where, I wondered, was my willpower?”The new book’s title is a slanted reference to Ozempic (which doesn’t come in pill form), and to the new class of anti-obesity medications that is already reshaping health care for tens of millions of Americans. Many of Magic Pill’s 250 pages describe these drugs’ amazing benefits and potential harms; most of the rest are devoted to a workmanlike review of certain social causes of obesity, and how they might one day be reversed. Some portions of this story have been told in other places—Hari makes ample references to other well-known books. But his account brings an element of human drama that few could match, even when it’s just rehashing others’ work. That drama is the author’s own: Above all else, Magic Pill describes Hari’s everlasting struggle to control himself. Whether purposefully or not, he has produced a revealing record of his shame.Why does Hari feel ashamed? For one thing, he’s on Ozempic. Hari doesn’t really need to take Ozempic, but he’s on it nonetheless: That’s the premise of the book, as laid out from the start. He decided, “quite abruptly” as he puts it in the introduction, to begin injections. It was 2022, and his pandemic BMI had risen to a hair over 30, just high enough to qualify for a prescription. Going on it “was a snap decision,” he explains, “and later I realized I was driven by impulses I didn’t fully understand at the time.” A methodical examination of those impulses unspools from there: Across the book’s 12 chapters, Hari will ask himself why he can’t just stop eating. Why should he need the help of a powerful drug to lose weight? Where, he’ll wonder again and again, is his willpower?There are scientific answers to those questions, and also there are moral ones. “Taking Ozempic was a betrayal of my values. Every time I injected myself, I felt fraudulent,” he writes. A few pages later, he elaborates: “If I am totally honest, at some level, I believed that by taking these drugs, I was cheating.” This inner sense of crookedness is meant to stand in for a more expansive one. If he’s a victim of his impulses, then we all are as well. Why can’t any of us stop eating? Whatever happened to our willpower? And if Hari feels uneasy injecting himself with artificial self-restraint, then society should feel the same. We’ve made a religion, more or less, out of limitless consumption; we’ve allowed our diets to be overrun with processed, packaged foods. Now we’re rolling back the ill effects of too much eating with yet another branded product. Doesn’t this approach to public health feel a little bit like cheating? Isn’t it a form of fraud?This line of thinking holds a special resonance for Hari, who has in other contexts shown a catastrophic lack of self-control. In fact, his history as a journalist would seem to offer special insight into the battle between the id and the superego. As a columnist for magazines and newspapers—and as the guy who wrote about the Alpine weight-loss trip almost 20 years ago—he was once a lauded journalist. Hari’s work “combines courageous reporting and forceful writing with honest analysis,” announced a judge who awarded him the Orwell Prize in 2008. But Hari’s career appeared to reach an early end a few years later, when some of his work was found to be conspicuously dishonest. In 2011, he was outed as a plagiarist, and then for making vicious accusations about his rivals through a sock-puppet account on Wikipedia. “I did two wrong and stupid things,” Hari wrote in his final column for the Independent, under the headline “A personal apology.” He promised to step away from writing for a while so that he could study journalism, and that when he finished he’d be more scrupulous than he’d ever been before, footnoting all his work and posting audio of all his interviews. “I hope after a period of retraining, you will give me the chance,” he said.That chance arrived a few years later, when Hari reappeared with a best seller, Chasing the Scream, on the social causes of addiction, and a viral TED Talk—which has now been viewed 21 million times—on the same topic. He’s since written three more pop-science books, all of which are variations on this theme. In 2018, he published Lost Connections, another best seller, about depression, anxiety, and, to some extent, the nature of addiction. Hillary Clinton blurbed that one, and Ezra Klein had Hari on his podcast. After that was Stolen Focus, in 2022, about technology, distraction, and the limits of the will. Hari got another blurb from Clinton (among other celebrities), and spent another hour as a guest on Klein’s show. And now this year we have Magic Pill, Hari’s book about obesity, overeating, and, once again, the limits of the will.Which is to say, all of Hari’s writing since his comeback has been concerned—one might even say obsessed—with self-control and self-destruction; and with the interplay of forces, from without and from within, that may lead us into ruin. They present as social commentary, and also as self-help, and further as a meditation on the links between the social and the self. As Klein put it on his podcast, the books compose “a little subgenre taking conditions and afflictions that we individualize and arguing for their social roots.”Hari tends to use himself to illustrate those conditions and afflictions, however they arise. According to his books, he’s been hooked on stimulants; he’s also been strung out on antidepressants, dependent on his phone, and addicted to fried foods. He says he has a family history of drug dependence, and of mental illness, and also of obesity. In other words, Hari lives in just the way we all do: caught between desire and self-blame. His books describe dysregulation. They’re also a product of it.Back in 2015, when Hari gave his first post-scandal interview, he described himself, in a joke, as a “recovering former columnist.” His work since then does read like one extended chronicle of a struggle for sobriety—particularly when it comes to sticking to the facts. Hari’s books remind you in a hundred different ways that he’s on the wagon as a journalist. He posts the audio from many of his interviews, just as he promised he would, and he piles on the endnotes. “I went on a journey of over forty thousand miles. I conducted more than two hundred interviews across the world,” he boasts in the introduction to Lost Connections. “I went on a 30,000-mile journey … In the end, I interviewed over 250 experts,” he says in Stolen Focus. And now, apparently having rushed a bit for Magic Pill: “I went on a journey around the world, where I interviewed over a hundred experts.”But showing off is not the same as showing discipline. In spite of Magic Pill’s 394 endnotes (including those published on the website for the book) and 318 posted clips from interviews, and notwithstanding the pair of fact-checkers whom Hari thanks in his acknowledgments, the book is strewn with sloppy errors. Some of these have already been made public. When a British restaurant critic named Jay Rayner, described by Hari as having lost his love for food after going on Ozempic, pointed out on X last month that this was “complete and utter bollocks,” Hari admitted his mistake: “I apologise to Jay for getting this wrong, & am gutted I & my fact-checkers missed it,” he wrote. Then his proffered explanation—that he’d meant to cite the experience of the film critic Leila Latif when she was on Ozempic—ran aground as well. “I’m not, nor have I ever been, on semaglutide,” Latif chimed in just hours later.A few weeks ago he posted fixes for another seven errors from the book on his website, in response to an email from a journalist. (A detailed roundup of those mistakes has since been published in The Telegraph.) I came across a bunch of other glitches in my reading of the book. In one instance, Hari writes about an evening long ago when he heard about a restaurant in Las Vegas where the servers doled out spankings to anyone who didn’t clean their plate. According to the book, that conversation happened in the late 1990s or early aughts, but the restaurant in question—called the Heart Attack Grill—didn’t open in Las Vegas until 2011. This tiny error makes no difference to the story Hari tells, but lots of tiny errors, set against the backdrop of the author’s ostentatious rigor, tell a story of their own. In a chapter on the scourge of ultra-processed foods, Hari talks about the slurry of defatted beef that is sometimes called “pink slime,” suggesting that it got this name from a food executive. This is precisely not the case. (Food executives sued the guy who coined that phrase, along with the news outlet that reported it, for defamation.) When Hari writes about the big reveal of findings from a major trial of Ozempic’s use for losing weight, he sets the scene on “one day in 2022.” The reveal occurred in 2021. And when he describes a study of mothers who have been taught “responsive parenting” techniques, he says their children ended up half as likely to become obese or overweight as those of other parents. (Hari puts the word half in italics, to emphasize the size of the effect.) But this finding was not statistically significant, according to the published work to which he is referring. “Differences between study groups were modest,” it says.When reached by email, Hari acknowledged two of these mistakes and insisted that the other two were spurious. Some food executives did end up uttering the words pink slime, he said. (This was only in the course of responding to the PR crisis that the coinage had produced.) He also said that he’d drawn the stat about responsive parenting from a different paper that came out of the same research project, which was published two years earlier than the one cited in the endnotes of his book. (The text in Magic Pill clearly refers to the findings of the more recent paper.)I’m worried by this indolence with details, from a (once again) successful writer whose commitment to the truth was formerly in question. But I was disconcerted, too, by Hari’s careless use of language. He’s a lovely writer when he wants to be: As a columnist, his early work—filled with fizzy, funny formulations—was a pleasure to consume. Now he sometimes writes as though he’s dishing day-old cream of wheat. “Then a breakthrough came from totally out of left field,” reads one characteristic section opener. The scientists in Magic Pill are said to have “aha moments,” “light-bulb moments,” and moments as “in a game show, where you realize you’ve won the jackpot”; and many of their reported quotes—which Hari tends to give at snippet-length—are comically banal. “That was unbelievably exciting,” an endocrinologist tells him, in reference to the FDA’s approval of a diabetes drug. “When you have obesity as a child, it’s very difficult to become un-obese,” another source explains.