President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Office of National Intelligence has thrown a contentious congressional battle into an even more precarious state. Appointee Bill Pulte’s off-color past, lack of requisite qualifications and history of pursuing Trump’s personal vendettas against perceived enemies have some lawmakers thinking twice about reauthorizing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a controversial warrantless wiretapping law. Already worried about how this White House would use the authorities granted by the law, Democrats now point to the controversial nomination as further justification to vote against the polarizing spy powers.

What did the commentators say?

A bipartisan Senate group working toward reauthorizing the provision had been “expected to deliver the votes necessary to move ahead” with their plan last week, said The New York Times — until Democrats’ “anger” over Pulte being named “prompted an almost unanimous retreat from the emerging deal” on Friday. The failed vote reflected “growing unease” with Pulte’s having led a “campaign of retribution” on Trump’s behalf while leading the Federal Housing Finance Agency, as well as his “lack of national security experience.”

The “very nature” of America’s surveillance data collection is “now going to be put in the hands of somebody who has a history of seeking out private information for political gain,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) per Semafor. “Everything’s up in the air now,” said Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, per The Times.

Democrats are now “threatening to let the government’s spy powers lapse,” said Axios. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has “suggested that Democrats would vote en masse against renewing FISA” because of Pulte, said Punchbowl News, echoing Warner’s “similar threat.”

It is “absolutely outrageous” that Democrats would “try to play politics right now,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) at a press conference last week. Among Republicans, however, opponents of the FISA renewal include “longstanding surveillance skeptics” who have been “some of the loudest voices within the conference” advocating for stronger warrant rules, said Politico. Now, Republicans “will likely need at least some Democratic support in the House” on top of at least seven Democrats in the upper chamber to reauthorize the FISA bill before a June 12 expiration deadline, said The Hill.

The GOP is “going to need some help from Democrats, obviously,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to reporters after Friday’s failed vote. Despite acknowledging that the “timing arguably wasn't the best” for Trump to announce Pulte’s appointment during the FISA negotiations, Thune “notably defended” Pulte from allegations he’d “targeted Trump’s opponents” at the Federal Housing and Finance Agency, said Punchbowl reporter Laura Weiss on X.

Pulte may not be “statutorily qualified” for the role, said Texas Republican Rep. Michael McCaul on ABC’s “The Week.” But failing to renew Sec. 702 during this summer’s World Cup and semiquincentennial celebrations would be the “most grossly irresponsible thing I’ve seen Congress do in my 22 years in office.”

What next?

Once “on track to pass a compromise bill after protracted negotiations” with Democrats, Republicans now “believe the renewal could be held up” past the June 12 deadline, said Reuters. The White House should “plan for a potential significant gap in foreign intelligence collection,” said Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio this past weekend.

In their letter, the Republican senators “blamed the situation ​on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer,” Reuters said. However, on “one level,” the letter means “they’re acknowledging reality,” said Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes (D) on CBS’s “Face The Nation.” Pulte’s appointment has “taken 702 reauthorization off the table.”

Last week’s scuttled extension deal is now “empowering privacy hawks in both parties,” said Politico. Section 702 critics feel they “have momentum to kill any FISA deal” that doesn’t address their policy concerns, “whether Pulte gets yanked from his acting leadership post or not.”

The horror genre occupies the current Hollywood spotlight, and we have YouTube to thank for a bevy of high-grossing indie films directed by popular former users of the video platform. The runaway success of these box office darlings has industry insiders questioning if this crew represents a new filmmaking era or if it’s a passing phase.

Pipeline from YouTube-to-horror filmmaker

The recently released “Backrooms” is “part of a growing wave of breakout films from fledgling directors” who “honed their instincts on YouTube” rather than “inside the Hollywood ecosystem,” said The New York Times. Kane Parsons, the 20-year-old first-time director, signed a deal with distributor A24 to make the film when he was 17. He joined the ranks of two other creators who have “already turned online followings into surprise box-office hits this year.”

The “YouTuber-to-filmmaker boomlet,” said the Times, began in January when YouTube creator Mark Fischbach, known as Markiplier by his fans, self-distributed his horror movie, “Iron Lung.” Though it only cost $3 million to make, it “took in $50 million” in the end. The run of successful YouTube horror directors continued with “Obsession,” a $750,000-budget horror movie directed by Curry Barker. Both Barker’s film and “Backrooms” have surpassed $200 million in earnings each. “It’s not an anomaly,” Stephen Galloway, the dean of Chapman University’s film school, said to the Times. It is the start of a “gigantic shift.” These are the “cinematic insurgents of our era.”

The YouTube generation has “finally come of age,” horror filmmaker James Wan, who coproduced “Backrooms,” said to Variety. They grew up creating content without money. That spirit has fostered a “new wave of filmmakers and storytellers.” YouTube is the “perfect incubator for emerging voices.”

There is a “whole generation of moviegoers who grew up” with a “very specific taste in horror, the stuff that sits a little outside the mainstream,” Jason Blum, the producer of the “Paranormal Activity” franchise, said to Variety. When one of these filmmakers “makes the jump to a theater, the audience that found them online comes with them.”

Wins with a grain of salt

While they are currently making a splash, these “box office victories come with caveats,” said the Times. All three movies are horror films, the genre that has “long been the most forgiving for first-time filmmakers, in part because horror is relatively cheap to produce.” For some studio executives, “that context is a reason for caution.” The real shift will come when “horror isn’t the only proof of concept.”

With so much emphasis being put on the “YouTube-to-horror movie trend” as the “next frontier of finding talented new voices,” a “difficult, uncomfortable conversation is more necessary than ever,” Slash Film said. Unless you exist as a “cisgender, heterosexual, white man,” the pipeline “doesn’t actually exist.” YouTube is not and has “never been a truly democratized platform,” and we are doing the “next generation of creatives a disservice by pretending it is.”

There are “random people from Discord who are, like, 14-year-olds” who are “not working in the industry at all, but they’re fucking wizards,” Parsons said to The Verge. Still, he refuses to “preach the blind optimism that I hear from a lot of other filmmakers who say, ‘You got a phone; everyone can be a filmmaker now.’”

The best lesson executives could take from the success of Parsons and Barker is “not to throw a zillion dollars at more movies that look just like these,” movie critic Alissa Wilkinson said at The New York Times. It would be to “find more creators like these two” because they’ve “built audiences in an organic way in the places that younger audiences congregate” and to give them “creative freedom to explore what feels right to them.” Remember, too, that “not everything will hit like these two movies.”

‘Hunter Biden is becoming a populist internet guy. I have questions.’

Zeeshan Aleem at MS NOW

Hunter Biden’s X account “marked the opening salvo of a deliberate bid to reinvent himself using the miraculous powers of the social internet,” says Zeeshan Aleem. The “reason Biden is breaking through is he’s making blunt, self-deprecating humor a significant part of his online persona.” But “there’s an aspect of his new identity that I find more troubling: his attempts at cross-partisan political populism.” Regardless of “what his intentions are, he’s exhibiting a naivete about noxious right-wing ideas.”

Read more

‘Big Tobacco didn’t just sell cigarettes. It shaped what Americans eat.’

Leana S. Wen at The Washington Post

Junk food is “designed to be addictive,” and “much of it comes from the same people who made a living selling another highly addictive and harmful product: cigarettes,” says Leana S. Wen. In the 1980s, Big Tobacco “diversified their business holdings at a time of declining cigarette sales by aggressively expanding into the food industry.” Since “tobacco companies helped create the modern unhealthy food environment,” some of the “same approaches that proved successful in tobacco control may be worth considering.”

Read more

‘What the latest judicial sex scandal tells us about a broken system’

Aliza Shatzman at Slate

Georgia Judge Eleanor Ross “received a ‘private reprimand’ for having sex with a law enforcement officer in chambers,” says Aliza Shatzman. But “more important are the larger issues this illustrates — an outrageous lack of transparency and accountability in the courts; the judiciary’s inability or unwillingness to “self-police”; and Congress’ refusal to conduct oversight, pass legislation or cut judiciary funding to check a lawless co-equal branch.” Judges “hold positions of public trust, yet they’re never held accountable.”

Read more

‘Haiti is still a house on fire. Senate, extend Haitian TPS for three years.’

Thomas Wenski at the Miami Herald

The House “passed a bill that would extend TPS (Temporary Protective Status) protections for Haitians for three more years — a critical lifeline for those desperate to avoid returning to the chaos on the island nation,” says Thomas Wenski. It “would be an act of abject cruelty for the United States to send families back to such dangerous and unsafe conditions.” It is “up to the Senate now to vote ‘yes’ on extending TPS protections for Haitians.”

Read more

CROSSWORD - June 19, 2026

SUDOKU - June 19, 2026

CROSSWORD - June 19, 2026

SUDOKU - June 19, 2026

Moving back home after college may seem like a failure to launch, both on the part of parents who thought their work was finally done, and young adults who thought they were poised to start building a life of their own.

But increasingly, it is a decision many recent graduates are making, often out of economic necessity but also because of the practical benefits the arrangement can offer. “Nearly half — 44% — of U.S. parents with adult children ages 18 to 35 say a child has moved back home at some point,” said The Washington Post, citing a recent poll by the financial services company Thrivent.

Just because the arrangement is common does not mean it is automatically easy. Even if you all lived peacefully under the same roof for 18 years, things can — and should — be different when cohabitating again after college. Here is how to navigate things smoothly.

Communicate about financial impacts and expectations

For parents, there is a “difference between providing a safety net and enabling financial immaturity,” said the Post. The latter benefits neither party.

Instead, plan to “have regular discussions with your child to see if they need assistance in any areas and check their progress toward achieving their goals,” said Fidelity. For instance, if they are moving back in because they have student loan debt, “their budget needs to reflect that they are treating this as a priority,” said the Post.

Parents should prioritize transparency about their own financial situation as well — including how the living arrangement may be affecting their current finances and long-term planning, such as saving for retirement.

Discuss divvying up costs

Just because you are the kid (or the parent) does not mean it is set in stone who pays for what. “Once your adult offspring move back home, you and your kids will need to decide how much they’ll chip in for household expenses,” said Kiplinger.

Exactly what that division looks like will vary depending on the financial situation of everyone involved. Maybe the child “can contribute a percentage of their wages to cover the mortgage or rent, for example, or agree to pay a set amount — say, $200 to $300 a month,” said Kiplinger. Alternatively, if they “can’t help with the mortgage or rent, consider having them pay a portion of utility, phone or insurance bills.”

If your child truly has nothing to contribute monetarily (maybe they are currently job-searching), there are still ways they can contribute to the household. “Doing regular yard work or other household chores can make the relationship feel more balanced,” said Earnest, a student lending platform.

Establish a clear plan and timeline

While living together may be fine for now, most likely it will not be fine forever. “Have a conversation with your parents about your plan for moving out and finding your own place,” said Earnest, and make sure you are both clear on the steps it will take for you to get there, whether that is paying down debt within a certain period of time or saving up a certain amount for a security deposit and a few months’ rent.

The plan you come up with should include a “clear timeline, as well as some contingency plans if you don’t reach those goals as soon as expected,” said Earnest.

What happened

Apple on Monday unveiled an AI version of its Siri digital assistant at its annual Worldwide Developers Conference. The new Siri AI is the company’s response to OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini. OpenAI recently filed documents to prepare for a massive IPO, joining Anthropic and Elon Musk’s SpaceX-xAI.

Who said what

Apple is “betting the upgraded assistant can help close the gap” in the “crucial AI race,” but it has “taken a different approach from rivals,” Reuters said. Instead of pushing AI agents, the company “emphasizes practical features integrated into everyday tasks” and stressed that “personal data would remain private.” Analysts will be looking to see whether Apple’s “history of turning nascent technologies into popular products will apply to AI,” said CNN.

Some AI companies “appear to be racing forward, seemingly pursuing AI for the sake of AI, without clear regard for the ​people — all of us — that it’s ultimately meant to serve,” said Apple software chief Craig Federighi.

What next?

Apple is releasing its new “Golden Gate” software update — which includes Siri AI, more robust parental controls and other changes — immediately to developers, with a “public beta next month and a full launch to customers in the fall,” The Wall Street Journal said.

What happened

At least 35 people died and more than 200 were injured after a magnitude 7.8 earthquake struck the southern Philippines on Monday. Multiple buildings collapsed in General Santos City, a major port on the populous island of Mindanao, and the quake also triggered deadly landslides and a 3-foot tsunami that hit neighboring islands’ coasts.

Who said what

The temblor, centered at sea about 20 miles off Mindanao’s southern coast, struck “just as children across the country were getting ready for their first day” of the new school year, said The Wall Street Journal. “Powerful aftershocks” then “rocked the area for about two hours,” said Philippine newspaper The Manila Times. Photos from General Santos City “showed convenience stores crumbling and sheets of concrete layered on top of each other,” CNN said.

What next?

Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. canceled school and directed disaster response teams to the affected provinces. “The national government is moving,” he said, “and we will not leave Mindanao behind.” The Philippine Red Cross said it was “evaluating heavily impacted structures” in General Santos City and will provide “emergency assistance, first aid and psychosocial support where needed.”

What happened

Progressive Los Angeles city council member Nithya Raman placed second in the city’s mayoral primary race and will face Mayor Karen Bass in a runoff election, The Associated Press projected Monday. Republican reality TV personality Spencer Pratt was initially in second place after last week’s election but lost ground with every vote update, and Raman overtook him over the weekend. Pratt’s slide to third place is “not possible,” President Donald Trump claimed on social media. “Rigged Elections!”

Who said what

In California’s “notoriously slow vote-counting process,” Republicans typically vote in person and Democrats mail in their ballots, which get counted later, the AP said. These “fleeting Republican leads are common enough to have a name — the ‘red mirage,’” The New York Times said. And this year, with the Democratic gubernatorial field in flux until the end, the election was “primed to create even more of a red mirage” than normal.

“There has been no evidence of impropriety” in Los Angeles, a “deep-blue city” that “hasn’t had a Republican mayor in more than two decades,” The Wall Street Journal said. But by “escalating allegations of election fraud in California,” Trump and his allies are “turning to a playbook they have used previously to sow doubt about election results,” including his 2020 loss.

What next?

Trump’s baseless “Democratic scam” claims “gave an unusually clear preview of how he could greet any disappointing results for his party in November, when control of Congress is at stake,” the Times said.

Pope Leo XIV is deeply worried about what artificial intelligence might do to all of us, said Francis X. Rocca in The Atlantic. The 42,300-word encyclical issued by the American-born pontiff recently—his first since being elevated to the papacy last year—was almost entirely devoted to AI, and he outlines “the choice humanity faces in stark terms.” With the help of governments and institutions, he says, the technology could become “an instrument of growth, justice, and fraternity.” But right now, it is fueling unemployment, destroying the environment, and reducing workers to “cogs in a machine.” We are unwisely entrusting AI with “lethal or otherwise irreversible decisions.” And the technology’s ready-made answers, he warns, can “weaken personal creativity and judgment,” threatening the “desire to form genuine human connections.” The Vatican “tends to ‘think in centuries,’” as one aphorism puts it, but on this issue Leo has moved “with remarkable speed.” It’s a clear sign of what he thinks humanity is up against.

