UK

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreMeta’s removal of third-party fact checkers from its platforms will allow “racist misinformation” to spread, MPs have warned.The social media giant denied that it was ending fact-checking on its app, but was instead “moving to a system which is more scalable” following “feedback” from its users.In January, Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg announced the change, saying at the time that fact-checkers were too “politically biased” and were having an impact on “free expression” – a move seen by many as an attempt to get closer to the pro-free speech stance of the incoming Donald Trump administration.During an appearance before MPs on the Science, Innovation and Technology Select Committee, Chris Yiu, Meta’s director of public policy for northern Europe said the decision to replace third-party fact checkers with a community notes system in the US, and to reduce content moderation on some topics was based on feedback that debate on sensitive issues was being “suppressed”.The committee noted that Meta had previously submitted evidence to it that third-party fact-checking was a key part of the firm’s approach to combating misinformation.Mr Yiu was asked by MPs on the committee how this fitted with leaked guidelines for the changed content moderation approach and community notes system which showed the site would now allow a range of transphobic, racist and antisemitic statements, including statements such as: “trans people don’t exist”, “immigrants are filthy” and “Jews are greedier than Christians” – which were labelled “racist misinformation” by the committee.In response, Mr Yiu said: “I accept that some of those are difficult for the communities that are affected to hear.“We have received feedback over the months and years that in some cases, some areas of debate were being suppressed too much on our platform, and that some conversations, whilst challenging, should have a space to be discussed.“We retain clear rules and community standards prohibiting content which is designed to incite violence.”Responding to Mr Yiu, Emily Darlington MP asked whether Meta believed there was a “genuine debate” around the example statements on trans people, Jewish people and immigrants.“We’ve had feedback that topics which have become part of mainstream discourse – conversations around some of the issues that happen among members of the public, that happen in newspapers, were being suppressed on our platforms in a way which was too aggressive,” Mr Yiu said.“Where people make statements that violate our policies, they will be actioned equally. We’ve had the feedback that there are topics where the view was that there there should be more room for debate and conversation.”Committee chair Chi Onwurah MP warned Meta that by allowing such statements to be appear on the platform, they were in fact “amplifying” such content.“It’s not the same as a conversation in somebody’s home,” she said.“This is something that people are going to see in their feeds.”Chris Morris, chief executive of independent fact-checking charity Full Fact, said Meta was “dismantling” processes that lead users to “good information” online.“Meta’s claim that it is not ending fact checking in the US isn’t credible and lacks context,” he said.“Replacing experts trained to establish factual accuracy with a community notes model designed to reach consensus risks skewing information circulating on Meta platforms towards what some users think rather than what the evidence says.“Community notes have a role to play in improving our online conversation, but is not the same as independent fact checking.”Elsewhere during the session, where representatives from TikTok and Elon Musk’s X were also giving evidence, Ms Darlington clashed with X executive Wilfredo Fernandez over the firm’s content policies.She read out a violent threat made to her in the replies to her own post on X, as well as a string of racist, antisemitic, homophobic and violent posts from the same account that were also posted to the platform.“Is this acceptable under the guise of free speech on X these days?,” she asked Mr Fernandez.The X executive said the comments were “abhorrent” and that he would ensure “our teams take a look”, but when pressed on whether the account in question would be removed he added that he “can’t make any assurances”.“I can assure you that our teams will review under our terms of service, and I’m sorry that you had to experience that,” he said.Mr Fernandez also refused to be drawn on whether the sharing of videos of Mr Musk’s recent gesture at a Donald Trump rally – widely interpreted as a Nazi salute – was appropriate and made X a safer platform.