[Read: Ozempic or bust]He’s also shameless about recycling his work. “I’d like to briefly restate a little of what I wrote,” he offers at one point, as the setup for a two-page run-through of a scene from Lost Connections. In other places, second-hand material gets passed off as something new. “If I was a sandwich, you wouldn’t want to eat me,” he says he told his trainer in Magic Pill, after learning that his body-fat percentage was up to 32. He made the same incomprehensible joke about his body-fat percentage, using almost the same words, in the story about his visit to the Austrian health spa from 2005: “If I were a sandwich, nobody would eat me. Except me.” He also used it in a column from 2010: “If I were a sandwich, nobody would eat me except me.”Some stretches of Magic Pill are so caked over with cliché that you can’t help but wonder if Hari might be doing it on purpose. He writes about a time when “something unexpected happened,” and then another time when someone “stumbled on an unexpected fact,” and a third when a lot of people started to “notice something unexpected.” This formulation—someone noticed something—keeps coming back: We hear from people who have variously “noticed something weird,” “noticed something odd,” “notice[d] something disconcerting,” “noticed something striking,” “noticed something peculiar,” or simply “noticed something” (which occurs multiple times on its own).Some people are so rich they’re said to have fuck-you money. As I read through Magic Pill, I couldn’t help but wonder: Is this Hari’s fuck-you prose? But then something else occurred to me: Ironically, and despite its tendency toward sloppiness, this is Hari’s writing on a diet. Sure, he used to tell his stories with panache, but that was the old Johann Hari—the fried-chicken-eating Johann Hari, the pill-popping Johann Hari, the plagiarizing Johann Hari. Now he’s on a strict regimen of bullet points. He’s skimmed the oil from his writing and doubled down on adding fiber.Why else would he insist on keeping track of all the miles that he’s traveled for each book? Why else would he be calculating (and reporting!) the numbers of his interviews? And why else would Hari feel the need to enumerate his every thought and argument as if it were a meal to be recorded in a food-tracking app? Magic Pill, like all his other books, is preoccupied with numbered lists. He can’t seem to stop himself from tallying: the five reasons we eat; the seven ways that processed foods will undermine your health; the 12 potential risks of taking drugs like Ozempic; and the five long-term scenarios that these drugs may yet produce. Was this just another form of laziness? He’s counting calories, of course; he’s showing you his work is made from whole ingredients. This is journalism on a detox cleanse. This is how you write for sustenance instead of pleasure. And this may be what you do when you’re a recovering former columnist.“I work hard to make my books both factually accurate and transparent,” Hari told me in his emailed response. “Because of some things I did that were unambiguously wrong 14 years ago, I am held to a high standard, and I embrace that high standard.” But few efforts at self-discipline can last for long, as Magic Pill itself explains.The book describes a long history of research showing that losing weight by eating less is often ineffective. “When I injected myself with Ozempic for the fifth month in a row, I thought of all the diets I had tried over the years, all the times I had tried to cut out carbs or sugar,” Hari writes. “I wondered if all those diets had been a sad joke all along, and this was my only option now.” As a journalist, he also ends up straying from his regimen: From time to time, and in place of conversations with his expert sources, Hari slips into a looser and more entertaining style. He talks about his friends, for instance, and describes the conversations they’ve had about Ozempic. Hari’s pals, unlike his sources, tend to speak in long and lively monologues that just happen to encapsulate the themes of Magic Pill. “How much is this really about improving your health?” asks a friend whom he decides to call Lara. “I don’t think, for you, it is. Not really. Not primarily. I want you to stop, and really think about it.” She goes on: I’ve known you for twenty-five years, and you’ve never been happy about how you look. You look good. I’ve always thought you looked good. But you don’t think you do. So you’re taking this drug—and all these huge risks—to conform to a particular look, an approved look, the most socially approved look. That’s why you’re doing it. You want to be thin. Those people at that Hollywood party you went to, where you learned about this drug for the first time, and you texted me all excited—they weren’t doing this to boost their health. They were already healthy. They had private chefs to cook them the healthiest possible food. They see a personal trainer every day. They were doing it to be unnaturally thin. You aren’t taking these risks to have a healthy heart. You’re taking them to have cheekbones. Lara continues in this vein, with very minor interjections from the author, across five pages of the book. This reads like Hari’s writing on a binge, unchecked by endnotes or the need for posting audio from interviews. (The bits about his friends come with no citations.) And he’s in binge mode, too, when he’s telling stories from his past, like the one about the wellness trip to Austria. Certain rigors now appear to be suspended, and the facts get kind of doughy.[Read: Ozempic patients need an off ramp]For instance, when Hari first wrote about his visit to the Alpine clinic, for The Independent in 2005, he said that he was met at the entrance by a man. In Magic Pill, it’s “a woman dressed in an elaborate nineteenth-century Austrian peasant costume.” (When reached by email, Hari blamed this gender inconsistency on a typo in the first version, which turned she into he.) The same woman comes back later in the retold version of the story, still in her elaborate peasant costume, where the original version refers only to a “nurse.” Hari says in Magic Pill that multiple staffers at the clinic were in these silly peasant outfits. The version from The Independent—from which entire paragraphs have otherwise been borrowed word for word—mentions none of them. (“It’s normal, when writing an article, to leave out some minor descriptive details, and to include them when you have more space later,” Hari told me in the email.)Similar adjustments can be found in Hari’s other reheated anecdotes. He starts the book with one about a trip he took to KFC on Christmas Eve in 2009, where all the members of the restaurant’s staff surprised him with a giant Christmas card addressed “to our best customer,” which included personal messages from each of them. He told the same story a few years ago in Lost Connections, and before that in an Independent column in 2010. But the original version takes place on December 23, not Christmas Eve; “You are our best customer” is a thing that’s said out loud, not written on a card, and there’s no mention of any personal messages from anyone at the restaurant. (Hari acknowledged that he’d made an error on the date, and told me that he’d be “happy to correct this.”) If these stories have been lightly edited, all the changes were of course unnecessary. Perhaps the clinic sounds a little sillier with the staff in dirndls, and the story of the card from KFC lands a little better when it plays out on Christmas Eve. But why would Hari bother to adjust these minor details when he’s taking such pains in other ways to demonstrate his scruples?Hari’s subject matter and his execution seem to come together in these moments. He’s explained the social and environmental causes of compulsive overeating, and he’s appealed to all the ways in which behavior can be shaped by past experience. In recent years he’s done the same for drug abuse, depression, and distraction. After nearly losing his career for taking liberties with facts, Hari has gotten famous as a chronicler and social theorist of our lack of self-control. But however it’s presented, his struggle to constrain himself still appears to be ongoing. Johann Hari keeps wondering what happened to his willpower. Four books into his comeback, we all might wonder just the same.