Leo“should be applauded,” said The Guardian in an editorial. The “reckless hubris, profit seeking, and lack of accountability of figures such as Elon Musk represent a threat to the common good,” and regulation is needed to ensure their ambitious plans are deployed “for the good of all.” While Leo’s thoughts are—of course—informed by theology, his “humanity-first message” is one that even the secular world can support. AI is a “spiritual and civilizational test that forces us to face what it means to be human,” said Russell Moore in Christianity Today. Leo’s concern is not that machines will outpace humans, but that “human beings will become more like machines,” prioritizing “efficiency, control, optimization, and power above human dignity.”

The problem with Leo’s encyclical is that it doesn’t go nearly far enough, said Matthew Walther in The New York Times. Magnifica Humanitas (“Magnificent Humanity”) begins with a parable about the Tower of Babel, “perhaps the greatest biblical symbol of technological hubris.” But it misses the story’s key point, which is not that the tower should have been built more ethically with greater “feedback from a more disparate assemblage of stakeholders.” The moral is instead: “Don’t build it!” And that’s the message Leo needed to deliver on AI, which is “unambiguously evil.”

We get it, said Barton Swaim in The Wall Street Journal: The pope’s a doomer. Clearly, he has “genuine concern for the ill uses to which AI may be put.” But “nobody yet understands the moral import of AI,” and calls for governments to “regulate AI” are incoherent and dangerous. Leo is simply echoing what the “left-liberal orthodoxy” is saying. But what’s the point “of a grand moral pronouncement” by a pope or any religious figure if it “doesn’t offend or seriously challenge honored cultural arbiters”?

President Donald Trump holds firm sway over the GOP and its voters. But his grip on Republican-controlled Congress may be slipping.

Trump’s White House “appears to be losing momentum” with a legislative agenda that has “stalled in Congress,” said Vox. His proposed “anti-weaponization fund” to reward allies “went down in flames after some unusual pushback from Republican lawmakers.” And Trump’s GOP allies are pushing back on personnel picks like Bill Pulte for acting director of national intelligence and Todd Blanche to serve as attorney general. House Republicans last week also “failed to block an effort to halt the Iran war,” said Politico, the “latest sign” that some members of the president’s party are “willing to buck him” on occasion.

What did the commentators say?

Trump is a victim of his own “petty revenge tour,” Chris Hayes said at MS NOW. The president recently demonstrated his mastery over the GOP by backing successful primary challenges to party figures like Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). Those “spurned” figures will remain in Congress through the end of the year, though they “don’t appear eager to bail out the president” and the more controversial aspects of his legislative agenda.

Republicans in Congress have mostly been “invertebrates” during the Trump years, Rex Huppke said at USA Today. They are showing the “faintest signs of embryonic spines” now that midterm elections are approaching and they will face constituents who “can’t afford gas or hamburger meat” because of the president’s policies. The GOP remains “largely in lockstep” with the president, but the “cracks will spread and deepen” the closer we get to November.

The midterm threat might be “stronger than the sway of a president who will be a lame duck” after the election, Jay Evensen said at The Deseret News. The president’s poll numbers “have dropped, even in Utah.” Congress has largely “abdicated its role” as a check on the power and corruption of the presidency, but “maybe that’s changing.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune “sounds like a man who’s had it with President Trump,” said Mike Zapler at Axios. The GOP leader has pushed back on the anti-weaponization fund and the president’s primary endorsements against Senate incumbents. “None of us controls what the president does,” Thune said to reporters, per the outlet.

Trump is reacting to the “widening rift” with Congress with a “blend of indifference and hostility,” said Isaac Arnsdorf and Natalie Allison at The Washington Post. He “lambasted” House Republicans who helped pass the Iran war measure and “brushed off” objections to his appointment of Pulte to the intelligence post. The president “does not think he needs Congress” as much as lawmakers might think and “feels no need to accommodate them.”

What next?

GOP opposition only goes so far. House Republicans this week are expected to approve long-delayed funding for immigration and border enforcement, said CNBC. The bill will fund those Trump priorities through the rest of his term.

Henry Nowak would “still be alive today” if Britain and Europe had “stood their ground against the politics of self-hatred and the mass invasion of migrants”, said J.D. Vance on X. The “proper response – the only response – is righteous anger”.

The “most outspoken member” of an “evangelistic” administration, Vance’s ire does seem to have a “particular focus on the UK”, said The Times. He has commented on protests around abortion clinics, and told Keir Starmer that there have been “infringements on free speech” in Britain.

Vance is now using the Nowak murder to “bolster” his narrative of Britain as a “once powerful nation” “pandering to liberalism”. This could just be a reminder for American voters that the Republican Party retains an “uncompromising approach to wokeism, borders and policing” in the upcoming mid-terms. But if Vance is anointed successor to the Maga movement, comments such as these could be a sign of things to come.

What did the commentators say?

“J.D. Vance is wrong to intervene in the controversy around the murder of Henry Nowak,” said The Telegraph in an editorial. That said, “there is a good deal of hypocrisy on show”: Labour Remainers had no issue with Barack Obama “intervening” in the Brexit debate, and have had “no compunction about condemning Donald Trump over domestic US policy. “Inevitably, politicians welcome foreign interference only if it suits their arguments”, when “it would be far better if each stayed out of the other’s business”.

Vance was “surely right” to call out the “politics of self-hatred” in the British justice system, said Ameer Kotecha in The Spectator. It is “perfectly legitimate” for the US to comment publicly on what is happening in the UK. The government’s reaction, arguing he has “crossed a red line of diplomatic protocol”, has been hypocritical and “frankly pathetic”.

Britain is just as guilty. For instance, the Labour Party sent 100 activists to campaign for Kamala Harris in 2024. “Rather than engage in shameless pearl-clutching, Starmer’s government should listen to what our closest ally is telling us.”

Interventions like Vance’s are “deepening the split between the Trump administration and Britain’s Labour government”, said Dominic Green in The Wall Street Journal. The division is inherent. Where Vance sees a mission to “stabilise values and societies after decades of self-inflicted confusion”, Britain sees “Bible-bashing and race-baiting”, and hears “only atavistic calls to the wrong kind of identity politics”.

This “political opportunism” against Britain goes far deeper than the vice president, said James Schneider in The New Statesman. “The exploitation of Nowak’s death is of a piece with a clear US state strategy, one which turns Europe into a source for American rhetoric.” Vance talks about Britain “not as an equal, but as a provincial outpost of the imperial system, nominally independent and permanently available for correction”.

What next?

Vance’s stance could have implications for the next election on this side of the Atlantic, said Gaby Hinsliff in The Guardian. If Vance remains in the White House as vice president, “or even as Trump’s successor” after the US elections in 2028, it’s hard to imagine him “standing idly by” when the UK goes to the polls, likely in 2029.

At best, the reaction to the Nowak intervention shows us that “plenty of Britons still reflexively dislike being lectured by Americans”. Yet, it has also warned us “not to take our political sovereignty for granted. Sooner or later, we may need to defend it.”

The world-renowned Bayeux Tapestry will embark on a “highly secretive journey” to cross the Channel on loan to the British Museum, said ITV News. The artefact, which depicts the Battle of Hastings in 1066, has reportedly been insured for “around £800 million” by the UK Treasury during its 10-month stay, which will begin in September.

The 70m embroidery, believed to have been created in the 1070s by English needleworkers, has left Bayeux only twice in 950 years. In 1803, it was displayed in Paris by Napoleon to inspire troops against the British, and during the Second World War it was moved several times to protect it from damage and the Nazi occupation.

The Tapestry is the “single most recognisable and understood object in our history”, former chancellor George Osborne, now chair of the British Museum, told the Financial Times. “The only thing that comes close is Stonehenge, and nobody’s going to be moving that any time soon.”

Dress rehearsals

The announcement of the loan “caused uproar” in France, said The Telegraph. A petition started by La Tribune de l’Art newspaper garnered around 78,000 signatures protesting the move due to the fragile condition of the tapestry. An assessment of the fabric in 2021 found that it contained “24,000 stains, 16,445 creases, almost 10,000 areas of damage and about 30 tears”.

A new “highly detailed” report on the arrangements for the tapestry’s transportation has “eased many concerns”, said Le Monde. “Nothing has been left to chance”, said Delphine Christophe, director general of heritage and architecture in the Ministry of Culture.

British roads – which generate “far more intense and constant vibrations” than their French counterparts – are the main source of concern. As such, teams have tested seven routes, and experts have “mapped every pothole and bump along the route from Bayeux to the British Museum”. Vibrations have now been “reduced by 96%”, said the outlet. This is about the “same level of movement a sculpture experiences on its pedestal in a museum”.

For the journey, the tapestry will be stored in a 1.6 ton “specially built climate-controlled crate” which is “literally suspended in mid-air” to minimise adverse motion. Two “full dress rehearsals” using a replica of identical length and weight have already taken place to practise proper handling of the 900-year-old work. The tapestry itself is currently being stored in a “secret location”.

‘Arduous’ journey

The Bayeux Tapestry is more than an artefact, said Financial Times political editor George Parker. Its arrival on British soil will be “hailed as a symbolic reconciliation of Britain and France after the chaos and bitterness of Brexit”. Ironically, despite depicting violent and bloody conflict between the Normans and Anglo-Saxons, the effort to bring the tapestry back to the UK has become a “symbol of Anglo-French co-operation”.

Britain’s journey to displaying the Bayeux Tapestry has been “arduous”, said The Independent. Requests to exhibit it in London have been “rejected several times”, most notably for the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953, and for the 900th anniversary of the Battle of Hastings in 1966. President Emmanuel Macron, however, first “signalled his eagerness for the move” in 2018, although progress was stalled by the Covid pandemic.

Now, the British Museum is “set to hit the jackpot”, said Le Monde. The cost of installing, displaying and protecting the piece, none of which will be covered by France, is “classified and likely enormous”. But considering that the tapestry has attracted around 400,000 visitors in Bayeux, the museum could easily expect to generate at least “€10 million” (£8.6 million) in ticket sales.

This will be the “museum event of the century”, but it may not be the easiest viewing experience, said Apollo Magazine. Time slots for viewing will be “only 40 minutes”, which has caused the art community to “raise an eyebrow”. “With the tapestry being 70m-long, that means each visitor has about 34 seconds to move along the work in 7cm intervals.”

When you make a purchase using links on our site, The Week may earn a commission. All reviews are written independently by our editorial team.

Some dads like receiving practical gifts for Father’s Day, while others want to be surprised with a present they’ve never heard of or wouldn’t buy for themselves. Whatever your dad, grandfather, father-in-law or father figure prefers, there’s a gift for him on this list of fun — and functional — presents.

Bite Society Snack Magic

Sweet, salty, savory — each taste is represented in Bite Society’s Snack Magic gift basket. This robust kit includes deliciously crunchy Kennebec potato chips, furikake snack mix, Bob’s Dilly Peanuts and Jalapeño Peanuts, plus a selection of cookies, chocolates and candies. Bonus: The whimsical tins and packaging feature original tattoo-themed artwork. ($155, Bite Society)

Camp Snap 2 screen-free digital camera

A screen-free digital camera is perfect for the dad who wants to cut down on their phone use “without sacrificing on capturing memories,” said CNN. The Camp Snap 2 offers a traditional point-and-shoot experience and can take 500 shots on one charge. It also comes with six built-in filters and can easily transfer images to smartphones and computers. ($70, Camp Snap)

Chamelo Dusk Classic smart sunglasses

These lightweight sunglasses are perfect for techie dads who love gadgets and gizmos. A button on the side of the frames lets him adjust the polarized lens tint to his exact liking (this can be done on the smartphone app too). There are also hidden speakers, so he can chat on the phone or listen to music while paying attention to what’s going on around him. ($260, Chamelo)

Cozy Earth bamboo stretch-knit short sleeve pajama set

He’ll stay cool and comfortable all night in these breathable pajamas. The soft and “silky” fabric “regulates your temperature” while feeling “just as cozy as cotton,” said Men’s Health. Both the top and shorts have a relaxed fit, great for lounging around the house. ($108, Cozy Earth)

Filson rugged twill zipper tote bag

This durable, water-resistant bag is the “toughest, most versatile tote there is,” said GQ. The reinforced base makes the tote strong enough to carry “everything from firewood to your laptop,” and the brass zipper keeps it all secure. The bridle leather handles are also on the longer side, so the bag can be slung over the shoulder. Choose from three classic colors: tan, black and otter green. ($299, Filson)

Ooni Koda 16 gas-powered pizza oven

Pizza on demand is the gift that keeps on giving. The Ooni Koda 16 “strikes the ideal balance between ease of use and portability,” baking dozens of 16-inch pies on a single tank of gas, said Wirecutter. It fires up quickly and has a “consistent” flame, cooking pizza “just as beautifully as other propane ovens that cost much more.” ($499, Lowes)

Powerup 4.0 paper airplane kit

Paper airplanes have come a long way since he was a kid. With this kit, he can fold up his plane, attach it to a motor and propeller controlled by a smartphone, then watch as it does loops, barrel rolls and hammerheads. It’s an “ingenious” present that combines “childhood pleasure with modern technology,” said Good Housekeeping. ($60, Amazon)

Rovr RollR 30 wheeled cooler

Dad will be the hero of any beach day, lake trip, picnic or desert campout when he rolls up with this wheeled cooler. Its inflatable rubber tires can “handle any and all terrain,” and the “sturdy and lengthy” telescoping handle make it a “joy to pull,” said Outdoor Life. The compact RollR 30 has “great insulation,” holds up to 40 cans with 10 pounds of ice and comes with a dry bin for food and snacks you don’t want to get wet. ($225, Rovr)

Tinkr mini car vacuum

Messy and immaculate dads alike will “appreciate how easy it is to clean up” with this rechargeable, hand-held vacuum, said Good Housekeeping. The vacuum and its attachments — a brush nozzle and a narrow hose nozzle — come in a case compact enough to keep in the glove compartment. It’s a small device but “big on suction” and able to get “crumbs, dust and other debris” from under seats, vents and cup holders. ($60, Amazon)

Artificial intelligence systems can now convince you they are human. Two large language models have passed the Turing test, which determines if a machine can “show the same intelligence as a human being,” said The Independent. This significant development in AI is troubling, as anthropomorphizing LLMs can lead to deception and raise questions about what’s real and what isn’t.

Man or machine

In the test, a person “engages in text-based conversations with both a human and a machine without knowing which is which," said Stanford University. If the individual cannot tell them apart, the machine is considered to have passed the test. Researchers tested four AI systems and found that newer LLMs can “effectively imitate people in short interactions,” said a study published in the journal PNAS.