“I think there’s a lot of discussion around that, and that’s why the platform allows for people to debate it and discuss it,” he said. More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreSir Keir Starmer has bowed to pressure from Donald Trump to boost defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by slashing foreign aid.The announcement came just 24 hours before Sir Keir flies to Washington DC for his first meeting with the US president since the inauguration last month.It comes at a time when the White House is piling pressure on European allies in Nato to massively increase their own share of the cost of defence as Trump appears to be on the verge of turning his back on Ukraine.The announcement to a stunned parliament has been condemned by senior Labour figures including former foreign secretary David Miliband and aid charities who have accused Starmer of “abandoning the poorest in the world”.Keir Starmer is set to meet Donald Trump in the White House this week More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreWatch as Sir Keir Starmer holds a press conference on Tuesday, 25 February, after announcing he will slash the foreign aid budget to hike defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP to counter “tyrants” like Vladimir Putin.The prime minister said spending on defence will rise from its current 2.3 per cent share of the economy to 2.5 per cent in 2027, meaning spending £13.4bn more every year from 2027.Sir Keir has acknowledged the increase will require what he described as “extremely difficult and painful choices”.The PM said he wants the figure to reach 3 per cent of gross domestic product during the next parliament.However, to fund it development assistance aid will need to be slashed from its current level of 0.5 per cent of gross national income to 0.3 per cent in 2027.Sir Keir said the plan amounts to “the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War”.His move comes just a day before he travels to Washington for a crunch meeting with Donald Trump, who has repeatedly pushed Nato countries such as Britain to bolster their armed forces as he seeks to negotiate an end to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Sir Keir will hope the spending boost, which he said will mean an extra £13.4 billion for defence every year from 2027, will placate Mr Trump, who wants Europe to be less reliant on the US for support. More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreSir Keir Starmer is travelling to Washington this week armed having freshly announced plans to slash the foreign aid budget in order to fund a boost to Britain’s defence spending, which he hopes will help the UK avoid any conflict with US president Donald Trump. The prime minister outlined plans for Britain to spend 2.5 per cent of its GDP on defence by 2027, up from 2.3 per cent currently, which he said amounted to a £13.4 billion annual uplift. It comes amid calls from Mr Trump for Nato countries to significantly bolster their armed forces as he seeks to negotiate an end to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Why is defence spending being increased? Sir Keir has faced flak from the left of the Labour Party for prioritising a boost for Britain’s armed forces over spending on public services or tackling child poverty. Keir Starmer outlined plans to hike Britain’s defence budget More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreFarmers have accused the government of “promising the world and giving us nothing” as the environment secretary faced another barrage of criticism over Labour’s inheritance tax raid on family farms. Steve Reed sought to shift the blame for the challenges facing the agricultural industry onto the Conservatives’ Brexit deal, which he said had left farmers “badly let down”.Mr Reed said farmers had been sold a lie during Brexit talks that they would maintain access to European markets, but that Sir Keir Starmer’s ongoing reset of post-Brexit relations with Brussels would help address the dropoff, which has seen exports to Europe have fallen by a fifth since 2018.But farmers immediately hit back at Mr Reed, accusing Labour of being “determined to make the Tories’ Brexit work”. “They are aggressively trying to derail a legal challenge to the dreadful Australian trade deal which saw Boris Johnson famously ‘cede the whole kingdom over dinner’,” Save British Farming founder Liz Webster told The Independent.Steve Reed said farmers have been ‘badly let down’ by Brexit More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreYvette Cooper has supported critics who say a former Labour MP who was jailed for punching a constituent should be stripped of his pay while behind bars.The home secretary agreed it is “unacceptable” that under parliamentary rules, Runcorn and Helsby MP Mike Amesbury will continue to receive his full £91,000 salary during his 10-week imprisonment for assault.Asked by the BBC’s Emma Barnett: “Can you believe he is on full pay?” Ms Cooper replied: “Everything that has happened is unacceptable here. It is why the Labour Party took action immediately to stop him being a Labour MP and stop him being in the Labour Party.”Ms Cooper again commented on Amesbury’s pay when pressed about the issue on the Today programme. Ms Barnett said: “He’s an MP, and I know you just said that is unacceptable.” Ms Cooper replied: “Yes, the exchange follows the disclosure that Commons rules mean an MP who is jailed does not automatically lose their pay.”