A chronicler of addictions struggles to control himself.

In the fall of 2005, Johann Hari, then a young columnist for The Independent who was struggling with his weight, described a trip he said he’d taken to a wellness spa in the foothills of the Carinthian Alps. After spending just four days there on a cleansing diet that consisted almost entirely of drinking tea—Hari could not bear to stay a moment longer—he’d lost seven pounds. “The cravings for lard had leeched out of my system,” he marveled in his write-up, noting that he hadn’t yet regained the weight.

Hari tells this Alpine-detox story once again in Magic Pill, his fourth and latest book, released last month—but the anecdote now appears to hold a different lesson. Instead of maintaining his new diet, he seems to relapse: “When I got home, I felt like a failure,” he now says of the very same experience. “Where, I wondered, was my willpower?”

The new book’s title is a slanted reference to Ozempic (which doesn’t come in pill form), and to the new class of anti-obesity medications that is already reshaping health care for tens of millions of Americans. Many of Magic Pill’s 250 pages describe these drugs’ amazing benefits and potential harms; most of the rest are devoted to a workmanlike review of certain social causes of obesity, and how they might one day be reversed. Some portions of this story have been told in other places—Hari makes ample references to other well-known books. But his account brings an element of human drama that few could match, even when it’s just rehashing others’ work. That drama is the author’s own: Above all else, Magic Pill describes Hari’s everlasting struggle to control himself. Whether purposefully or not, he has produced a revealing record of his shame.

Why does Hari feel ashamed? For one thing, he’s on Ozempic. Hari doesn’t really need to take Ozempic, but he’s on it nonetheless: That’s the premise of the book, as laid out from the start. He decided, “quite abruptly” as he puts it in the introduction, to begin injections. It was 2022, and his pandemic BMI had risen to a hair over 30, just high enough to qualify for a prescription. Going on it “was a snap decision,” he explains, “and later I realized I was driven by impulses I didn’t fully understand at the time.” A methodical examination of those impulses unspools from there: Across the book’s 12 chapters, Hari will ask himself why he can’t just stop eating. Why should he need the help of a powerful drug to lose weight? Where, he’ll wonder again and again, is his willpower?

There are scientific answers to those questions, and also there are moral ones. “Taking Ozempic was a betrayal of my values. Every time I injected myself, I felt fraudulent,” he writes. A few pages later, he elaborates: “If I am totally honest, at some level, I believed that by taking these drugs, I was cheating.” This inner sense of crookedness is meant to stand in for a more expansive one. If he’s a victim of his impulses, then we all are as well. Why can’t any of us stop eating? Whatever happened to our willpower? And if Hari feels uneasy injecting himself with artificial self-restraint, then society should feel the same. We’ve made a religion, more or less, out of limitless consumption; we’ve allowed our diets to be overrun with processed, packaged foods. Now we’re rolling back the ill effects of too much eating with yet another branded product. Doesn’t this approach to public health feel a little bit like cheating? Isn’t it a form of fraud?