“Given the right prompts, advanced LLMs can exhibit the same tone, directness, humor and fallibility as humans,” study author Cameron Jones said in a release. “While we know LLMs can easily produce knowledge on nearly every topic, this test showed that it can also convincingly display social behavioral traits, which has major implications for how we think of AI.” The four tested AI models were GPT-4.5 and Llama-3.1-405B, which were state-of-the-art models, as well as the older baseline models GPT-4o and ELIZA, a simple chatbot from the 1960s.

Of the models, “GPT-4.5 was judged to be the human 73% of the time, meaning interrogators selected it as ‘human’ significantly more often than they selected the real human participant,” said the release. Llama-3.1-405B, “given the same prompt, was judged human 56% of the time,” making it “statistically indistinguishable from the humans it was compared against.” The baseline systems performed significantly worse, with ELIZA being mistaken for human only 23% of the time and GPT-4o being mistaken 21% of the time.

No man’s land

AI models passing for humans is a concerning development. The Turing test is a “game about lying for the models,” Jones said in the release, and “one of the implications is that models seem to be really good at that.” A big risk of the existence of AI models with this ability is the rise of “counterfeit people.” Thanks to the ease of deception, we “need to be more alert,” and “people should be much less confident that they know they’re talking to a human rather than an LLM.” Still, AI is not yet at a level where it can be deceptive on its own.

While the bots did pass the Turing test, they also required specific instructions to do so. Each of the systems was “instructed to adopt a persona, or a specific character and communication style,” said The Independent. These prompts “worked partly by leading the systems to make mistakes in the same way a human would.” When the models were not prompted, they were much less likely to be mistaken for humans, and GPT-4.5 fell to a 36% win rate and Llama-3.1-405B to a 38% win rate. The models “have the ability to appear humanlike,” study co-author Ben Bergen said in the release, “but maybe not as much the ability to figure out what it would take to appear humanlike.”

Are Americans ready for “bloody cage fights on the White House’s South Lawn?” asked Jack Crosbie in Rolling Stone. On June 14, President Trump will celebrate both his 80th birthday and America’s 250th anniversary with a card of seven outdoor UFC fights at the People’s House. These mixed martial arts fights, in which kicks to the head, elbows to the face, punching prone fighters, and choke holds are all legal, are big in “the right-leaning manosphere”—and with Trump, who calls it “the greatest sport.” The president—who recently bought stock in UFC’s parent company—is pals with Dana White, the company’s CEO, who has openly allied the sport with Trump. The UFC is “allegedly footing the bill” for the spectacle, which will take place in a temporary arena that can hold some 4,000 fans, with up to 90,000 watching on a screen outside. The Pentagon has placed a casting call for brawny troops in short-sleeve uniforms to help fill the stands, so long as they “meet a certain physical standard.”

The kitschy “Las Vegas–style venue” highlights “just how extensively Trump has remade the White House grounds to his liking,” said Erkki Forster in The Daily Beast. A hulking steel arch that’s nine stories tall and decked out “in patriotic red, white, and blue graphics” has been raised over the stage and seating area. It looms over the torn-up construction site for Trump’s $400 million ballroom, where “the East Wing once stood.” Erecting this garish “monstrosity” is among Trump’s “worst insults” to Washington’s once-dignified architecture, said Zeeshan Aleem in MS.now. But his endorsement of brutality on White House grounds sends an even darker message than the aesthetic desecration: Violence can be glorious and patriotic.

Gladiatorial combat is just one way Trump has turned our national birthday into “a royalist celebration of himself,” said David Frum in The Atlantic. He’s “seeking to emblazon his face on coinage and currency,” displaying “his image on banners in downtown Washington,” repainting the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool a garish blue, and gilding bronze horse statues. The 250th celebration should’ve been “an easy layup, a gimme, a chance for a now-unpopular second-term president to reinvent himself as the leader of all of the American people.” But he’s unable to rise above his egomania, and has “made a pitiful shambles of what should have been a glorious moment.”

What’s happening to the river?

Running from the Rocky Mountains in Colorado to Mexico’s Gulf of California, the Colorado River is being pushed to the breaking point by years of drought and overuse. That dwindling flow is causing panic across the region because the river supplies water to more than 40 million people in seven Western states—Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. It also provides power to more than 25 million people through hydroelectric dams at the nation’s two largest reservoirs: Lake Powell (in Utah and Arizona) and Lake Mead (in Nevada and Arizona). Water levels at both are down about 75% from peak volumes; declining water levels at Lake Mead could potentially reduce the Hoover Dam’s power generating capacity by 40% as early as this fall. And the situation will likely worsen as climate change accelerates and further dries out the West, with recent studies suggesting the river will provide 10% to 45% less water by 2050. With an October deadline looming for the seven states to agree on a new Colorado River Compact—the plan that governs how water is distributed between them—regional officials are under pressure to strike a compromise on steep water cuts. “Maybe this is the first worldwide climate-change crisis that’s going to force really fundamental policy-level decisions to be made,” said Brad Udall of Colorado State University’s Colorado Water Center.

How did the situation get this bad? 

The entire Colorado River Basin has been in drought since 2000, with snow and rain down 7% from the 20th-century average. The snowpacks that feed the river hit their lowest level on record this year, with snow accumulations in Colorado’s high country peaking a month early in March and containing just half the average moisture. Even a rare May storm that dropped 30 inches of snow in parts of the Rockies offered little relief. But drought is just one of the basin’s problems. Struck in 1922 during an unusually wet period, the Colorado River Compact overestimated how much water the river could provide. Meanwhile, the demands for water keep rising as drought shrinks the flow. The semi-arid region’s population has exploded over the past century—the river served only 457,000 people in 1922—as has its agriculture sector, which now covers more than 5 million acres of farmland and accounts for 70% of all water use. Alfalfa grown for cattle feed swallows 26% of all water consumed in the basin, more than every city in the region combined. Former Upper Colorado River commissioner Anne Castle likens the demands on the river to “spending more money than you’re bringing in. You can pull on your savings, but your savings aren’t going to last forever.”

Are states willing to take less water?

In theory. But three years of talks on a new compact between the four upstream states—Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming —and the three downstream states of Arizona, California, and Nevada have yet to produce an agreement. The Lower Basin states recently proposed slashing their water allotments by about 20% annually and asked Upper Basin states to commit to permanent cuts to ensure water keeps flowing south. But Upper Basin states are wary of restrictions that would limit future development and stop them building new dams. “I see still a very large lack of skin in the game by the Upper Basin,” said Tom Buschatzke of the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

What’s the federal government doing? 

To avert potential water shortages, the Interior Department in April sent billions of gallons from Wyoming’s Flaming Gorge Reservoir into Lake Powell. Up to a third of the water in Flaming Gorge could be let out over the next year to ensure Powell’s dam keeps generating electricity. The Upper Basin states only reluctantly agreed to the Flaming Gorge drawdown, which could put many boat ramps out of action at the popular tourist destination and also hurt local fish populations. “Our consideration and approval are not taken lightly,” said Wyoming state engineer Brandon Gebhart, “and we wouldn’t be recommending this release except for the historically dire conditions.”

What happens if states can’t reach a deal?

The Bureau of Reclamation, which oversees water in the West, will step in and impose cuts. Buschatzke said a plan under consideration by the Trump administration would slash the Lower Basin’s allocation by up to 40%—almost as much water as flowed from 19 million people’s taps in Southern California last year. For now, any breakthrough in compact talks seems unlikely. If anything, the recent releases by the Interior Department have exacerbated tensions, with Upper Basin states complaining they’ve already been forced to use less than the 7.5 million acre-feet allotted by the compact because dry conditions have cut their water supply by 25%. “The Upper Basin is proud to be part of the solution,” said Colorado water commissioner Becky Mitchell. “But we cannot be the entire solution.”

Could taps actually run dry? 

It’s possible in some areas. The small desert town of Kearny, Ariz., gets its water from a reservoir on a Colorado tributary that’s only 2% full. Mayor Curtis Stacy has warned residents they could run out of water in July unless they take radical action now; he’s suggested washing clothes less often and showering together. Other towns and cities are rationing water just in case. Las Vegas, N.M., has barred restaurants from serving water to customers unless specifically requested. Denver and Aurora, Colo., have ordered cuts to outdoor watering. Climate change could force more communities to drastically reduce their water usage in coming years. “Just because we’re the first don’t mean we’ll be the last,” said Stacy. “We’re the canary in the copper mine.”

Is President Trump finally tired of winning? asked Shawn McCreesh in The New York Times. Asked in a Cabinet meeting two weeks ago if he feels pressure to end the Iran war before November’s elections, Trump airily replied, “I don’t care about the midterms.” In the context of Iran, Trump’s “posture of nonchalance” is defensible. Presidents shouldn’t let politics sway their thinking on matters of war. But GOP lawmakers are starting to wonder if Trump couldn’t care less about their party’s bleak electoral prospects. Republicans trail Democrats by 7.6% in the generic ballot, dragged down by Iran, high gas prices, Trump’s slumping approval rating (38% and falling), and the belief—shared by 77% of Americans, including most Republicans—that Trump’s policies have driven up the cost of living. Without a course correction, the GOP could lose both the House and Senate in November, a prospect suddenly more likely after Trump’s endorsement lifted Ken Paxton, the scandal-drenched MAGA loyalist, over incumbent Texas Sen. John Cornyn in last week’s primary. But instead of assuring cash-strapped Americans that he feels their pain, Trump spends his days constructing “pricey pet projects,” from his gilded White House ballroom to a 250-foot triumphal arch. These don’t seem like the actions of someone who’s especially bothered “about what’s coming after the summer.”

“Don’t be fooled,” said Frank Bruni, also in the Times. Trump’s ego won’t let him confess his midterm anxieties. But beneath the “bluster and makeup, he’s sweating.” Look at how hard he’s pressured red-state legislatures to redraw their electoral maps to gain a handful of seats in November, and how he’s “haranguing congressional Republicans” to pass new voting laws to depress Democratic turnout. And the electoral landscape this fall might not be as grim for Republicans as it looks now, said Mene Ukueberuwa in The Free Press. Progressives are pushing Democrats toward nominating class warriors like Maine’s Graham Platner and Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed, potentially alienating moderate voters in what would otherwise be “easily winnable races.”

I suspect Trump is relaxed about the midterms because “there might be political upside regardless of who wins,” said Abby McCloskey in Bloomberg. If the House and Senate turn blue, Trump will gain the scapegoat that his second term has lacked. He can blame “any and all shortcomings on Congress’s new Democratic majority.” And if empowered Democrats push left-wing legislation and try to impeach him, Trump will get to replay his favorite roles: “victim of the elite” and “protector against the progressive tide.” There’s a Jan. 6–size hole in such analyses, said Joel Mathis in his Substack newsletter. Trump’s indifference to the midterms more likely flows from the fact that he has plans in place—this time fully thought-out—to ignore or reverse the results “unless they are favorable to him.”

None of this explains why Trump suddenly cares so little about his popularity, said Paul Waldman in MS.now. Perhaps he’s contemplating his post-2029 legacy. He may be comfortable with being loathed by two-thirds of the country “so long as there are gigantic buildings with his name on them.” And his newfound indifference to approval ratings may be liberating. Trump has spent his life trying “to free himself of any and all constraints”—the law, civility, political norms, international alliances—“so he can do whatever he wants.” The interests of his party, and Americans, are just more things tying him down. “And he’s going to cut those cords.”

Filling up your tank is pricey, and the total cost is more than just the price of gas alone. Every time you fill up, a federal gas tax and a state tax gets tacked on to each gallon of gas you put into your car.

With the price of gas skyrocketing of late, in large part because of the war Donald Trump started with Iran, the president has floated the idea of suspending the federal gas tax altogether. But how much would that really save consumers?

What is the federal gas tax?

It is an “excise tax that’s paid on any fuel that’s sold in the US.,” said Intuit TurboTax. Initially, the tax “was meant to be temporary when President Herbert Hoover signed it into law in 1932 to help pay for national defense spending,” said The New York Times. “But persistent budget deficits kept it in place, and the money it raises is used for road maintenance through the Highway Trust Fund.”

How much is the federal gas tax?

The current federal gas tax costs drivers 18.4 cents, a charge that applies per gallon of gas. For those filling up with diesel fuel, the cost is a bit higher, at 24.4 cents per gallon.

Keep in mind, that is just the federal gas tax. All states and the District of Columbia also tax motor fuels, with per-gallon gas tax rates ranging “from 8.95 cents in Alaska to 62.9 cents in California,” said the Tax Policy Center. Additionally, “10 states also levy a general sales tax or gross receipts tax on purchases of motor fuel,” which can further increase the overall cost of filling up.

How much could drivers save if the gas tax is suspended?

Will nixing those cents on the gallon actually allow drivers to save on gas? Yes, but only minimally. If the federal gas tax were to drop by the full 18.4 cents, that would mean “for a 15-gallon tank, that’s $2.70 saved,” said CBS News. “When filled up weekly, that’s about $10.80 a month.”

However, “experts say the price drop would be less than 18 cents,” said CBS News. Some of that gas tax would instead “end up staying with the gas station itself, maybe the producers or anyone else in the supply side of the gas market,” added the outlet, citing tax policy expert Adam Hoffer.

Gas taxes ultimately make up just a small portion of the amount consumers are paying at the pump. Even with the suspension of both federal and state gas taxes, “prices would still average 35% more per gallon than they were at the start of the Iran war,” said NBC News. Since the war began in late February, “prices nationwide are up more than 50%.”

Maine’s Graham Platner was seen as a potent populist challenger to incumbent GOP Sen. Susan Collins. But revelations about the Democrat’s Nazi-linked tattoo, charged social media posts, and past treatment of women now have his party’s leaders debating whether to pull their support. And either choice might cost them a shot at winning the Senate in November.

Democrats should “cut Platner loose,” David Frum said at The Atlantic. Republicans in 2017 ditched Alabama’s Roy Moore over revelations about his pursuit of underage girls as a thirtysomething adult. GOP leaders then had to “choose between character and power.” Now it is time for Democrats to “muster equal shrewdness and toughness.” Other observers disagree. Democratic critics must “stop submarining” Platner, Michael Tomasky said at The New Republic. The party should stick with the candidate unless there are revelations “involving murder, rape or a taste for child pornography.” That is admittedly a “low bar,” but Collins has spent her public career helping Republicans “pick the pockets of working-class people.”

‘Scandal fatigue’

The party is “betraying its own values” if it does not denounce Platner, Michael A. Cohen said at MS NOW. The evidence suggests Platner is a “moral and political train wreck” with an “unceasing drumbeat of scandals about him.” The latest revelations include reporting that he has been “volatile, unfaithful and physically threatening” to the women in his life. Supporting Platner “opens up Democrats to charges of hypocrisy” in their criticisms of Texas Senate candidate Ken Paxton and risks “losing both the Maine Senate race and their souls.”