“I think the Runcorn constituents deserve better and we want to see a new MP in place as swiftly as possible,” she added.On Monday he was sentenced to 10 weeks in jail, which will trigger a recall petition and pave the way for a by-election, pending any appeals by Amesbury. It has since emerged that Amesbury will continue being paid his salary until he ceases to be an MP, which would follow the six-week recall petition period and could see him paid as much as £10,500, as well as his pay accrued during the appeals process. Critics have rounded on the MP after the sentence, urging him to “do the honourable thing” and step down immediately so a by-election can be held. MP Mike Amesbury speaks to media outside Chester Ellesmere Port and Neston Magistrates’ Court at an earlier hearing More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreA new crackdown on government credit card abuse has been announced as chancellor Rachel Reeves tries to tighten spending controls ahead of a difficult spring budget.In a letter to Whitehall departments, Cat Little, Civil Service chief operating officer and Cabinet Office permanent secretary, warned that disciplinary action would be taken where abuse of credit cards is discovered.It comes after thousands of pounds were said to have been spent on luxury crystal glasses, cases of sparkling wine and thousands of pounds at private members’ clubs, Mail Online reports. The crackdown was announced less than a fortnight after questions were raised about Ms Reeves own use of a company credit card when she worked for Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS).Chancellor Rachel Reeves will deliver the Spring statement in late March (Jordan Pettitt/PA) More

Your support helps us to tell the storyFrom reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it’s investigating the financials of Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, ‘The A Word’, which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.Your support makes all the difference.Read moreGoogle has been accused of helping to monetise a website which spread misinformation about the identity of the Southport attacker and sparked the summer riots last year.MPs on the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee said they had seen an unpublished report which said the tech giant’s advertising network had helped monetise a site where misinformation about the attack appeared.In the days following the murder of three girls in Southport last summer, violence erupted across England, in part fuelled by false information circulating online about the attacker’s identity and background, including false claims that he was an asylum seeker who had arrived in the UK the previous year.Committee chair Chi Onwurah MP, during an evidence session on misinformation, said MPs had seen a report from digital advertising watchdog Check My Ads, which said it had evidence that a website claimed “to be monetised” by two firms, including Google, “at the time that it published that misinformation”.In response, Google’s managing director for trust and safety in Europe, Amanda Storey, said that if true, such an incident would violate the tech giant’s rules and it would investigate “what had gone wrong”.“I would completely agree that monetising any form of low quality information, particularly associated with an atrocious real world attack, is absolutely not acceptable,” she said.“I haven’t seen that report yet – very happy to take a look at the report once it comes out, and to respond in writing – but very much agree that would violate our policies.“It’s something that we would look into and understand what had gone wrong.“These fast-moving, real-world situations are very challenging – there is viral spread of misinformation on social media, and we have to deal with the echo of that across sites that we operate with.”Elsewhere in the session, Ms Storey said she believed that had the Online Safety Act been in effect last summer when the riots took place, it would have “made a difference” to how easily misinformation was able to spread.New codes of practice that will require platforms to remove illegal content and protect children from harmful material are due to take effect this year, with fines running into billions of pounds for the largest firms who breach the new rules.Ms Storey added that she believed Google’s position as a search engine, rather than a social media platform, meant it was in a different position with regards to social media platforms when it came to misinformation.“I think the illegal harm codes would have probably made a difference to overall ecosystem safety,” she said.“I think that our policies and our approaches meant that we were not particularly implicated in what happened in the Southport situation, but obviously it’s an atrocious attack, and our thoughts and sympathies are with the families.”But in response, committee member Emily Darlington MP said she was “concerned” that Google appeared to be trying to distance itself from links to misinformation around the Southport attack.“You’ve been presented evidence here where you helped to monetise the creation of misinformation – a key piece of misinformation – that was used to incentivise the riots,” she said.Asked by Ms Darlington if Google had done any “reflection” since the riots on how its “advertising and monetisation of content may have contributed”, Ms Storey said: “Absolutely. Any time an incident plays out in the real world, any real world harm situation, we have our strategic command teams do a root cause and corrective action assessment.“We post-mortem. If anything did go wrong, what can we learn from that? And we roll those learnings into our policies and our enforcement processes on a real-time basis.”She added that she would report back and look to share more details of that process with the committee. More