This line of thinking holds a special resonance for Hari, who has in other contexts shown a catastrophic lack of self-control. In fact, his history as a journalist would seem to offer special insight into the battle between the id and the superego. As a columnist for magazines and newspapers—and as the guy who wrote about the Alpine weight-loss trip almost 20 years ago—he was once a lauded journalist. Hari’s work “combines courageous reporting and forceful writing with honest analysis,” announced a judge who awarded him the Orwell Prize in 2008. But Hari’s career appeared to reach an early end a few years later, when some of his work was found to be conspicuously dishonest. In 2011, he was outed as a plagiarist, and then for making vicious accusations about his rivals through a sock-puppet account on Wikipedia. “I did two wrong and stupid things,” Hari wrote in his final column for the Independent, under the headline “A personal apology.” He promised to step away from writing for a while so that he could study journalism, and that when he finished he’d be more scrupulous than he’d ever been before, footnoting all his work and posting audio of all his interviews. “I hope after a period of retraining, you will give me the chance,” he said.

That chance arrived a few years later, when Hari reappeared with a best seller, Chasing the Scream, on the social causes of addiction, and a viral TED Talk—which has now been viewed 21 million times—on the same topic. He’s since written three more pop-science books, all of which are variations on this theme. In 2018, he published Lost Connections, another best seller, about depression, anxiety, and, to some extent, the nature of addiction. Hillary Clinton blurbed that one, and Ezra Klein had Hari on his podcast. After that was Stolen Focus, in 2022, about technology, distraction, and the limits of the will. Hari got another blurb from Clinton (among other celebrities), and spent another hour as a guest on Klein’s show. And now this year we have Magic Pill, Hari’s book about obesity, overeating, and, once again, the limits of the will.

Which is to say, all of Hari’s writing since his comeback has been concerned—one might even say obsessed—with self-control and self-destruction; and with the interplay of forces, from without and from within, that may lead us into ruin. They present as social commentary, and also as self-help, and further as a meditation on the links between the social and the self. As Klein put it on his podcast, the books compose “a little subgenre taking conditions and afflictions that we individualize and arguing for their social roots.”

Hari tends to use himself to illustrate those conditions and afflictions, however they arise. According to his books, he’s been hooked on stimulants; he’s also been strung out on antidepressants, dependent on his phone, and addicted to fried foods. He says he has a family history of drug dependence, and of mental illness, and also of obesity. In other words, Hari lives in just the way we all do: caught between desire and self-blame. His books describe dysregulation. They’re also a product of it.

Back in 2015, when Hari gave his first post-scandal interview, he described himself, in a joke, as a “recovering former columnist.” His work since then does read like one extended chronicle of a struggle for sobriety—particularly when it comes to sticking to the facts. Hari’s books remind you in a hundred different ways that he’s on the wagon as a journalist. He posts the audio from many of his interviews, just as he promised he would, and he piles on the endnotes. “I went on a journey of over forty thousand miles. I conducted more than two hundred interviews across the world,” he boasts in the introduction to Lost Connections. “I went on a 30,000-mile journey … In the end, I interviewed over 250 experts,” he says in Stolen Focus. And now, apparently having rushed a bit for Magic Pill: “I went on a journey around the world, where I interviewed over a hundred experts.”

But showing off is not the same as showing discipline. In spite of Magic Pill’s 394 endnotes (including those published on the website for the book) and 318 posted clips from interviews, and notwithstanding the pair of fact-checkers whom Hari thanks in his acknowledgments, the book is strewn with sloppy errors. Some of these have already been made public. When a British restaurant critic named Jay Rayner, described by Hari as having lost his love for food after going on Ozempic, pointed out on X last month that this was “complete and utter bollocks,” Hari admitted his mistake: “I apologise to Jay for getting this wrong, & am gutted I & my fact-checkers missed it,” he wrote. Then his proffered explanation—that he’d meant to cite the experience of the film critic Leila Latif when she was on Ozempic—ran aground as well. “I’m not, nor have I ever been, on semaglutide,” Latif chimed in just hours later.

A few weeks ago he posted fixes for another seven errors from the book on his website, in response to an email from a journalist. (A detailed roundup of those mistakes has since been published in The Telegraph.) I came across a bunch of other glitches in my reading of the book. In one instance, Hari writes about an evening long ago when he heard about a restaurant in Las Vegas where the servers doled out spankings to anyone who didn’t clean their plate. According to the book, that conversation happened in the late 1990s or early aughts, but the restaurant in question—called the Heart Attack Grill—didn’t open in Las Vegas until 2011. This tiny error makes no difference to the story Hari tells, but lots of tiny errors, set against the backdrop of the author’s ostentatious rigor, tell a story of their own. In a chapter on the scourge of ultra-processed foods, Hari talks about the slurry of defatted beef that is sometimes called “pink slime,” suggesting that it got this name from a food executive. This is precisely not the case. (Food executives sued the guy who coined that phrase, along with the news outlet that reported it, for defamation.) When Hari writes about the big reveal of findings from a major trial of Ozempic’s use for losing weight, he sets the scene on “one day in 2022.” The reveal occurred in 2021. And when he describes a study of mothers who have been taught “responsive parenting” techniques, he says their children ended up half as likely to become obese or overweight as those of other parents. (Hari puts the word half in italics, to emphasize the size of the effect.) But this finding was not statistically significant, according to the published work to which he is referring. “Differences between study groups were modest,” it says.

When reached by email, Hari acknowledged two of these mistakes and insisted that the other two were spurious. Some food executives did end up uttering the words pink slime, he said. (This was only in the course of responding to the PR crisis that the coinage had produced.) He also said that he’d drawn the stat about responsive parenting from a different paper that came out of the same research project, which was published two years earlier than the one cited in the endnotes of his book. (The text in Magic Pill clearly refers to the findings of the more recent paper.)