Democrats’ chances of retaking the Senate now depend on a “baggage-laden candidate with clear character issues and a sketchy past,” Nia-Malika Henderson said at Bloomberg. “Scandal fatigue” could dampen enthusiasm for Platner, but America’s “ultrapolarized” politics could also “work the other way, hardening support for Platner.” It is a dynamic that has worked for GOP candidates like President Donald Trump and Paxton, who have both succeeded “despite a raft of scandals.” After years of criticizing Trump’s transgressions, “Democratic voters face a character test of their own.”

‘Fed up with rolling revelations’

“Unfortunately for Graham Platner, he needs women on his side to win,” Steve Collins said at the Portland Press Herald. Independent and Democratic women voters in Maine are “increasingly fed up with rolling revelations” about the candidate’s past, and social media is “full of Maine women who say they’re no longer buying what Platner’s selling.” Maine Gov. Janet Mills, who suspended her campaign in April, could pick up votes in Tuesday’s primary as a result.

Critics “at the national level misunderstand” his populist campaign, Platner said Friday to supporters, per Politico. “They think this is a race about me, but it isn’t.” Platner’s supporters remain similarly “unfazed” by the revelations, said The Wall Street Journal. The scandals demonstrate “that he is a real person,” Maine voter Amanda Nicholson said to the outlet.

‘Flu vaccines should not be this hard’

Katherine J. Wu at The Atlantic

In a “typical year, the process of bringing a new seasonal flu shot to market is one of the United States’ most predictable vaccine routines,” but this is “not a typical year,” says Katherine J. Wu. The job would normally “fall to the CDC’s expert vaccine advisory panel, known as ACIP, which guides the agency’s recommendations,” but “currently, no functional ACIP exists to guide this autumn’s immunization campaigns.” This “could further undermine ACIP’s role as a key scientific check on government policy.”

Read more

‘How women are shaping Minnesota’s cannabis industry’

Clemon Dabney at The Minnesota Star Tribune

Cannabis legalization “created a market in Minnesota. Women are helping create its culture,” says Clemon Dabney. While women are “still underrepresented in cannabis ownership,” the “women who are launching dispensaries across the state” are “doing far more than opening stores.” These women are “claiming space in an industry where they have too often been overlooked, underestimated or asked whether a man is really behind the business.” They “are setting the tone for what this market becomes.”

Read more

‘Is Britain getting a new prime minister?’

Eliot Wilson at The Hill

In “America, changes of leaders are predictable,” but “in Britain, it is more nuanced,” says Eliot Wilson. It is “impossible to predict whether Sir Keir Starmer will still be prime minister at the end of this year, this month or perhaps even this week.” There is “no bar to a party in office changing its leader, who then becomes prime minister.” Will the United Kingdom “have a new prime minister by autumn? Yes. Or possibly no.”

Read more

‘AI leaders are cosplaying James Bond villains’

Gautam Mukunda at Bloomberg

“Shark Tank impresario Kevin O’Leary wanted to build data centers on 40,000 acres in rural Box Elder County, Utah,” the “latest battle in the war that might determine the future of artificial intelligence,” says Gautum Mukunda. AI “might unleash miracles of productivity, cure cancer or make energy too cheap to meter,” but it “can’t do any of those things — or at least it can’t do them in the United States — if the public rejects the technology.”

Read more

Have bread; breadcrumbs are inevitable. You would think then, with boundless English-speaking cultures using bread, there would be endless words for breadcrumbs. Terms that are mere descriptors for the bread pieces, like “fine,” “medium” and “large.” Would that we have 50 words to express a range of kinds of breadcrumbs, in the way Tamil has more than four dozen words for love.

In “All That Crumbs Allow,” authors Michelle Marek and Camilla Wynne creep toward that goal. Across 45 recipes — each its own kind of breadcrumb-naming treatise — the duo proclaims how versatile the kitchen staple both is and can be.

A prayer to pulverization

There is much bread-on-bread action in this text. Marek and Wynne, who both have backgrounds in pastry, cannot help themselves. Wynne, in a recipe for bread and jam twice-baked croissants, eschews the nut filling and crafts a breadcrumb frangipane, which is then slathered on bisected day-old croissants along with the jam of your choosing and baked until crackly.

Marek reminisces about the sweet cheese dumplings of her childhood visits to the Czech Republic. Soft bread cubes are beaten with butter, sugar, flour, egg and farmers cheese before a poaching turn in sweetened boiling water. The pillowy dumplings are then added to hot crisped breadcrumbs and served with roasted or fresh fruit.

Other recipes for sweets include such zingers as breadcrumb-glazed doughnuts, rhubarb cardamom breadcrumb cake and witches’ froth, a fluffy cloud of whipped apple served with clattering toasted breadcrumbs.

Savory-heads, fret not: Marek and Wynne have not abandoned you. A three-page blueprint for schnitzel ensures the finest you might ever cook. Roasted potatoes are shellacked with buttery crumbs. From the annals of cooking past, sauce jouvert, spunky with marjoram, red wine vinegar, both walnuts and hazelnuts, and breadcrumbs, is raised from the annals of recipe history to be draped over pretty much any kind of vegetable.

In the beginning, there was bread

The book’s centerpiece chapters on starters, mains and sweets are bookended on one side by a treatise on how to make and store breadcrumbs of various sizes, with an under-duress sub-section about how to buy breadcrumbs. “There is, it must be said, something perverse about paying for breadcrumbs,” Marek and Wynne write. “Buying breadcrumbs is one of life’s cosmic jokes, and it makes us laugh every time.”

A pantry chapter closes “All That Crumbs Allow.” It is a terse collection of six recipes that swerves from the book’s much-used, dead-simple Crunchy Topping to Fairy Rocks, with their sparkling blend of freeze-dried raspberries, sesame seeds, ground rose petals, sugar and, yes, breadcrumbs.

The book’s coda is a collection of exciting recipes from pals. In Marek and Wynne’s world, breadcrumbs are not for gatekeeping. They are meant to be spread wide and far. You can almost hear the authors chattering, “May you forever follow a trail of gluten nubbins to immeasurable deliciousness.”

What happened

Former “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley on Sunday said he hadn’t expected to be fired after criticizing CBS News editorial chief Bari Weiss at a staff meeting last week. But “somebody had to stand up,” he told The New York Times in an interview. She was putting a “thumb on the scale for the president’s version of events that I felt was a level of political influence that I had never seen in 37 years at CBS News.”

Who said what

After Pelley had gotten final sign-off on a report on ICE’s killing of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, Weiss “sends an email to my boss” asking for some post-deadline changes, including, “Can we make the protesters look more violent?” and “Good’s car — you need to describe her as driving toward the officer,” Pelley said. That is “not what you see on the video,” he said, but it’s “what the president said.” A CBS News spokesperson said Weiss’ suggestions “had no political motivation” and sought to make the piece “strong, fair and accurate.”

What next?

Weiss is a “lovely person,” but “television’s not her thing” and she needs to be removed, Pelley said. “It’s possible to land this plane. But right now, CBS News is on fire.”

What happened

President Donald Trump abruptly ended an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” broadcast Sunday after Kristen Welker challenged his assertions that last week’s California primaries and the 2020 election were “dirty” and “rigged.” During the interview, taped at a farm in Wisconsin, Trump “made a series of false, misleading or exaggerated comments,” NBC News said, including that he “didn’t promise” no new conflicts or “guarantee no war.”

Who said what

Trump “repeatedly pledged not to involve the United States in war,” The New York Times said, including in his 2024 victory speech, when he said, “I’m not going to start a war.” During Welker’s interview, Trump “appeared to become agitated” when she asked about the purportedly defunct $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, The Washington Post said. And when she pressed Trump for evidence that there was cheating in California’s notoriously slow election count, he raised his voice, called Welker “either stupid or crooked” and said the “fake, dirty press” knows about the “rigged” elections. “Let’s call it quits because I’ve had enough,” Trump said. “Thank you, darling. Have a good time.”

What next?

Welker said that Trump later agreed that heavy rain on the metal barn roof had caused audio complications and agreed to sit down for another interview at an undisclosed time.

What happened

Iran and Israel on Sunday night fired missiles at each for the first time since a U.S.-backed ceasefire took effect in April. Iran said it targeted an Israeli air base in response to Israeli strikes in Lebanon, and Israel said it retaliated by striking military targets in western and central Iran. Israel also said it intercepted a missile from Yemen.

President Donald Trump told Fox News earlier that the U.S. was not involved in Israel’s strike on Beirut’s suburbs and “I’m not happy about it.” After Iran launched missiles at Israel, Trump warned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to imperil peace talks by firing back, according to several news reports. “I call all the shots,” Trump told the Financial Times. Netanyahu “doesn’t call the shots.”

Who said what

Trump told Netanyahu to stand down because “we are close to doing something good in terms of a deal,” a U.S. official told Axios, and Netanyahu “pseudo-agreed.” Israel “has responded enough, they don’t need to respond anymore,” Trump told Israeli public broadcaster Kan. “We can achieve peace after 3,000 years.” No “self-respecting country in the world would tolerate such an attack, and neither will Israel,” Israel’s U.S. ambassador, Yechiel Leiter, said on X.

What next?

The tit-for-tat attacks continued Monday morning and “threatened to drag the wider Middle East back into a regional war,” The Associated Press said.

President Donald Trump’s executive order that voluntarily allows artificial intelligence companies to receive more government oversight marks a shift in the White House’s attitude about AI. It seems Trump, Republicans and even some Democrats are changing their tune.

What did the commentators say?

The order signed by Trump is “relatively toothless” because most major AI companies “already had agreements in place that allowed the government to preemptively test their models for safety risks,” said The Atlantic. But it is also “meaningful in that the president is doing something — anything — about AI” given that when Trump retook office, he largely “signaled to tech companies that he would stay out of the way.”

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett previously said the administration was considering federal guidelines that would “require AI models to go through an evaluation process similar to that used by the Food and Drug Administration,” said The Hill. This idea seemed to fizzle out as AI advocates became “concerned that an evaluation process from the White House could strangle development.”

The order that was signed “nonetheless represents a sea change in Washington’s willingness to tighten oversight of the technology,” said Politico. For the “first time it’s on a piece of paper, a structure and a process,” former Trump adviser Steve Bannon told the outlet. Some argue that Democratic politicians were already doing the same thing. “This executive order is implementing a voluntary regime to do pre-deployment evaluations of models for security risks,” Saif Khan, a tech adviser under former President Joe Biden, told Politico. “That is the thing that the Biden administration was doing.”

What next?

It is unclear where the Trump administration may go next with AI. The “entire chaotic saga — a wishy-washy White House, confused statements from populist and tech-elite Trump whisperers — is only the latest in a long string of strange, often contradictory AI policy positions,” said The Atlantic. There is a chance Trump could change his mind again, as his policies on the matter have been “inconsistent, if not incoherent, almost since the day he retook office.”

While Trump says he is focused on AI security, his White House has also slashed major portions of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA), the “government agency that aims to protect the nation against hackers,” said The Atlantic. The budget cuts mean CISA is “heading into the AI era with shrinking resources and a diminished role,” said Axios, which could pave the way for future vulnerabilities. Many fear the agency “no longer has the capacity to help utilities, banks and other critical infrastructure operators prepare for a coming wave of AI-fueled cyberattacks.”

Others believe that both sides of the aisle have it wrong. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants to ban data centers and is currently “calling for the government to own 50% of AI companies” — and it “would be easier to dismiss his ideas if they weren’t partially built on bipartisan consensus,” said The Washington Post editorial board. But U.S. tech policy works, and the “U.S. is a wealthy country because it doesn’t engage in the kind of government ownership schemes that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are fond of.”

Instead of reaching for biscuits or chocolate to “combat the 4pm slump”, people are turning to a “more natural sweet alternative: dates”, said The Guardian.

The wrinkled fruit has been “thrust into the snacking spotlight” thanks to a slew of viral online recipes and a growing demand for alternatives to ultra-processed foods. Ocado reports that sales of Medjool dates have soared by 100% year-on-year and searches for date butter have shot up by 458% over the same period.

Some fitness experts are suggesting their followers swap “additive-laden” protein bars for energy balls made with a mix of dates, nuts and oats. And TikTok is bursting with ideas for comforting yet nutrient-dense snacks like “sticky fried dates drizzled with olive oil and served with tangy yoghurt”.

First cultivated in the hot, arid climates of the Middle East and North Africa, “dates have had a place in culinary culture for millenniums”, said The New York Times. Traditionally used to break the fast during Ramadan, they are a staple ingredient in everything from tagines to sticky toffee pudding.

With more consumers interested in adding fibre to their diet, dates are “emerging as a simple vehicle for the macronutrient”. One serving of dates (around two to three large Medjools) contains about 5g of fibre – “a helpful step towards the daily recommendation of 25g per day for women and 38g for men”.

Brands like Date Better are opting for “bold flavour choices” to stand out in the crowded market. Varieties include dates stuffed with cashew butter, coated in chocolate infused with lime and dotted with toasted quinoa “for texture”.

But it’s important to “manage your health-related expectations” if you’re reaching for a jazzed-up version of the fruit. “If it’s stuffed with peanut butter and covered in chocolate, enjoy it!” said nutritionist Maya Feller. “But don’t think it’s going to support gut health. Right? That’s a dessert.”

If you don’t want to splash out on pricey on-the-go packaged snacks, consider adding the fruit when baking cakes, said The Times. Dates can be “chopped or blended” and “stirred through the batter instead of sugar, substituting the weights like-for-like”. They also make a delicious caramel sauce: simply soak them in boiling water before “blending them with butter” and “adding enough hot water until you have a smooth sauce”.

Dates aren’t only suitable for sweet treats, though. “I do a simple but brilliant lemon, chickpea, feta and date traybake,” said author and cook Melissa Hemsley. “The sweetness of the roasted dates with the salty feta is amazing. I’ll have that in a wrap or toss it into a warm salad. It’s perfect.”

Israel and Iran have traded tit-for-tat strikes, in defiance of Donald Trump, for the first time since a fragile ceasefire was agreed in April.

The Israeli Air Force confirmed hitting military targets in western and central Iran, in response to Iranian missile attacks on its own air bases. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it had attacked the air bases after an Israeli strike on an alleged Hezbollah site in southern Beirut.

This escalation is a “major test for negotiations”, said CNN. Donald Trump said both sides must “stop shooting”, and told the media he had urged Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu not to retaliate to the Iranian attack. “We are very close to a final deal with Iran,” he told Israel’s Channel 12 News. “It is going to be a good deal. I don’t want it to blow up because of what is happening now.”

What did the commentators say?

Tensions between Iran and Israel have been heightening over Lebanon, said Maziar Motamedi at Al Jazeera. The Lebanese government was alarmed by Israeli troops crossing its Litani River last month. And, despite reports that Trump had convinced Netanyahu not to target Beirut, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned last week that “there will be no calm in the region” if Israel continued its occupation of southern Lebanon. The Israeli strike on the alleged Hezbollah site crossed “an unofficial red line for Tehran”.

