The burnt-out shell of Grenfell Tower will be "sensitively" dismantled, the government has confirmed, nearly eight years after a fire in the London tower block claimed 72 lives.

The decision followed expert advice that the 24-storey tower is "significantly damaged". The government has committed to create a "fitting and lasting memorial" that would be a "sacred space" for "remembering and reflecting", but what form that memorial will take remains a delicate question.

How have survivors and locals reacted?
An "overwhelming majority" of locals are in favour of demolishing the tower amid concerns that the burnt-out structure is unsafe, a local residents' association told the BBC. Taking it down would offer "closure", although a "small minority" are in favour of it remaining "to remind people" of the tragedy. Among former Grenfell residents and their families, opinions are mostly against the plans. Dismantling the tower puts the tragedy "out of sight and out of mind" for those responsible, survivor Emma O'Connor told Radio 4's "Today" programme. She suggested that any unstable upper floors should be removed and then re-erected as a memorial.

What will replace Grenfell Tower?
The independent Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission has so far only said that it should include a garden, monument and space for mourning. Five design teams have been shortlisted, with the successful bidder expected to submit a planning application late next year.

What's happened at other tragic landmarks?
In Hiroshima, a building left standing after the atomic bomb was dropped on the Japanese city in 1945 has been turned into a memorial to the people who were killed. The Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland has also been preserved, as a reminder of the horrors of the Holocaust.

Ground Zero, the site of the 9/11 attacks on New York's World Trade Center, is a commemorative space that includes several monuments that pay tribute to the victims and survivors. This "anguished debate over Grenfell Tower", said The New York Times, now echoes previous debates over "ruined structures" that have become "sacred ground, steeped in symbolism and memory".

"As any new parent knows, the joy of welcoming a new baby into the world is unparalleled," said Charlotte Cripps in The Independent. But since "Emily in Paris" actor Lily Collins and her director husband Charlie McDowell announced their baby's birth by surrogacy, "hell has broken loose". The couple seem to have "hit a raw nerve", with critics accusing them of taking part in an "unethical trend" for "rich people renting women's bodies".

'Social surrogacy'
Collins is far from the first Hollywood celeb to face scrutiny for having a child by surrogacy. Nicole Kidman, Kim Kardashian and Sarah Jessica Parker, among others, have faced backlash, too. Many of Collins' critics have focused their anger on what they see as "social surrogacy": using a surrogate not for medical reasons, but for lifestyle ones, such as not having to change body shape.

Collins hasn't commented on why she chose surrogacy, although she has spoken in the past of fears that an eating disorder may have damaged her fertility. McDowell told his Instagram followers: "It's OK to not know why someone might need a surrogate to have a child."

Wondering about the possible reasons is "a natural reaction in the absence of information", said Sophie Beresiner, mother of two girls born through surrogacy, in Glamour. But everyone, including those in the public eye, has "the right to privacy".

'Deep-rooted resentment'
"No happy announcement will ever make me see surrogacy as anything other than an unedifying business, nor prevent me from calling for a ban," said Claudia Connell, who has struggled with fertility issues, in the Daily Mail. The global surrogacy industry is thought to be worth nearly £14.5 billion. "At the heart of the trade lies a disturbing imbalance of power. Surrogacy is available only to wealthy people."

When the cost of having children, let alone hiring surrogates or seeking fertility treatment, has become inaccessible to many, it's understandable that the spectacle of "celebrities paying surrogates to have cute babies might unleash deep-rooted resentment", said Cripps in The Independent. The "heated conversations" about the financial barriers blocking many people from starting a family, by any means, speak to an issue that goes much deeper than the controversy around celebrity surrogacy.

The food "once fit for kings" is no longer a luxury ingredient, said Sudi Pigott in The Telegraph. Though it still has royal fans (King Charles is said to have a "penchant"), the salt-cured fish roe has been "democratised" after becoming a TikTok trend and can now be found on "menus and social feeds across the UK". 

A 2006 ban on wild caviar, and the spread of sustainable farming worldwide, have resulted in a "greater choice of suppliers" and therefore "better affordability". But the current fashion started, as it so often does, with influencers – this time doing caviar “bumps” online: putting a spoonful on the back of their hand, giving it a "few seconds to warm, then licking it off in one hit, preferably followed by a swig of champagne or ice-cold vodka".

After Taylor Swift followed suit, the caviar bumps' status as a viral trend was set. And why not? It's no more expensive than a round of G&Ts in a pub: "£30 for the smallest 10g tin of entry-level caviar, enough for a bump for four friends".

Caviar bumps are now appearing on restaurant menus, and come from larger tins, said Delicious magazine's Kate Gibbs, which makes for "a cost-effective way to give their customers something playful and delicious".

Supermarkets have got in on the game as well, with Waitrose selling "affordable" and "everyday" caviar at £5.50 per 100g, said The Grocer's Grace Duncan. And for a cost-of-living crisis option, Exmoor Caviar has Luxury Caviar Crisps at £3.50 a bag. Truly democratic.

I saw illegality and complicity with war crimes. That's why I quit the UK Foreign Office
Mark Smith in The Guardian
My time at the Foreign Office "exposed how ministers can manipulate legal frameworks to shield 'friendly' nations from accountability", writes former diplomat Mark Smith. There was a "systemic effort to suppress inconvenient truths", to "stall, distort and obscure" to "create a facade of legitimacy", while allowing "the most egregious crimes against humanity to take place". But "the time for silence is over": we must not allow ministers "to trade human lives for political expediency".

The Tories have no God-given right to keep on existing
Tim Stanley in The Telegraph
"One hundred days ago", Kemi Badenoch was elected Conservative Tory leader – "and, boy, it feels like a hundred years", writes Tim Stanley. The Tories "certainly can sink further" still – after all, "they have no God-given, constitutionally-mandated right to exist". In fact, Reform "probably has more to lose" from a pact with the Tories. A Nigel Farage-led government is now "imaginable", and the "vision of a 'proper conservative' PM with an ashtray on his desk has a certain charm".

I was raised in a strict Muslim household where singing was banned – then I did the unthinkable
Hajar Woodland in The Independent
My father told me when I was 11 that as a Muslim female, I "shouldn't sing on stage", writes Hajar Woodland, because "my singing voice – like my hair and body – should be kept covered". Without permission to perform, singing "felt like an empty passion". Now, I'm a professional singer putting on a show that I'm "dedicating" to my late dad. I hope "he'd allow himself a glimmer of pride in raising a little girl who fought hard for her own joy".