I’m worried by this indolence with details, from a (once again) successful writer whose commitment to the truth was formerly in question. But I was disconcerted, too, by Hari’s careless use of language. He’s a lovely writer when he wants to be: As a columnist, his early work—filled with fizzy, funny formulations—was a pleasure to consume. Now he sometimes writes as though he’s dishing day-old cream of wheat. “Then a breakthrough came from totally out of left field,” reads one characteristic section opener. The scientists in Magic Pill are said to have “aha moments,” “light-bulb moments,” and moments as “in a game show, where you realize you’ve won the jackpot”; and many of their reported quotes—which Hari tends to give at snippet-length—are comically banal. “That was unbelievably exciting,” an endocrinologist tells him, in reference to the FDA’s approval of a diabetes drug. “When you have obesity as a child, it’s very difficult to become un-obese,” another source explains.

[Read: Ozempic or bust]

He’s also shameless about recycling his work. “I’d like to briefly restate a little of what I wrote,” he offers at one point, as the setup for a two-page run-through of a scene from Lost Connections. In other places, second-hand material gets passed off as something new. “If I was a sandwich, you wouldn’t want to eat me,” he says he told his trainer in Magic Pill, after learning that his body-fat percentage was up to 32. He made the same incomprehensible joke about his body-fat percentage, using almost the same words, in the story about his visit to the Austrian health spa from 2005: “If I were a sandwich, nobody would eat me. Except me.” He also used it in a column from 2010: “If I were a sandwich, nobody would eat me except me.”

Some stretches of Magic Pill are so caked over with cliché that you can’t help but wonder if Hari might be doing it on purpose. He writes about a time when “something unexpected happened,” and then another time when someone “stumbled on an unexpected fact,” and a third when a lot of people started to “notice something unexpected.” This formulation—someone noticed something—keeps coming back: We hear from people who have variously “noticed something weird,” “noticed something odd,” “notice[d] something disconcerting,” “noticed something striking,” “noticed something peculiar,” or simply “noticed something” (which occurs multiple times on its own).

Some people are so rich they’re said to have fuck-you money. As I read through Magic Pill, I couldn’t help but wonder: Is this Hari’s fuck-you prose? But then something else occurred to me: Ironically, and despite its tendency toward sloppiness, this is Hari’s writing on a diet. Sure, he used to tell his stories with panache, but that was the old Johann Hari—the fried-chicken-eating Johann Hari, the pill-popping Johann Hari, the plagiarizing Johann Hari. Now he’s on a strict regimen of bullet points. He’s skimmed the oil from his writing and doubled down on adding fiber.

Why else would he insist on keeping track of all the miles that he’s traveled for each book? Why else would he be calculating (and reporting!) the numbers of his interviews? And why else would Hari feel the need to enumerate his every thought and argument as if it were a meal to be recorded in a food-tracking app? Magic Pill, like all his other books, is preoccupied with numbered lists. He can’t seem to stop himself from tallying: the five reasons we eat; the seven ways that processed foods will undermine your health; the 12 potential risks of taking drugs like Ozempic; and the five long-term scenarios that these drugs may yet produce. Was this just another form of laziness? He’s counting calories, of course; he’s showing you his work is made from whole ingredients. This is journalism on a detox cleanse. This is how you write for sustenance instead of pleasure. And this may be what you do when you’re a recovering former columnist.

“I work hard to make my books both factually accurate and transparent,” Hari told me in his emailed response. “Because of some things I did that were unambiguously wrong 14 years ago, I am held to a high standard, and I embrace that high standard.” But few efforts at self-discipline can last for long, as Magic Pill itself explains.

The book describes a long history of research showing that losing weight by eating less is often ineffective. “When I injected myself with Ozempic for the fifth month in a row, I thought of all the diets I had tried over the years, all the times I had tried to cut out carbs or sugar,” Hari writes. “I wondered if all those diets had been a sad joke all along, and this was my only option now.” As a journalist, he also ends up straying from his regimen: From time to time, and in place of conversations with his expert sources, Hari slips into a looser and more entertaining style. He talks about his friends, for instance, and describes the conversations they’ve had about Ozempic. Hari’s pals, unlike his sources, tend to speak in long and lively monologues that just happen to encapsulate the themes of Magic Pill. “How much is this really about improving your health?” asks a friend whom he decides to call Lara. “I don’t think, for you, it is. Not really. Not primarily. I want you to stop, and really think about it.” She goes on:

I’ve known you for twenty-five years, and you’ve never been happy about how you look. You look good. I’ve always thought you looked good. But you don’t think you do. So you’re taking this drug—and all these huge risks—to conform to a particular look, an approved look, the most socially approved look. That’s why you’re doing it. You want to be thin. Those people at that Hollywood party you went to, where you learned about this drug for the first time, and you texted me all excited—they weren’t doing this to boost their health. They were already healthy. They had private chefs to cook them the healthiest possible food. They see a personal trainer every day. They were doing it to be unnaturally thin. You aren’t taking these risks to have a healthy heart. You’re taking them to have cheekbones.

Lara continues in this vein, with very minor interjections from the author, across five pages of the book. This reads like Hari’s writing on a binge, unchecked by endnotes or the need for posting audio from interviews. (The bits about his friends come with no citations.) And he’s in binge mode, too, when he’s telling stories from his past, like the one about the wellness trip to Austria. Certain rigors now appear to be suspended, and the facts get kind of doughy.

[Read: Ozempic patients need an off ramp]

For instance, when Hari first wrote about his visit to the Alpine clinic, for The Independent in 2005, he said that he was met at the entrance by a man. In Magic Pill, it’s “a woman dressed in an elaborate nineteenth-century Austrian peasant costume.” (When reached by email, Hari blamed this gender inconsistency on a typo in the first version, which turned she into he.) The same woman comes back later in the retold version of the story, still in her elaborate peasant costume, where the original version refers only to a “nurse.” Hari says in Magic Pill that multiple staffers at the clinic were in these silly peasant outfits. The version from The Independent—from which entire paragraphs have otherwise been borrowed word for word—mentions none of them. (“It’s normal, when writing an article, to leave out some minor descriptive details, and to include them when you have more space later,” Hari told me in the email.)