Israel’s decision to strike back at Iran was “deliberate”, said Alex Winston in The Jerusalem Post. “It could not afford to leave unanswered” Tehran’s retaliation for the strikes in Lebanon. Had it not responded, “the message to Tehran would have been pretty clear”: “any Israeli response to Hezbollah could be framed by Tehran as a provocation, allowing Iran to fire directly at Israel while assuming that American diplomatic pressure would keep Jerusalem’s hands tied”.

Netanyahu’s decision to defy Trump’s instructions underscores a relationship that is increasingly at odds on how to prosecute the war on Iran, said The Wall Street Journal. “Under pressure from his political allies and the opposition to respond to the Iranian missile barrage”, the Israeli PM’s order to resume direct attacks on Iran “threatened to escalate a conflict that has been largely contained”.

What next?

Iran has now announced “a halt to the operations of the armed forces”. Mediation efforts “are naturally continuing”, said Esmail Baghaei, spokesperson for the Iranian foreign ministry, earlier today, but he warned that Iran believes the US “bears responsibility for the Israeli regime’s aggression”. No one would believe that the Israeli regime would take action “without coordination with the US,” he said. America will “be responsible for the consequences of any escalation in tensions”.

Tehran has also used its Houthi proxies in Yemen to threaten a blockade of the Bab al-Mandab Strait if Israel continues to escalate its use of force. The route is “another vital artery connecting major trade routes between Europe, Asia and the Arab world”, said CNN; closing it “would compound the worldwide economic pressure” generated by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Jared Kushner’s goal to open a luxury resort on Albania’s coast has hit a speed bump. Albanian investigators have begun digging into the private equity firm spearheading the project, the first son-in-law’s Affinity Partners. And mass public protests over the proposed resort are a flashpoint for broader civic frustrations. What began as a “local land dispute on Albania’s southern coast,” said France 24, has now become a forum for “wider grievances” over “corruption, arrogance of power and disgruntlement with the ruling government.”

‘Flamingo revolution’

The proposed luxury resort project is slated for construction on the “uninhabited Adriatic island of Sazan” and hundreds of acres of the Vjosa-Narta protected site, a “sensitive coastal wetland area home to flamingos, seals and sea turtle nesting sites,” said Politico. Protesters gathered outside Prime Minister Edi Rama’s office this week “using a pink flamingo as their emblem,” said the BBC.

The symbol “echoes the deployment of a yellow duck” used in Serbian civic protests, but here “reflects the protesters’ very specific concerns” about the project’s environmental impact. “Hence,” said France 24, “why the movement has now been nicknamed Albania’s ‘flamingo revolution.’” Asher Abehsera, Kushner’s “business partner” on the project, claims the development will focus on “responsible stewardship” and “enhancing the environment,” as well as on creating “jobs and value for local communities,” said the BBC.

‘Total lack of transparency’

Initially a local development dispute, the project has spiraled into a “national political crisis,” said the Tirana Times, “triggering mass protests” and calls for Rama’s resignation. In addition to opposition to Kushner’s involvement in the construction, the endeavor has “drawn scrutiny” over “disputed land titles, unclear ownership structures and the involvement of powerful domestic business interests.”

“From start to finish, there has been a total lack of transparency,” said leading Albanian conservationist Aleksander Trajce to The Guardian. “We have seen no public consultation or public documentation regarding permits.” If Albanian authorities “remove the bulldozers, remove the fence and restore the habitats to what they were, then we can start talking.”

Prime Minister Rama has hailed the project as a “milestone in the Balkan country’s trajectory from Stalinist state to high-end holiday destination,” The Guardian said. While he has offered to “meet protesters in an attempt to break the logjam,” Rama also “stuck to his guns,” declaring last week that “there is absolutely no chance that the investment will stop as long as I am here.”

Broader frustrations

“No longer only about a resort,” the growing protests are now a “vehicle for wider anger” over Albanian civic society, said the Tirana Times. “It’s more or less everything” at the protests, said Albanian Ornithological Society President Taulant Bino to The New York Times. “You find people from the left, people from the right, people from different religious beliefs.”

Now, investigators from Albania’s Special Structure Against Corruption and Organized Crime anti-corruption office are digging into “controversial changes in the area’s protected status and land ownership in 2024,” said Politico. The office operates “independently of the national judiciary” and is “currently the most trusted institution in the country, according to several independent polls.”

The bees of the United States are in trouble and so is their honey. Disease and budget cuts have put bee populations in peril across the country even as honey demand has skyrocketed. The government is also planning on closing an important agricultural research center, risking further loss of both bees and their beloved nectar.

Honey, I shrunk the output

The U.S. demand for honey has grown significantly during the past three decades, mostly due to population growth and “consumers’ association of honey as a ‘superfood,’” said the USDA. However, as more people seek honey, the country is producing less. The U.S. has seen “staggering honeybee colony losses,” said the bee research nonprofit Project Apis m. Between June 2024 and March 2025, 1.6 million colonies were lost, with commercial beekeepers sustaining an average loss of 62%.

There are several reasons for the reduced honey production. The parasitic mite called the varroa destructor has “decimated hives ever since its appearance in the late ’80s,” said Bloomberg. More than 60% of honeybee colonies in the U.S. that died from June 2024 to January 2025 were “infected by mites resistant to the industry’s most widely used pesticide.”

For the bees that survived the mites, “it’s generally more lucrative for beekeepers to put them to work pollinating crops, rather than dedicating the insects to honeymaking.” As a result of the growing demand and reduced supply, “near-record imports are flowing in to fill that widening gap, with India, Argentina, Brazil and Vietnam emerging as some of the top suppliers.”

A bad place to bee

Alongside the ecological issues, the government is perpetuating the honey dearth. The USDA is planning to close the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, a “6,500-acre agricultural research station in Maryland that is home to the nation’s premier bee research and disease diagnosis hub,” Jennie L. Durant, a research affiliate in human ecology at the University of California, Davis, said at The Conversation. Beltsville researchers “have helped beekeepers respond to varroa mites” and is now “helping them prepare for a deadlier mite that is infesting honey bees in Asia: Tropilaelaps mercedesae.”

The USDA has claimed that its reason for decommissioning the Beltsville center is that “building maintenance and renovations would cost an estimated $500 million,” said Durant. However, the price, experts argue, is well worth it. “The lab is $3.2 million a year for 20-plus scientists,” Zac Lamas, a researcher at the bee lab within the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, said to The Associated Foreign Press. “We responded to a $600 million problem,” so the “idea that we’re redundant and expensive isn’t a good way to generalize the value of this lab.”

In addition to the Beltsville center, the Trump administration has “proposed eliminating the U.S. Geological Survey’s Ecosystems Mission Area, a move that could defund the USGS Bee Lab, an essential resource for research on native bees,” said Durant. The honey industry “has never been this stretched to keep healthy bees,” Jeff Pettis, who worked as a bee researcher at Beltsville from 1996 to 2016, said to Wisconsin Public Radio. And maintaining bee health is “what Beltsville was all about.”

Manhasset

Architect Tim Maldonado designed this 1991 modern four-bedroom in North Hills, on the North Shore in Nassau County. Carved Parisian doors open to a home with flamed Canadian granite floors, a water feature at the base of a floating steel staircase, a living room with floor-to-ceiling windows, and a primary suite with a balcony.

On more than an acre, the landscaped property includes a guest cottage, pool and spa, patios, fig trees, and a garage. $5,500,000. Irene Rallis, Douglas Elliman, (516) 241-9848

Quogue

Built in 1967 and expanded in 1998, this shingled Hamptons five-bedroom is near shops and oceanside Dune Road. The vaulted living room features a floor-to-ceiling brick fireplace, wood floors, and sliders to a deck; the home also includes two kitchens, a den, a sitting room, a screened porch, and a loft.

The flat property has yards, mature trees, and space for a future pool and sports court. $4,850,000. Lauren Battista, Brown Harris Stevens/Luxury Portfolio International, (917) 744-9382

Southampton

About five minutes from town and the beach, this estate spans more than 2 acres. The original 1900 barn has been expanded into a five-bedroom, open-plan home with decks extending from both levels and a 25-foot-tall great room topped by a loft with wood railings.

Outside are a three-story art studio with an elevator, a heated pool and hot tub, a shed, a garage, a riverbed garden, and stone bridges. $7,395,000. Pat Garrity, The Corcoran Group—Southampton, (631) 903-5900

Water Island

In a small, secluded, largely car-free enclave within the Fire Island National Seashore, this 2015 oceanfront coastal modern compound designed by Scott Bromley has a one-bedroom main house and a four-bedroom guesthouse.

Both feature walls of windows, cedar and teak woods, ocean views, built-ins, a high-end kitchen, and decks; the larger building also includes a pool, an outdoor kitchen, and a bar. The Atlantic Ocean is steps away down a boardwalk. $6,250,000. Nathaniel Larson, Daniel Gale Sotheby’s International Realty, (631) 800-1301

Sag Harbor

Set in the converted 1881 Watchcase Factory Lofts, this 2016 two-bedroom penthouse condo is a block away from the village’s Main Street. The apartment has exposed brick walls, 10-foot ceiling beams of old-growth pine, oak floors, oversize windows, a fireplace, and a chef’s kitchen with Thermidor appliances and thick stone counters.

Outside are a roof terrace with a firepit, plus a community pool, gym, lounge, bar, and parking. $5,995,000. Jack Pearson, Compass, (516) 457-7111

Port Washington

Docked on Manhasset Bay, this 1986 houseboat is near Bat Walk Park and shops and dining in the town’s center. The two-bedroom features diagonal wood-clad walls, a step-up living room and kitchen area with a woodstove and granite counters, and a lower level with bedrooms, a bath, and laundry.

Outside are a balcony, a lower deck, and an upper deck with 360-degree water views. $299,999. Giedre Pogozelski and Elpis Hardiman, Douglas Elliman, (917) 335-0264

‘Backrooms’

Directed by Kane Parsons (R)

★★★

“Might social media, a force often credited with hastening the death of theatrical moviegoing, instead prove to be its salvation?” asked Justin Chang in The New Yorker. As the three-week-old horror film Obsession continues its surprising run, it has now been blocked from topping the box office chart by another made-on-the-cheap hit by a young director whose vision was also shaped by social media. Backrooms, created by 20-year-old Kane Parsons, is “an ingeniously contoured exercise in liminal horror” built around the notion of a nearly endless maze-like expanse of eerily bland office spaces. Though the film “ends on a disappointingly conventional note,” it establishes Parsons as “an undeniable talent.”

Given that his theatrical debut grew out of the huge audience he’d built on YouTube for short videos set in the same world, said Amy Nicholson in the Los Angeles Times, “Backrooms would be one of the year’s most significant releases even if the movie itself was merely fine.” Instead, “it’s a work of honest-to-goodness art,” an “uncannily mature” tale about how the self-serving narratives we tell ourselves block emotional growth. Chiwetel Ejiofor plays an embittered furniture store owner who discovers a passage into the mundane alt-space, eventually drawing two young employees and his therapist, played by fellow Oscar nominee Renate Reinsve, into also braving its potential dangers. Still, Backrooms is less straightforward horror than “a surrealist painting in motion.” It conjures “a deep-in-the-bones unease,” said Kyle Smith in The Wall Street Journal. And while the disappointing screenplay ensures the film isn’t “a fully explained wonder,” it remains “well worth the wander.”

‘Power Ballad’

Directed by John Carney (R)

★★

The latest music-filled comedy drama from the director of Once and Sing Street “should be breezy fun,” said Stephanie Zacharek in Time. Instead, “it left me feeling mildly depressed,” because its happy ending felt unearned after roughly 90 minutes about a nice-guy musician who has a song stolen from him by a pop star. Co-stars Paul Rudd and Nick Jonas “aren’t to blame here; it’s the story that lets them down,” and the wrong turns start with the pain we have to see Rudd’s underdog endure.

Beyond that, “you have to suspend quite a bit of disbelief to meet the film on its own terms,” said Christian Zilko in IndieWire. Rudd plays Rick, the middle-aged American leader of a Dublin-based wedding band who, after meeting a former boy-band member, winds up exchanging song sketches deep into the night. Months later, Rick is shocked, and begins spiraling, when one of his tunes becomes an uncredited global hit for his new celebrity soulmate. But while some key events in the story are “tough sells,” the characters’ actions convey emotional truths, and “the film builds toward the mature realization that sometimes it’s OK to miss out on our material dreams if we replace them with something better,” such as a rich family life. Still, the likable Rudd is “about all that tethers Power Ballad to something like life,” said Manohla Dargis in The New York Times. Director John Carney “keeps everything insistently light, gesturing at complexities rather than delving into them.”

‘Masters of the Universe’

Directed by Travis Knight (PG-13)

★★

“The creators of the new Masters of the Universe movie really, really want to let you know that they’re in on the joke,” said Frank Scheck in The Hollywood Reporter. The brains behind Mattel Studio’s first movie since Barbie know that only children and over-grown adolescents would care about He-Man and Skeletor, two 1980s toys turned cartoons, so they’ve packed the film with “so much campy, self-referential humor that you don’t know whether to laugh or cry.” There’s plenty of action, but even that feels “more dutiful than exhilarating, with nothing really seeming at stake.”

When the movie works, it’s “a rollicking under-dog space adventure,” said Clint Worthington in RogerEbert.com. Nicholas Galitzine plays He-Man, aka Prince Adam of Eternia, who, as an adolescent, was sent to Earth after his kingdom was conquered by Skeletor, played by Jared Leto as a purring diva. Fifteen years later, Adam is working a dreary HR job when a chance encounter sends him back home to reclaim the throne. Owing to all the wisecracking, however, the movie too often “feels like it’s ashamed of what it truly wants to be.” It’s “most enjoyable as a fish-out-of-water tale on either side of the planetary divide,” said Guy Lodge in Variety. Once we’re back on Eternia, though, “things get less spry,” and as the movie lurches from one fight scene to the next, it becomes “a nostalgia trip that never quite belongs to the present, and never rouses any cherished memory of the past.”

The authorities in China have banned a prizewinning film because nationalists and the manosphere “resented its portrayal of their country”, said The Economist.

The movie, “Her Heart Beats in its Cage”, is a prison drama based on real killing, centering on Zhao Xiaohong, who may be perceived as a “star in the making”, a “feminist icon”, a “murderer” or “part of a calculated deception”, said The Times.

Deeply conflicted 

Zhao killed her husband with a fruit knife during an argument that “spilt over into a violent altercation” about the wider division of domestic chores. A court found her guilty of intentional killing in 2009 and sentenced her to 15 years in prison.

She was preparing for release from jail when Xiaoyu Qin, a film director, “discovered” her. He visited her prison, and was surprised to find “marginalised individuals full of personality and complexity, intense clashes between notions of good and evil” and “deeply conflicted stories”, he told China Newsweek.