Similar adjustments can be found in Hari’s other reheated anecdotes. He starts the book with one about a trip he took to KFC on Christmas Eve in 2009, where all the members of the restaurant’s staff surprised him with a giant Christmas card addressed “to our best customer,” which included personal messages from each of them. He told the same story a few years ago in Lost Connections, and before that in an Independent column in 2010. But the original version takes place on December 23, not Christmas Eve; “You are our best customer” is a thing that’s said out loud, not written on a card, and there’s no mention of any personal messages from anyone at the restaurant. (Hari acknowledged that he’d made an error on the date, and told me that he’d be “happy to correct this.”) If these stories have been lightly edited, all the changes were of course unnecessary. Perhaps the clinic sounds a little sillier with the staff in dirndls, and the story of the card from KFC lands a little better when it plays out on Christmas Eve. But why would Hari bother to adjust these minor details when he’s taking such pains in other ways to demonstrate his scruples?

Hari’s subject matter and his execution seem to come together in these moments. He’s explained the social and environmental causes of compulsive overeating, and he’s appealed to all the ways in which behavior can be shaped by past experience. In recent years he’s done the same for drug abuse, depression, and distraction. After nearly losing his career for taking liberties with facts, Hari has gotten famous as a chronicler and social theorist of our lack of self-control. But however it’s presented, his struggle to constrain himself still appears to be ongoing. Johann Hari keeps wondering what happened to his willpower. Four books into his comeback, we all might wonder just the same.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Theater Award Created in Honor of Philip Seymour Hoffman and Adam Schlesinger Turns 10

Playwright David Bar Katz is helping artists facing financial stress through The Relentless Award, the largest annual cash prize in American theater

NEW YORK (AP) — Many times in his life, playwright David Bar Katz didn't know how he was going to pay the bills. These days, he's helping the next generation of artists facing that same dilemma.Katz oversees The Relentless Award, the largest annual cash prize in American theater to a playwright in recognition of a new play. It's celebrating its 10th anniversary this year and, as always, seeking submissions that “exhibit fearlessness.” The award also honors musical theater.“Being able to create under financial stress is so difficult, and so anything we can do to give artists a little breathing room is what we want,” says Katz.The award was inspired by Katz's friend and collaborator Philip Seymour Hoffman, the late actor who was described as relentless in his pursuit of truth in his art. A musical theater honor was added after the 2020 death of another of Katz's friends, Fountains of Wayne co-founder Adam Schlesinger.“To me, a big aspect of the award — the musical and the straight play — is not merely honoring Phil and Adam, but the idea of expanding their artistic legacies,” says Katz. Some of the plays that have been recognized have gone on to great success, like Aleshea Harris’ 2016 winner “Is God Is,” which has been made into a movie starring Janelle Monáe, Vivica A. Fox, Sterling K. Brown and Kara Young.“Alicia typifies the whole point of the award,” says Katz. “I think at a moment in her life where she, like so many of us other artists, had kind of had it, she won the award and that was incredibly meaningful in her career.”Other successes include Sarah DeLappe’s “The Wolves” and Clare Barron’s “Dance Nation” — joint winners in 2015 — who have gone on to become Pulitzer Prize finalists. “The impact, especially of those three plays, has been profound in theater,” Katz says.The musical and the playwriting honors alternate each year. The winner this year is Jack D. Coen, who created the musical comedy “Jo Jenkins Before the Galactic Court of Consciousness.”Cohen will receive $65,000 and his musical — as well as the works of the finalists — will be honored at a ceremony and performance on Oct. 12 at Building for the Arts’ multi-theater complex, Theatre Row. Chris Collingwood, of Fountains of Wayne, will be performing as well. The Relentless Award seeks full-length works by American applicants who haven’t previously been produced. All submissions are judged anonymously. The Relentless Award’s selection committee this year consisted of Katz, “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” co-creator Rachel Bloom, Tony Award-winner Jason Robert Brown, Emmy Award-winner David Javerbaum, songwriter and producer Sam Hollander, composer and arranger Laura Grill Jaye, two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright Lynn Nottage, musician and writer Brontez Purnell and Obie-winning playwright Lucy Thurber.The American Playwriting Foundation, which gives out the award, will be able to showcase winners at Theatre Row, a crucial step for budding artists.“The first step was getting this money to artists that need it and giving them a launching place and some notoriety. But the dream was also then to be able to put it up because that is the hardest thing to get done now,” Katz says. “Everybody has readings and no one has a production.” “Jo Jenkins Before the Galactic Court of Consciousness” is described as an inventive, existential sci-fi comedy about a marine-biologist-turned-actuary who must defend humanity to an intergalactic council. Katz says it deals with the environmental crisis in a novel way. “We’ve all heard the polemic, and it’s not really working the way we want it to. But a musical like this, what it does is it appeals to the heart and the soul, and not the intellect,” he says. “That maybe can move the needle.”Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Sept. 2025

California faces a self-created oil and gas crisis. Lawmakers should consider these steps next

Newsom’s long-overdue acknowledgement of a pending gasoline crisis — together with the Legislature’s last-minute actions — are a start, but also a piecemeal approach to addressing a critical problem.

California lawmakers just passed legislation to support the oil and gas industry in an attempt to lower costs for consumers. Below, a business professor says the package is overdue but also a piecemeal approach for such a critical problem. The opposing view: an environmental scholar argues that making it easier to drill oil won’t lower gas prices. Guest Commentary written by Michael Mische Michael Mische is an associate professor at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business. Time matters, and California is running out of it. Lawmakers in Sacramento must act to address the state’s fuel and affordability crises. Since 2001, California gas prices have increased 162%. Today, we pay about 43% more than the national average, and that figure would likely be far higher if not for record-high domestic oil production. That tailwind unfortunately won’t last. While crude oil prices have fallen 19% since January, California costs and taxes have increased, now accounting for approximately 26% of the retail price of gasoline. And with the highest state excise tax per gallon in the nation, California makes several times more than a typical retailer for the same gallon of gas sold. Platitudes and rhetoric aside, the truth is California is staring at a near-term gasoline shortfall, driven largely by the pending closure of two refineries, the highest operating costs in the nation and decades of falling in-state production. What these fuel supply challenges have not resulted in is a gigantic drop in demand. This has and will continue to lead to a greater dependence on foreign fuel, greater emissions, increased exposure to global volatility, and ultimately an increase in the price Californians pay for the fuel that powers the world’s fourth-largest economy. We face a choice: On one side, the status quo assumes California’s economy can run without petroleum any time soon. On the other is a growing recognition that affordable energy is essential to economic stability and national security. After spending years demonizing the oil and gas industry and accusing California’s refiners of ripping off consumers, Gov. Gavin Newsom now admits that “We are all the beneficiaries of oil and gas,” under severe pressure to avert a full-blown energy crisis. At the tail end of the legislative session last week, legislators and the governor reached an agreement to increase in-state crude oil production. If we care about our climate goals, we must also care about where our gasoline comes from. In 1982, California imported around 6% of its oil needs from foreign sources; today, the Golden State imports around 64% from various petrostates. Shipping finished fuel thousands of miles can mean crude sourced from regimes with higher emissions and weaker oversight than California. That’s more pollution, less transparency, less leverage for the U.S. — and yes, higher prices at the pump. None of this is necessary, and most of this is self-created. California has one of the most underused oil reserves in the nation and some the most advanced technologies, best-trained workforces and safest producers in the world. The Newsom administration’s recent moves to ease the bureaucratic red tape and permitting challenges that have forced us to import two-thirds of all our crude quietly admits as much. We should use the resources we have today while we continue to build the clean energy system of tomorrow.  We also need to dial back the regulatory cost stack. On July 1, the state raised the gas excise tax and updated the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the state’s greenhouse gas reduction program. Layer on infrastructure costs, amortization, new storage mandates, refinery retrofits for changing crude blends and the lagging effects of the LCFS credit. If we care about affordability, let’s price it honestly and show the math. Finally, equity must be both fiscally and morally sound. California’s gas tax — roughly 61 cents per gallon — pays for the roads we all use. Meanwhile, EV drivers don’t pay the tax but still use the same infrastructure. As EV adoption grows, the revenue gap widens. In a state that prides itself on equity, a fair solution is to stop subsidizing EV owners on the shoulders of other drivers and adopt a more equitable mileage-based road fee for EVs that accounts for miles driven and vehicle weight, which better reflects road wear. Newsom’s long-overdue acknowledgement of a pending gasoline and price crisis — together with the Legislature’s last-minute actions — are a start but also a piecemeal approach to addressing a critical problem. As a next step, the Legislature should consider the repeal of regulations limiting production and pipeline use in more counties, assess the powers of agency bureaucrats who force higher prices on the backs of Californians, and a new regulatory strategy that will provide a more hospitable business environment for refiners and producers. That ultimately means greater fuel and price security for California consumers.

Alabama Utility Commission Allowed to Hike Prices Behind Closed Doors, Judge Rules

A judge has ruled that Alabama's Public Service Commission can continue holding private meetings to decide fuel price hikes

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — Alabama's utility regulators can continue to hold closed-door meetings to determine price hikes, in an apparent departure from common practices in neighboring states, a circuit court judge ruled.The decision on Monday rejected a lawsuit filed by Southern Environmental Law Center on behalf of Energy Alabama, a nonprofit that advocates for renewable energy sources. The watchdog group was denied access to two meetings in 2024 where the public service commission decided how Alabama Power — the state's largest electricity provider — should adjust prices based on volatility in global fuel costs. Montgomery circuit Judge Brooke Reid ruled against the environmental advocates in a one-page order after a hearing in June. She said the group's rights had not been substantially violated. At the June hearing, Reid said the commission’s “interpretation of its own rules should be given deference.”Christina Tidwell, a senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, blasted Reid’s decision in a statement on Monday.“While other Southern states have meaningful public engagement in fuel cost proceedings, Alabama Power customers will continue to be shut out of the process,” Tidwell wrote. The Alabama Public Service Commission has rules that govern how Alabama Power can change electricity prices to offset increases in fuel costs, which tend to be volatile. Those rules say that the public is entitled to hear evidence and participate in proceedings that adjust fuel costs to ensure these changes are “just and reasonable.”The lawsuit said there have been only two public fuel cost hearings since the commission’s current rules were adopted in 1981. By contrast, the Georgia Public Service Commission, which regulates a sister company of Alabama Power, has held at least 26 public formal fuel cost proceedings, according to the complaint.The last public meeting in Alabama was called because the 2008 financial crisis caused fuel prices to skyrocket rapidly, according to attorneys for the state commission. They argued that the commission hasn't technically initiated a new proceeding since that change 16 years ago, even though rates have been adjusted over 15 times since then, so they are not compelled to invite public input.Attorneys for the state also argued that the public has “plenty of opportunities for input” even without public meetings, because the commission publishes monthly reports on fuel prices online, and rate changes are subject to public appeal. Alabama Power is a subsidiary of Atlanta-based Southern Company, which reported $4.4 billion in profit in 2024, according to annual shareholder reports. Alabama Power serves about 1.5 million of the state’s roughly 5 million residents.Most Alabama residents get electricity through municipal or cooperatively owned utilities. In 2023, the average Alabama Power consumer was paying about $159 per month, compared to the statewide average of approximately $132 per month, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Alabama Power did not respond to an emailed request for comment on Wednesday afternoon inquiring about recent rates.After the ruling, Energy Alabama's executive director Daniel Tait said in a statement that the decision was “disappointing” for “Alabamians who have no choice but to pay the high cost of fossil fuels on their Alabama Power bill.”Riddle is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - June 2025

California overhauls landmark environmental protection rules

Governor Gavin Newsom says bureaucratic roadblocks have made it difficult to build housing in the most populous stateCalifornia is overhauling its landmark environmental protection rules, a change state leaders say is essential to address the state’s housing shortage and homelessness crisis.California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, had threatened to reject the state budget passed last Friday unless lawmakers overhauled the California Environmental Quality Act, or Ceqa, a 1970s law that requires strict examination of any new development for its impact on the environment. Continue reading...