For the film, Qin blended documentary-style footage of Zhao’s time in jail, filmed with the approval of the government, with scripted performances by her and her family, including her husband’s relatives. Critics claimed that Qin had “lured” the grieving family into participating and “feigning forgiveness”, said The Economist.

When the film was shown last year at the San Sebastian Film Festival in Spain, it “caused an immediate stir” and “made headlines back home in China”, said The Times.

It was quickly criticised online for allegedly whitewashing a convicted killer. Some argued that the film was “condoning violence” and “rewarding a criminal”, while others “questioned whether she was a victim of domestic violence at all”, noting that the judge had “rejected” her claim of self-defence.

There were also “the usual claims” on China’s “highly nationalistic internet” that the movie depicted the country in a “bad light”, which is the “sort of issue” on which censors “tend to agree with popular opinion”.

The film’s release in China was hotly anticipated, but as controversy raged, it disappeared from schedules less than a fortnight before its release. No explanation was given.

Meanwhile, the film’s cast and crew are not responding to requests for interviews, so “even finding out their defence to the accusations and counter-accusations” aimed at the film has “become more and more difficult”, as reports and reviews are “ruthlessly scrubbed”. Zhao’s social media accounts have also been blocked, according to reports in state media.

Touchy nationalism 

Chinese “propaganda” is “full of distortion and deception”, said The Economist, but much of the reaction online “reflected a touchy nationalism”, claiming the film was a “Western plot to undermine party rule by spreading liberal, pro-feminist values”.

China is undergoing its own “version” of the “West’s culture wars”, said The Times, with feminists “calling out the patriarchy and sexual harassment”, while men, particularly young men, are “crying foul”.

But “more informed online debate” about the movie has focused on reforms to the justice system. The law has been altered to allow judges assessing a self-defence claim to take into account any previous history of domestic violence.

I remember southern Africa’s old-fashioned sleeper trains, with their wooden carriages and “grand” dining cars, from my childhood in what was then Rhodesia in the 1950s and 1960s, said Matthew Parris in The Times.

They fell out of use long ago, and few of the region’s railways now carry passengers at all. You can, however, relive their glory days – with added luxury – thanks to Rovos Rail.

This tour operator was founded in 1989 by Rohan Vos, a South African businessman with a “passion” for restoring old railway carriages. The company’s trains now ply routes across the region, from Cape Town to as far afield as Dar es Salaam, going at a slow pace for comfort (the tracks are narrow gauge and sometimes poorly maintained) and making many stops for excursions to nearby “wonders” and occasional nights in “lovely” lodges.

I took an 11-night trip from Pretoria to the “massive sand dunes and mysterious desert coast” of Namibia – an expedition that combined “adventure” with “amenity and elegance of a high order”. Our train had 19 carriages from the old Rhodesia Railways, but carried just 60 passengers: my compartment occupied a third of a carriage and had mahogany panelling, brass fittings and an en suite shower.

The meals served in the two “magnificent” dining cars were “splendid” and varied. The staff were charming. A South African historian gave “sparkling” lectures. And I never tired of the observation car, where I spent chilly mornings and warm evenings sipping coffee or post-prandial negronis and watching the “ever-changing” landscape slip by.

In South Africa, we went for a cruise on the Orange River and took a trip to the Augrabies Falls, where the river plunges into an “immense” granite gorge. In Namibia, we gazed over the vast Fish River Canyon and saw lions and elephants in the Etosha Pan game reserve. The most fun I had, though, was sliding down a huge sand dune at Sossusvlei. “I felt like a boy again.”

Distant Journeys (distantjourneys.co.uk) has a 16-night trip from £9,696pp, including flights.

Developed after 9/11 and during the Iraq War, Prevent is the first of four pillars of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy for England, Scotland and Wales (together, they make up the “four Ps”: Prevent, Pursue, Protect, Prepare).

It has three main objectives: tackling the ideological causes of terrorism, intervening early to stop people becoming radicalised, and enabling those who have engaged with terrorism to “disengage and rehabilitate”. Prevent is, in theory, not about getting people “into trouble”, but about helping those “susceptible to radicalisation” with early intervention.

Even so, the programme has faced repeated criticisms, from a range of perspectives: both that it stigmatises Muslims, and is too soft on them; that it chills free speech; and that, ultimately, it fails to prevent terrorism.

How has it failed to prevent terrorism?

It has failed to stop a series of high-profile terror incidents. Ahmed Hassan detonated a bomb in Parsons Green in 2017 after Prevent officials had discussed his case for more than a year, and almost closed it days before the attack. Usman Khan, responsible for the 2019 Fishmongers’ Hall attack, was monitored by Prevent officials, while Ali Harbi Ali, who murdered David Amess MP in 2021, was later found to have manipulated Prevent through “disguised compliance”. Axel Rudakubana, the Southport killer, had been referred to Prevent three times, but his case was closed each time. The suspect in the Golders Green stabbings in April was referred to Prevent in 2020, but his case was shelved that year.

At the same time, there have been notorious cases of “false positives”, such as a 10-year-old Muslim boy referred in 2015 after writing at school that he lived in a “terrorist house”; he meant “terraced house”.

How does Prevent work?

Anyone can make a Prevent referral, to police or a local authority. In 2024-25, there were 8,778 referrals, an all-time high; in the past the figure has been closer to 6,000. The median age of a referral was 16; 36% were aged 11 to 15.

Until 2011, Prevent was aimed specifically at Islamist extremism. Today, there are 15 other categories of concern, the most common being extreme right-wing ideology (20% of 2024-25 referrals), compared to 9% in the Islamist category; but also including left-wing, environmental and incel extremism (“involuntary celibates” driven by misogyny).

Once a referral is received, police evaluate whether the individual is at real risk of radicalisation. If so, their case goes before a multi-agency panel (called a Channel), chaired by the local authority and attended by social services, education and mental-health professionals, who agree on a support package. In 2024/25, only 17% were adopted as a Channel case. Taking part is voluntary – those referred, or their parents, must give their consent.

Why is it so controversial?

By definition, it involves keeping tabs on people, mostly young people, who haven’t committed crimes: gathering detailed and often personal intelligence on them, sharing it with different agencies and retaining it for years or even decades. Campaigners argue Prevent violates the principle of “innocent until proven guilty”; it operates in what is designated, in rather Orwellian terms, as a “pre-criminal space”.

Controversy often centres on the so-called Prevent duty. Since 2015, schools, hospitals, prisons and police have had a statutory duty to identify and refer those showing signs of potential radicalisation. The National Union of Teachers voted against it in 2016, arguing it created “suspicion in the classroom”. That Prevent has been largely focused on one religious minority makes the issues more acute.

Is that criticism justified?

For many years, particularly during the peak of Islamic State influence, the great majority of Prevent referrals targeted Muslims: in 2015-16, for instance, 65% related to concerns about Islamist extremism. In 2015, the former senior Met officer Dal Babu said that many Muslims were suspicious of the scheme and saw it as a tool for spying on them; that it had become a “toxic brand”. The Muslim Council of Great Britain said that year that some parents were “training their children” not to discuss their beliefs at school.

However, in recent years, referrals for extreme right-wing terrorism have frequently equalled or surpassed those for Islamist extremism. This itself, however, has proved controversial.

Why is that controversial?

The 2023 independent review of Prevent, conducted by William Shawcross, concluded that it suffered from a “culture of timidity”, due to fear of upsetting Muslims, and neglected Islamist extremism relative to the threat level it posed to the UK: 80% of police counter-terrorism investigations focused on Islamist terror, but such cases accounted for only 22% of Prevent referrals.

What do Prevent’s defenders say?

In counter-terrorism, successes – attacks prevented – are inherently hard to prove. However, the Channel programme gives bespoke support to about 500 people every year, and officials claim that it has successfully helped more than 6,400 people to disengage from extremism since 2015. Prevent’s budget is limited: £38.7 million in 2025-26, barely 3% of the national £3 billion counter-terrorism spend; and down to a reported £25 million this year.

With regards to Muslim “mistrust”, last year’s Prevent review by David Anderson KC found that 80% of British Muslims supported Prevent, and that many of its practitioners are Muslim. However, Anderson found that it was facing a structural problem. It was set up to deal with people driven by ideologies. Yet more than half of those referred to Prevent in the past year were found not to have one. The Home Affairs Committee said last month that the programme was becoming “saturated” with such cases.

The changing landscape of extremism

When Prevent was set up in 2006, the threat it was built to address was relatively contained: young men drawn towards al-Qaida-inspired Islamism via mosques, prisons and radical preachers. While Islamist and extreme right-wing threats haven’t gone away, new forms of extremism have emerged, nurtured by social media, gaming platforms and online forums, and communicated via influencers, memes, coded messaging and AI-generated content. These new forms of extremism are a murky blend of conspiracy theories, nihilism, identity-based narratives and a fascination with violence.

Of the 2024-25 Prevent referrals, 56% (4,917) were for individuals with “no identified ideology” – the largest single category; 5% (469) were due to concerns regarding “fascination with extreme violence or mass casualty attacks”, not accompanied by an ideology. That “fascination with extreme violence” category was created in response to cases such as Axel Rudakubana’s: his lack of a clear ideology had led to Prevent dismissing his case three times. Mental health and neurodiversity also seem to be a factor: a third of Prevent referrals had mental-health conditions, and 14% had been diagnosed with autism, compared to 1% of the UK population.

How Kemal Atatürk – founder of modern Turkey, the man who transformed the decrepit Ottoman monarchy into a modern secular republic – must be “turning in his grave”, said Jonas Roth in Neue Zürcher Zeitung (Zurich).

Last week, Turkish riot police stormed the headquarters of the CHP, the social democratic party Atatürk set up in 1923, to flush out the party’s current leader, Özgür Özel. For three days, Özel and a group of party officials had barricaded themselves inside the building in protest at a highly controversial court ruling that had just ordered Özel to stand down, claiming there had been voting irregularities at the CHP party congress that elected him leader in 2023.

Using batons, tear gas and rubber bullets, the police rushed in to evict him; Özel emerged to address the cheering crowd outside and then led a march to the parliament building.

‘No longer unbeatable’

It isn’t hard to detect the hand of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan behind all this. For 13 years, from 2010 to 2023, the CHP under its former leader, Kemal Kılıçdaroglu, had proved an ineffectual opposition, losing every single election, local and national, to Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP). But under Özel, the CHP has been transformed into a political force capable of ending Erdogan’s 23-year rule.

So the fact that the judiciary, which Erdogan has made his tool, should now have ordered Özel to be replaced by the perennial loser Kılıçdaroglu, speaks for itself. The crackdown on the CHP began in earnest after it inflicted a “historic defeat” on the AKP in local elections in 2024, said Ecehan Balta in Xekinima (Athens). Holding Erdogan responsible for the economic crisis that had seen inflation rise above 80%, voters turned en masse to Özel’s party, which won 35 provinces to the AKP’s 24. This was a huge blow to the president, a sign that his political machine, for all its grip on state institutions and the media, was “no longer unbeatable”.

And, since then, hundreds of CHP officials have been arrested, notably Ekrem Imamoglu, the popular mayor of Istanbul, who was detained last March on the same day that he was chosen as his party’s next presidential candidate.

Hope not lost

What happened to Imamoglu was a travesty, said Raphael Geiger in Süddeutsche Zeitung (Munich): he faces up to 2,352 years in jail, if convicted of corruption and espionage. But the dethroning of Özel is even worse. It “eliminates everything that remains of Turkish democracy”, effectively snuffing out “the faint hope” of a different government being elected.

Indeed Turkey, now lacking a genuine opposition, is closer than ever to “one-man rule”, said The Economist. Özel could try and found a new party, but without the “powerful brand” of the CHP behind him, he is unlikely to succeed. In any case, Erdogan is expected to call a snap election before the next scheduled vote in May 2028. In doing so, he would be exploiting a loophole which allows him to stand again if he doesn’t fully complete his current presidential term, which the constitution mandates should otherwise be his last.

All hope is not lost, though, said Dogan Ertugrul on Turkish Minute. Imprisoning your main challenger and sowing chaos in the ranks of their party is a sign not of strength, but of insecurity.

And these risky political steps could well backfire. Look at the Gen Z-led protests that have erupted across the country since Imamoglu’s arrest. They are still going strong and have Erdogan worried, said Giorgio Brizio in La Repubblica (Rome). On the same day police raided the CHP’s offices in Ankara, thousands of students and staff staged a demonstration at Bilgi University in Istanbul, a bastion of liberal thought that the president had just closed down. In scenes “unthinkable” until a few years ago, police burst onto the campus, targeting protesters with batons and pepper spray. Many of the students were arrested; but they stood firm, and soon after Erdogan issued a decree to reopen the university. The students’ victory is clear proof that Erdogan is not invincible.

Young people in Britain today risk becoming a “lost generation” owing to job opportunities shrinking, “not growing”, a landmark report warned last week.

Compiled by the former Labour minister Alan Milburn, the report said that almost a million 16- to 24-year-olds (equivalent to one in eight young people) are now “Neets” – not in education, employment or training.

He called this a “catastrophic failure” and said that, without urgent action, the proportion would reach one in six within five years.

‘Getting stickier’

In his 232-page report, Milburn said the rise in Neets could be attributed to factors including rising employment costs (such as increases to the minimum wage); a decline in Saturday jobs; and a 70% increase over a decade in those who are Neet because of ill health, nearly half of whom cite mental health conditions. Ministers said the review had laid bare “the scale of the challenge [...] we need to confront”.

Keir Starmer is often criticised for commissioning “endless reports”, rather than “forging ahead with policies”, said the Financial Times. But Milburn’s review serves a vital purpose, and “deserves to be heeded”.

Britain’s “Neets problem” isn’t new: the proportion has been at 10% or above for 25 years. But it’s “getting stickier”. The UK has three times as many Neets per capita than the Netherlands, and more than any EU country except Romania. Six in ten Neets today have never had a job, up from four in ten in 2005, and 15% have degrees. With data showing that nearly half of young Neets on benefits will not be working 15 years later, this is more than an economic problem; it’s a “moral” issue.

‘Transformative’ implications

“Milburn’s charge list is long,” said The Daily Telegraph. He criticises an education system that fails to prepare students for work, and a welfare system that spends £25 on benefits for the young for every £1 spent on getting them into work. Young people themselves, however, are rightly absolved of blame, said The Independent. Milburn stresses that 84% want to work, but are being let down by a failing system.

Milburn’s report provides “an excoriating overview” of this failing system, said Polly Toynbee in The Guardian. It identifies huge structural problems – from the 1.6 million “first-rung jobs” that have vanished in the past 20 years, to a more than 40% fall in the number of young people starting apprenticeships since 2016. It gives a voice to those who spend their days firing off job applications to firms that use faceless AI systems to screen CVs, and that don’t even bother to notify rejected candidates. And it outlines how the pandemic led to a surge in truancy levels (which are closely linked to youngsters becoming Neets), and left a generation utterly ill-equipped for the jobs market.