California is overhauling its landmark environmental protection rules, a change state leaders say is essential to address the state’s housing shortage and homelessness crisis.California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, had threatened to reject the state budget passed last Friday unless lawmakers overhauled the California Environmental Quality Act, or Ceqa, a 1970s law that requires strict examination of any new development for its impact on the environment.The governor and housing advocates say that Ceqa, although well-intentioned at the time, put up bureaucratic roadblocks that have made it increasingly difficult to build housing in the most populous state in the US.Lawmakers passed the transformative measure despite opposition from environmental groups. Newsom called it a step toward solving the state’s housing affordability problem.“This was too urgent, too important, to allow the process to unfold as it has for the last generation,” he told reporters at a news conference after signing the bill.The new rules were passed in two so-called “budget trailer” bills. Under the new rules, large swaths of “infill housing”, or homes built in and around existing development, will be exempt from Ceqa reviews. There will be some exceptions, including for very large projects and construction in very low-density areas, but most homes and apartments built in cities will no longer be subject to the review.“This is what we’ve all been waiting for – a long-overdue step to stop Ceqa from being weaponized against housing,” said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, who sponsored one of the bills. “We’re taking a major step toward building desperately needed homes faster, fairer, and with more certainty.”The new regulations also include exemptions for hi-tech manufacturing sites, a move proponents say will stimulate growth but critics say will facilitate industrial development in low-income neighborhoods.The exemptions, and in particular those for manufacturing sites, have been vehemently opposed by some social justice and environmental groups. “Together, these bills undermine the public participation process and the right to protect their community from environmental and health risks,” said the Western Center on Law & Poverty.“We’re in a nature crisis, we’re seeing unprecedented loss of wildlife, and that’s to be made worse with this bill,” said Laura Deehan with the group Environment California in a committee hearing on Monday.Earlier this year, Newsom waived some Ceqa rules for victims of wildfires in southern California, creating an opening for the state to re-examine the law that critics say hampers development and drives up building costs.The state budget passed last week pares back a number of progressive priorities, including a landmark healthcare expansion for low-income adult immigrants without legal status, to close a $12bn deficit.

Coalition fears spending cuts could idle central Oregon trail maintenance

Jana Johnson of Deschutes Trails Coalition says federal funding cuts will indefinitely pause trail maintenance performed by professionals.

Each summer the Deschutes Trails Coalition dispatches a small crew into the forest around Bend to improve trail conditions for myriad hikers. They remove fallen trees, repair trails impacted by erosion and cut back overgrown vegetation. But those involved with trail maintenance are increasingly worried the work relied on by both locals and visitors will soon come to a screeching halt. Jana Johnson, executive director of the nonprofit coalition, says federal funding cuts ordered by the Trump administration will indefinitely pause trail maintenance performed by professionals. A hiring freeze for seasonal workers will only compound problems for the Forest Service. “There’s obviously a lot of staffing shortages. There have been firings. People have been leaving our federal agencies due to the current budget and offers from the current administration,” said Johnson. “The public needs to know that our public lands are struggling right now.” READ MORE: Oregon hikers asked to ‘step up’ as federal cuts threaten Northwest trails The Deschutes Trails Coalition — in the third year of a three-year pilot project to pay for trail maintenance — was expecting a $200,000 grant to pay for a trail crew to operate through the summer. But that funding has been canceled, casting doubt about how the nonprofit will pay for trail maintenance in the years ahead. The coalition planned to stretch the funding over the next three years, supplemented by grants. “But without that $200,000, we are just left scrambling to try to figure out how we are going to fund them,” said Johnson. Concerns that trail maintenance won’t happen this year on the Deschutes and other national forests reflect broader worries that the Trump administration is sidelining environmental protections and recreation in favor of resource extraction. Executive orders are already in place to increase logging and fossil fuel extraction on public lands. The Deschutes River Trail runs through Tumalo State Park in central Oregon near Bend. One section of the trail follows a metal boardwalk over a field of boulders. Jamie Hale/The OregonianNate Wyeth, vice president of strategy for Visit Bend, says abandoning professional trail maintenance won’t go unnoticed by the public. “Our unparalleled access to outdoor recreation is the top reason many folks visit or live in Bend, and the current federal funding crisis will undoubtedly impact trail conditions, creating a negative visitor experience,” Wyeth said. An inquiry to the U.S. Forest Service from the Bulletin related to the disappearance of funding for trail maintenance went unanswered. Maintaining trails in national forests and other public lands has only become more challenging in recent years, due to increased demand from the public to hike and explore the outdoors. Project work has piled up due to increased use. “We already have millions of dollars of backlog of maintenance that needs to be done on our trails,” said Johnson. “So we’re just going to keep falling further behind if we don’t have crews that are working on maintenance and projects.” While volunteer crews occasionally maintain local trails, the Deschutes Trail Coalition crew is the only paid, professional crew working on the Deschutes National Forest. Deschutes County Commissioner Tony DeBone acknowledged that the Trump administration is tightening the purse strings, impacting groups like the trails coalition. “These are times of action, obviously, from Washington D.C. when the dollars are stopping in different directions,” said DeBone. “People could or need to think differently this year,” he added. “This is the time where if those resources aren’t there, what’s the next plan? Being able to open up a trail can be done in partnership with the federal government.” DeBone suggested local organizations like the Deschutes Trail Coalition find out what is possible to accomplish. “Volunteers can get quite a bit done,” he said. Trail maintenance on the Deschutes National Forest usually starts in May and continues until mid-October. Johnson said there are some funds leftover from a year ago along with some new grants that can be used to get some work done at the start of the season. But the coalition’s account will be drained fairly soon, she predicts. “We desperately need funds,” Johnson said. Courtney Braun, co-owner of Wanderlust Tours in Bend, said she is anxious about what federal funding cuts mean for national forests’ partner organizations and public lands. “We feel this could impact not only the health and maintenance of the forest including trails, but could impact visitor safety without as many boots on the ground or trail maintenance,” said Braun. “This also will affect future projects of trail building that will delay some major improvements for both our community and visitors alike.” Braun said she hopes the community can “rally around” public lands and support federal employees who have been left with large funding gaps in their departments. “We can encourage visitors to really lean into volunteering and understanding or educating themselves about the lands upon which we recreate,” said Braun. “Hopefully with all of our powers combined we can still offer a high quality visitor experience. It just may look a bit different.”Approximately two dozen organizations conduct volunteer trail maintenance in Central Oregon, including: • Sisters Trail Alliance • Oregon Equestrian Trails • Central Oregon Trail Alliance • Friends of the Central Cascades Wilderness • Central Oregon Nordic Club — Michael Kohn, The Bulletin

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.