Crucially, it also details how the welfare boom is exacerbating this crisis, said Fraser Nelson in The Times. With the right political will, the report could trigger a total rewiring of the benefits system – continuing the “transformative” tradition of reviews such as the 1942 Beveridge Report, which laid the foundations for the welfare state.

‘Moral crusade’

Milburn deserves credit for dragging welfare back onto the agenda, said Lana Hempsall in The Spectator. But much-needed reform hasn’t been stymied by a prior lack of analysis, but rather by the unwillingness of MPs to grasp the nettle. It’s only a year since the government proposed some “relatively minor” tweaks to the welfare system, only to be forced into a climbdown by its own backbenchers.

Milburn’s “mammoth” report gives the government cover to have another crack at overhauling the system, said Josh Glancy in The Sunday Times. Rooted in data and humanised by the voices of real people, it cleverly frames welfare reform as a “moral crusade” through which Labour can create a better future for the young. Admittedly, it will still be hard to persuade Labour MPs to make cuts, and the Treasury to fund the cost of moving from one system to another. But if Labour doesn’t seize this opportunity to mend a broken system, the party will “deserve to watch as Nigel Farage or the Tories” cut the welfare bill “their way”.

Milburn is due to publish his recommendations in the autumn. As part of a radical restructuring, he is said to be considering the case for an “entirely separate welfare system for young people who have never worked”, reports the FT, with a focus on getting them into jobs. Pat McFadden, the Work and Pensions Secretary, is due to join Milburn on a fact-finding trip to the Netherlands next week. The country has similar levels of mental ill health in young people as Britain does, but has much more success at keeping them in work or education.

As Pride Month begins in the U.S., numerous Republican governors have “bestowed alternative titles” for Pride Month that “both supporters and opponents view as counterprogramming,” said The Associated Press. But this is just one of several ways the current Republican Party’s stance on LGBTQ+ rights has revealed itself during President Donald Trump’s time in office.

What did the commentators say?

The GOP governors of both Indiana and Tennessee “rebranded June as Nuclear Family Month to celebrate units made up of ‘one husband, one wife and any biological, adopted or fostered children,’” said the AP. Alabama deemed June Strong Families Month, whose “proclamation says fathers are ‘the head of the household.’” And Utah and Arkansas christened June as Fidelity Month, which “emphasizes fidelity to faith, country and family.” The “contest over the month of June reflects decades-long culture war questions, exacerbated by partisan polarization and a sense that red and blue states increasingly represent different values,” said Deseret News.

The current White House has also attempted to “enact a nationwide ban on transgender girls participating in girls’ sports,” expel transgender service members from the military and prevent “transgender Americans from having their gender on their passport,” said Roll Call. These efforts are a result of “rank animus against transgender people,” Jessica Clarke, a law professor at the University of Southern California, told the outlet. The “legislation dovetails with administration efforts and state laws intended to curb the rights of transgender Americans,” said Roll Call.

While both of Trump’s presidencies have been defined by anti-LGTBQ+ stances, his second term efforts are “more far-reaching and extreme than those he put in place during his first term,” said The 19th. Civil rights groups pushed back against Trump’s anti-trans executive orders during his first four years in office, but the courts are “not as friendly as they once were,” Mike Zamore, the national director of policy and governmental affairs at the American Civil Liberties Union, told the outlet. These groups shouldn’t assume that a court case “that was successful in the first Trump administration would necessarily prevail this go around.”

What next?

The Republican ramp-up against the LGBTQ+ movement is likely here to stay, as “every Democratic president since Bill Clinton in 1999 has signed a Pride proclamation each year — and no Republican president has,” said the AP. There also appear to be changing public views on whether same-sex marriage should be legal, which is “largely because more Republicans oppose them” now than before Trump retook office.

Approval of “same-sex marriage, moral acceptance of gay and lesbian relations and endorsement of gender changes are all down from peaks reached in the early 2020s,” according to a recent Gallup survey. The poll of 1,001 adults found that 65% of Americans support same-sex marriage. While this still represents a majority of Americans, it is also “down six percentage points from the peak in 2022 and 2023.”

Many people also appear to be going back on their acceptance of the transgender community, according to Gallup’s results. The “share of Americans who consider changing one's gender morally acceptable has declined eight points over the past five years, to 38%,” said Gallup.

Editor's note: The following is The Week's Good News newsletter. You can subscribe to it on Substack here or register to have it emailed to you once a week here.

Wearable ultrasound tracks high-risk pregnancies

A new wearable ultrasound patch could one day help detect pregnancy complications early on and prevent stillbirths. The UPatch, now a proof-of-concept device, continuously monitors fetuses in the womb and tracks blood flow. In a trial of 52 pregnant women, the UPatch found that one woman with preeclampsia, a serious type of high blood pressure, had extreme intrauterine growth restriction. Her baby was then delivered via caesarean to prevent a stillbirth, researchers reported in the journal Nature Biotechnology.

Paralympian could be first astronaut with disability in orbit

British Paralympic sprinter John McFall is set to make history as the first disabled astronaut in space. The 45-year-old surgeon is a member of the European Space Agency astronaut reserve and has been cleared to participate in a two-week mission to the Haven-1 commercial space station, set to launch as soon as next year. Among other tasks, The Guardian said, McFall will assess how the space environment affects modern prosthetic limbs, “which often rely on sensors and microprocessors to function properly.”

New method transforms ocean water into drinking water

A new desalination method offers a waste-free way to turn ocean water into drinking water without any chemical additives. Self-cleaning solar panels distill the water and separate out the salts, which can be used as table salt or to extract minerals like lithium. The researchers who designed the system at the University of Rochester’s Institute of Optics say it is scalable for use worldwide and tackles both clean drinking water scarcity and damage caused by mining minerals.

Patients helped by therapy donkeys at French psychiatric hospital

Therapy donkeys are helping to improve the emotional regulation and communication skills of patients at a French psychiatric hospital. As part of their treatment, patients with conditions like anxiety, schizophrenia and depression take the donkeys on walks, clean their hooves and give them hugs. This is “animal medicine,” one patient, Nathalie, told France 24. “It brings relief. You stop thinking about everything else.” Participants are paired with one donkey so they can form a bond.

President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) has no known national security experience. But the new interim intelligence director, Bill Pulte, does have a history of going after Trump’s rivals. And this combination is raising alarms in Congress.

The 38-year-old Pulte is an “unusual selection” to be the interim intelligence chief following Tulsi Gabbard’s resignation, said The Hill. Before leading the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) under Trump, he owned a construction company and private equity firm and has “no high-level national security experience.”

Pulte at FHFA “proved his loyalty to the president by combing through the mortgages of Trump’s enemies,” said Talking Points Memo. His inquiries led to federal mortgage-fraud cases against New York Attorney General Letitia James and Fed Governor Lisa Cook.

Pulte has “deep experience managing the most sensitive matters in America,” Trump said, per The Hill. But the president’s GOP allies are concerned. “We don’t need a weaponized DNI,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said to reporters, per Axios.

‘Vocal attack dog’

“Everybody hates Bill Pulte,” said The New Republic. That may not be entirely correct — Trump is clearly a fan — but Pulte has a knack for inspiring bipartisan revulsion even within Trump’s own cabinet. At a 2025 event involving White House officials, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Pulte he was “going to kick his ass,” according to Bessent’s testimony in a Senate hearing this week, per CBS News.

Pulte’s willingness to scrap with Trump’s enemies both online and through official channels has earned him a reputation as a “vocal attack dog,” said The Washington Times. But his dearth of national security credentials may be a challenge. The law that created DNI says the director “shall have extensive national security experience.”

The office was created after 9/11 to ensure the coordination of the nation’s various intelligence agencies. But Pulte’s history of fractiousness may not make him a “promising person” to get “top officials to work together,” David A. Graham said at The Atlantic.

‘Senate GOP rebellion’

Trump’s announcement of Pulte as his choice prompted pushback from Democrats. Pulte’s willingness to investigate the president’s enemies demonstrates he “can’t be entrusted to protect our national security,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), per Roll Call.

The pick has also prompted a “Senate GOP rebellion,” said Axios. Pushback is coming from Thune, along with Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas). So Pulte might not have the support to get Senate confirmation for the long term.

Senate Democrats may tank efforts to “renew a powerful surveillance program” over the Pulte pick, said The Guardian. Reapproval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was already facing obstacles but has an even more difficult path forward, said Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) to NPR, as long as “someone with no intelligence background” and a “record of misusing private information” is in the running to lead DNI.

Staying on budget does not have to mean staying in all the time. But going out can often be a slippery slope — especially if you are doing so with friends who have different financial situations and spending habits. Your friend might suggest another round or two of drinks or grabbing dinner at a pricey restaurant, and the next thing you know, your bank account balance is not where you would like it to be.

How can you balance having a good time with friends and feeling good about your spending? Read on for some tips and tricks.

Make a budget before going out

“Setting aside a specific line item in your budget for parties, trips or weekend brunches lets you enjoy your social life without the stress of overspending,” said Money. By doing the math on the front end, you can know exactly how much you can afford to spend in a given month. This will also give you a clear way to track how much of that allotted amount you have already gone through at any point throughout the month, which is helpful to know prior to meeting up with friends.

Come up with lower-cost activities

“Meaningful experiences with your friends don’t have to be expensive,” said Ally. If you want to spend time with a friend and are nervous about shelling out, consider suggesting something free or fairly inexpensive — who knows, they may even breathe a sigh of relief for their own budget. Some easy ideas include going on a hike, checking out a free museum or outdoor concert or attending a local book club together.

Invite people over

Having people over is an easy way to get the crew together while skipping the bar tab or the restaurant bill. Maybe you can ask everyone to bring over a dish for a potluck, or you could even cook as a group. Perhaps someone brings over a bottle of wine, and you pull out a board game or put on a movie. The bonus of this approach is that everyone can stay as long as they (or you) would like.

Be open with your friends

Maybe you have been trying to dance around your financial reality because it feels embarrassing or like a potential buzzkill. But “discussing money openly with friends can help dismantle the shame around financial struggles and is a great way to explore affordable ways to spend time together,” said Ally. It also gives you a more honest way to say no to an invitation in the future, if you need to.

Spend on what matters to you most

“Look at money as ‘a tool to enhance your values and your experiences,’” as opposed to just a default way to socialize, said Jack Howard, the head of money wellness at Ally, to CNBC Make It. Evaluate what you really enjoy spending money on, versus when you are spending just to spend, and adjust your expenditures accordingly. “If costly activities like going out to dinner or traveling with friends are important to you, you may have to make cuts in other areas of your life in order to prioritize them,” said the outlet.

‘Why gambling won’t ruin sports’

David Bockino at The Boston Globe

Even the “most vocal critics of widespread legalization concede that gambling has always been part of American sports,” says David Bockino. Gambling “wasn’t an inconvenient intrusion upon the nascent American sports industry but rather an essential catalyst — perhaps the essential catalyst — for nearly every major American sport.” This “revelation also suggests that our current sports betting mania isn’t the result of a national attitudinal shift.” People “have always wanted to bet on stuff. Especially young people.”

Read more

‘Texas is America Inc’s new center of gravity’

The Economist

Texas is “establishing itself as America Inc’s new center of gravity,” as “no state receives more business investment or is adding more people to its population,” says The Economist. The “state’s appeal to yuppies is also growing,” and it “seems there is no part of America with which Texas is not competing.” Texas’ cultural “ascendancy” is “making it easier for firms to convince workers to move there,” though “cultivating homegrown talent is a big part of Texas’s economic plan.”

Read more

‘It’s time the US got serious about Canada’

Richard M. Sanders at Newsweek

One of the “more bizarre features of Donald Trump’s second term in office has been the enormous effort he and his senior officials have put into damaging relations with Canada,” says Richard M. Sanders. The U.S. “has some genuine trade issues with Canada,” but the “administration seems locked into a policy of taking shots.” What “seems clear is that diplomacy by insult and provocation, which has characterized the administration’s approach, has only led to suspicion and hostility.”

Read more

‘What a week in the hospital showed me about our broken healthcare system’

Gregg Gonsalves at The Nation

A successful surgery happened “thanks to the miracles of modern medicine,” but it “was no thanks to modern American healthcare,” which is “fundamentally broken,” says Gregg Gonsalves. The “system is sclerotic, and trying to get appointments, even for things I have been told are urgent, is a challenge.” This is a “cry for help that goes unheard and unaddressed year after year.” The “rot deepens in the day-to-day foundation of American medicine, at the level of the physician-patient interface.”

Read more

With many Americans opposing the construction of giant AI data centers in their neighborhoods, some tech companies are proposing an unconventional solution: attaching mini data centers directly to people’s houses. At least one major startup backed by Nvidia is looking into the prospect, though it will likely be controversial.

How would these mini data centers work?

People typically associate data centers with big buildings churning out massive quantities of AI datasets. But the home version would be a “unit about the size of an air conditioner, mounted in the side yard,” said Scientific American. It could perform “artificial intelligence tasks, drawing power from your home’s energy supply” and theoretically “earning you discounted electricity and internet in exchange.”

Most of the attention has been focused on Span, an electrical panel startup that recently began manufacturing these types of units in partnership with Nvidia. The company said its mini data centers would be “less of a financial burden on residents” and “have a potentially lower ecological footprint than warehouse data centers,” said Fortune. Span’s units are also quiet, thereby “mitigating the problem of noise pollution that has drawn the ire of residents of areas with nearby warehouse data centers.”

Industry experts hope the home models like those proposed by Span could help alleviate the financial and energy constraints created by large buildings; a typical AI data center “consumes as much electricity as 100,000 households,” according to the International Energy Agency. Instead of “building a single large data center that requires its own substation upgrade or on-site gas turbines,” the AI “spreads compute across thousands of homes that are already connected to the grid,” said Scientific American.

What has the reaction been?

Creating more energy-friendly data centers is a “cool idea on paper, but it’s almost completely unproven in real-world use,” said Fast Company. And even if the home data centers took off, the “main point of resistance” is the fact that these centers “will result in higher electric bills for everyone in the area,” even if they are at people’s homes. Whether it’s a “new central data center or a distributed data center,” the “risk of higher costs — perhaps because of transformers and other infrastructure running hotter and degrading more quickly — could arguably be the same.”

Politically, gathering power from existing homes “may be easier than talking a city council into issuing a permit for a data center,” said Fast Company. But all of this is moot if tech companies are unable to perform the “tangled math of coordinating thousands of tiny residential energy resources to fuel the energy beast that data centers are,” said The Arizona Republic. While “distributed power generation has been around for years,” it has never “been harnessed at the scale needed for feeding data centers.”

Officials with Span remain optimistic that the home-based products will work. “There is certainly opportunity, as Span can provide homeowners with access to innovative technology and potential income generation that can help offset monthly energy costs,” a spokesperson for the company told Inc. “On a larger scale, if the technology proves out, it might also keep local infrastructure from being overburdened, which could keep land open for other uses, such as building homes.”

What happened

President Donald Trump on Thursday said his administration was pouring more than $700 million into reviving the struggling coal industry. The funds will reopen one coal-fired power plant, extend the life of 13 others, subsidize coal mining and export operations and build the first two new coal-burning plants since 2013. Trump said he was invoking the 1950 Defense Production Act to intercede in the market. The money for the new coal-fired plants had been allocated by Congress for clean energy technologies.

Who said what

This is the “latest in a series of extraordinary efforts” Trump has taken to “improve the fortunes of coal, the most polluting of the fossil fuels and a favored industry” in his White House, The New York Times said. Energy experts “quickly attacked the subsidies as irrational” since “burning coal is one of the least economic methods of producing power,” The Washington Post said. The half-dozen coal plants Trump has kept open through emergency orders have cost “ratepayers tens of millions of dollars.” He has concurrently “clamped down on renewable energy,” said The Associated Press, blocking wind and solar projects and “ending clean energy tax credits.”

What next?

Analysts said Trump’s investments “could run into trouble if a future president cracked down on the coal sector,” the Times said.

What happened

Lawyers at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Thursday ordered President Donald Trump’s name stripped from the building by June 12 and “immediately” removed from marketing materials, staff signatures and other documents. The order follows a federal judge’s ruling last week that Trump had unlawfully appended his name to the storied arts institution, designated by Congress as a living memorial to the assassinated 35th president.

Who said what

The Trump-picked board “acted beyond its authority” when it added his name to the institution, the Kennedy Center general counsel’s office said in a memo to staff. “Expunging Trump’s name throughout the center would be the most tangible setback” in his quest to “take over” the venue, The Washington Post said, and the memo was the “first indication that the Kennedy Center plans to comply with the judge’s order.” Trump was “incensed” by last week’s ruling, The New York Times said, and Kennedy Center leaders had quickly “indicated that they planned to appeal.”

What next?

The general counsel’s memo said the center was “considering its options” regarding the judge’s temporary halting of plans to shut the arts venue down for two years for renovations and “will provide further guidance shortly.”

What happened

The House on Thursday voted 226 to 195 to provide Ukraine with $1.3 billion in security aid and $8 billion in direct loans while imposing stiff new sanctions on Russia. It was the “most robust aid package to advance in Congress in more than a year,” The Washington Post said, and 18 Republicans joined all but one Democrat to pass the bill “over the objections of the chamber’s GOP leadership” and the White House.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Thursday issued an open letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin proposing a face-to-face meeting outside of the stalled peace process involving President Donald Trump’s envoys. But “woven into the offer for peace talks were needling remarks” in which he “taunted the Russian leader over wartime setbacks, inflation” and “Putin’s advancing age,” The New York Times said.

Who said what

The House’s “strong show of support for Kyiv” was also a “fresh bipartisan blow” to Trump’s foreign policy, Politico said. Republican leaders had “warned the bill would undermine negotiations” on a peace deal, The Associated Press said. But combined with the House’s Iran war rebuke earlier this week, the Ukraine vote signaled bipartisan “impatience” with Trump’s approach to war and peace.

What next?

Trump told reporters he was “glad” Zelenskyy had suggested direct talks with Putin and it “would be great” if they met. But it wasn’t clear if Zelenskyy’s letter was “meant to jump-start talks or to denigrate” Putin, the Times said. It “appeared to be at least in part a publicity move” to highlight Kyiv's drone strike outside St. Petersburg and “recent shifts in Ukraine’s favor on the battlefield.”

“Right now, it’s like the AI industry has a gas pedal but it doesn't have a brake pedal,” Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark told the BBC.

Anthropic recently overtook OpenAI, the makers of ChatGPT, as the world’s most valuable AI start-up. But Clark has called for a global freeze in AI development, warning that humans risk losing control of the technology. He revealed that 80% of the code that Claude, the company’s chatbot, is operating on was written by Claude itself. And reaching 100% is only a couple of years away.

Clark and his research colleague, Marina Favaro, have suggested that work at Anthropic could undergo “a meaningful slowdown or pause” if other AI tech firms were prepared to do the same. “If it were possible to effectively slow the development of this technology to give ourselves more time to deal with its immense implications, we think that would likely be a good thing,” they wrote in a blog post.

What did the commentators say?

Better regulation “would keep AI systems in their lane”, said David Krueger, a specialist in responsible AI, in The Guardian. We should insist companies have “clear and well-scoped purposes” for their AI tools, and “demand evidence that they are fit for purpose”. And they should report statistics and data so that we can see if their product is being used in ways that “deviate from its intended purpose”.

But the “safest, sanest” option is to “stop racing” to make AI smarter. The creation of Moltbook (a forum for AI agents that humans can only observe) is one of the “increasingly alarming warning signs” that “rogue AI agents” could be on their way. “We need to make sure” that rogue AI isn’t “capable of threatening humanity, by agreeing to enforceable, international limits on AI capabilities and AI development”.

There are some hopeful signs in the US. On Tuesday, Donald Trump signed a “much-awaited” executive order to establish a measure of vetting for AI companies, said Politico. It was “messy, muted and far less ambitious than Silicon Valley’s critics had hoped for” but it does mark a “sea change in Washington’s willingness to tighten” AI oversight. The new voluntary process of sharing new models with the US government, so that security risks can be identified and addressed before the technology is released, could “soon pave the way for mandatory vetting, federal pre-approval of advanced AI systems and other regulations”.

Some may think it “meaningful” that Trump is “doing something – anything – about AI”, said The Atlantic, but this executive order is “relatively toothless”. He wants to look like he’s being robust, to “score points” with the public, but, in fact “he is not saying or doing anything substantive at all”. The window for serious government regulation, anywhere in the world, is “rapidly closing”; “hopefully, it is not already gone”.

We’re missing the point, said John Burn-Murdoch in the Financial Times. “AI’s capacity to deliver genuine value has been vastly exaggerated.” In one US study, researchers tracking software developers before and after they adopted AI tools found an initial “explosive” increase in productivity (300% more files created or edited) but, after verification and review, just a 30% “uplift” in the number of releases. These are “powerful new tools” but it’s going to take some time before they can interact with current workflow “processes and structures” without friction or bottlenecks.

What next?

Trump’s executive order is a “good first move in creating a safer tech ecosystem”, said Jen Easterly, former director of the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, in The New York Times. But a voluntary framework, predicated on mutual cooperation between private companies and the US government, “cannot guarantee” effectiveness. And, let’s not forget, a “principle enshrined in an executive order is only as durable as the administration that issued it”.

For this step to be a positive one, in an American context at least, the legislative branch needs to follow suit. The responsibility of building an AI environment that is “innovative, trusted and resilient” ultimately lies with the US Congress.

Peter Murrell, the former chief executive of the SNP, appeared “for 20 excruciating minutes” at the High Court in Edinburgh on Monday, said Tom Peck in The Times. His earlier guilty plea meant there was little prosecuting to be done. “What we saw, instead, was a High Court edition of ‘Supermarket Sweep’”, as the prosecutor detailed how Murrell had embezzled £400,000 from the SNP over 12 years and spent it on 627 items in total, from £3.60 door fixings to the infamous £124,000 motorhome. How did he get away with it? Because “the Great Expenser” was in charge of the process. “He submitted his expenses to himself, then he signed them off himself.”

The list “makes for dazzling reading”, said Louis Wise in the FT: not just the Jaguar, the Golf, the luxury watches, the £2,000 salt and pepper shakers – but also “no fewer than seven – seven! – vacuum cleaners”. One luxury goods PR described Murrell's splurge as “like a regional sales manager's idea of living large”. But actually it's stranger than that – from the £75 men's “slouch pouch” onesie, to the Xbox, the 108 Covid-era loo rolls, and the posh edition of Hannah Arendt's “The Origins of Totalitarianism”.

Double life

“She should have known. She must have known. Nobody can get away with it for that long, in secret, in a marriage.” These are some of the accusations levelled at Nicola Sturgeon, said Victoria Richards in The Independent. Except it's not that simple. As she has pointed out, they were both well-paid, and they had no children. None of these items were unaffordable, except perhaps the motorhome, which Murrell parked at his mother's house.

Countless people find their partner has been living a double life. And, as Sturgeon told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg, a lot of women “end up finding themselves blamed for the actions of the men in their lives”. She's right to reject that sort of misogyny. “This isn't Sturgeon's fault.” That's a “risible” defence, said Oliver Kamm in The i Paper. The accusations are against her as a politician, not as a wife. She is not the “wronged party”.

Conflicts of interest

When Sturgeon became SNP leader, Alex Salmond advised her that having Murrell as chief executive might create conflicts of interest, said Daniel Finkelstein in The Times. She chose to ignore this. She allowed three members of the party's finance and audit committee, its treasurer and its auditors to resign, “all complaining they were being prevented from doing their jobs properly”. Through all this, Sturgeon defended the arrangements, and fiercely discouraged further inquiries. “This was grotesque behaviour. It produced one of the worst scandals of modern political history.”

I still have “a smidgen” of sympathy, said Susan Dalgety in The Scotsman: Sturgeon's “legacy has been reduced to jokes about motorhomes”. But only a smidgen. “She failed on every count.” Long after we have stopped laughing at Murrell's purchases, “the stench of government corruption will linger over Scotland”.

The death of a British soldier in Iraq has refocused concerns over the UK’s military presence in the Middle East.

Lance Corporal James Stewart Freeman died in northern Iraq on Sunday during a training exercise, the Defence Secretary John Healey has said. The US has confirmed that the Briton, and an American soldier, died at a US-controlled base in Erbil, in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region near the Iranian border.

The UK’s position on the Iran war is to participate in “defensive action” only. But after Iran began retaliating against US-Israeli strikes, the UK deployed more personnel to the region, bringing the total number to about 1,000.

The heightened risk to British troops

Northern Iraq has been “one of the most dangerous places for British troops” since Iran launched retaliatory attacks on Gulf countries, said The Times. Tehran has been targeting “US strongholds” across the border in Iraq; specialist soldiers stationed in Erbil have “shot down more than 100 kamikaze drones” since the US and Israel started the war. British personnel “have been within a few hundred feet of successful Iranian strikes”. There is a “heightened risk” that Iran or its proxies could “hit coalition bases in the Middle East”.

The US has about “two dozen significant air bases, naval facilities and outposts scattered from Turkey to Oman”, said The Independent. About 50,000 US service personnel are stationed across the Middle East, many in Arab Gulf countries such as Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar and the UAE – “all of which are at risk of Iranian retaliation with short-range weapons”. There are also about 200 British service personnel deployed in Iraq, involved in “training and supporting Iraqi and Kurdish security forces”.

Oman has been a “strategic hub” for the UK since the Royal Navy opened a “joint logistics support base” at Duqm port. The MoD said Duqm gives the UK a “strategically important and permanent maritime base east of Suez, but outside of the Gulf”. The UK also has two Sovereign Base Areas in Cyprus: Akrotiri and Dhekelia. A string of drone attacks, presumably by Hezbollah, appeared to target the RAF Akrotiri base in March.

Britain: an unwilling participant?

“The UK’s armed forces have long had a presence across the Middle East,” said Geraint Hughes, military historian at King’s College London, on The Conversation. The UK’s naval support facility, which supports the Royal Navy’s “longstanding maritime security mission” in the Persian Gulf, has been in Bahrain since the 1980s. The base and its 300 personnel were “close to the Iranian missile strike” targeting the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in February. That shows that British military personnel “could potentially be at risk from an Iranian attack, even if indirect”.

Keir Starmer maintains that the UK will not join in “offensive action”, and that military assets are only being used to “support the defence of the Gulf states”. But Iran is “unlikely to acknowledge this distinction between ‘defensive’ operations and more ‘offensive’ ones”. As part of the Five Eyes alliance, Britain also “closely coordinates its eavesdropping operations” with the US.

Fundamentally, said Hughes, the regime in Iran is “profoundly Anglophobic”. It presumes the US and Britain will “always collaborate” – as they have done in the Middle East in the past. Iran may have “assumed British complicity in the launching of Operation Epic Fury”, and may “target the UK’s military assets in the Gulf and beyond”. Whatever Labour’s intentions, the UK “may find itself drawn into a war it had no say in starting”.

When is a ceasefire not a ceasefire?

Agreements have been announced in recent months “to great fanfare” in Gaza, Lebanon and Iran, said PBS News, yet fighting continues. So the term “ceasefire” is “rapidly losing its meaning”.

What is happening?

Israeli forces have captured more territory in Gaza, contravening the US-brokered truce with Hamas in October, and at least 900 Palestinians have died in strikes, according to the strip’s ministry of health. Israel has also been increasingly bombarding Lebanon and making deeper incursions across the border, while Hezbollah has kept up rocket fire into northern Israel. The US and Iran have also continued to trade fire since the agreement in April, as they try to reach a permanent truce.

Advantages of an imperfect ceasefire

Ceasefires “often seem to be just smoke and mirrors that precede another round of fighting”, but “even when they don’t hold, they still have value”, said academics Avishay Ben-Sasson-Gordis and Simon Frankel Pratt on Foreign Policy.

They can “establish new bargaining baselines that, over multiple iterations, can become a ladder to a more permanent peace agreement”. The Northern Ireland peace process was primarily driven by two ceasefires in 1994, which ultimately paved the way for the decisive Good Friday Agreement in 1998.

Even a partial decrease in fighting can save lives, reduce injuries and limit the destruction of infrastructure and homes. A ceasefire that cuts violence by 50% is often preferable for many than no ceasefire at all.

Truces can also help with humanitarian access because aid organisations can deliver food, medicine, fuel and other supplies to affected populations. Civilians may be able to evacuate dangerous areas. Even brief pauses in fighting can enable exchanges of detainees, recovery of bodies, or arrangements for missing persons. Meanwhile, observers can assess conditions on the ground.

What are the disadvantages?

Sceptics argue that imperfect ceasefires allow forces to regroup militarily. They can be exploited for propaganda, or they may create a false impression that a conflict is being resolved.

So “cynics begin to see ceasefires as jokes from the start, while the naive fall into a cycle of optimism and despair”, said Ben-Sasson-Gordis and Frankel Pratt. Diplomacy “starts to look false and pointless”.

An imperfect ceasefire can create long-term problems if policymakers do not have a clear objective. After the first Gulf War in 1991, the US stumbled into a “decade-long trap of its own making”, said academics Daniel Chardell and Samuel Helfont on Foreign Affairs.

Washington “crafted a cease-fire agreement” with Iraq that led to ongoing tensions, repeated military confrontations and a long-term containment strategy rather than a durable peace. Subsequent US presidents were unwilling to accept Saddam Hussein remaining in power or fully commit to removing him.

The US enforced no-fly zones, sanctions, military patrols and repeated air strikes, effectively becoming a policeman. Meanwhile, international support eroded and frustration grew in Washington. Ultimately, the ceasefire became a stepping stone to the larger war in 2003.