Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to take on social media companies in a bid to protect children from addiction, as new guidelines recommend limiting screen time for children under five to no more than an hour a day. The guidelines, developed by a panel led by the children's commissioner, Rachel de Souza, and children's health expert Prof Russell Viner, advise that children under two should avoid screen time except for shared activities. Ministers are also exploring Australia-style measures to limit or ban social media for under-16s, as part of a broader effort to regulate social media companies and protect children. Starmer emphasized that regulating social media companies will require a 'fight' to ensure they do not prioritize profits over children's well-being. 'Some of this will require a fight,' he said. 'If we're going to do more to protect children, we're going to have to fight some of the platforms that are putting the material up there because they're putting this addictive stuff up there for a reason.' The guidelines advise families to avoid fast-paced social media-style videos and toys or tools that use artificial intelligence for children aged two to five. They also recommend screen-free bedtimes and mealtimes, and encourage shared screen activities like video calling or looking through photos together. According to the government, about 98% of children watch screens daily by the age of two. Infants with high screen time are less likely to be read to or go on outdoor trips, which can impact language development. Experts have welcomed the guidelines, with Dr. Mike McKean, vice-president for policy at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, saying they will help parents protect 'short, but developmentally crucial early years.'

Oil prices have climbed higher amid fading hopes of deescalation in the Iran war following Tehran’s denial that talks with the United States are under way.Futures for Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose nearly 2 percent on Thursday to top $104 per barrel after Tehran dismissed reports of direct negotiations with US President Donald Trump’s administration.The rise comes after oil prices eased on Wednesday following reports that Trump had shared a 15-point plan for ending the war with Iran.Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in an interview with state media aired on Wednesday that Tehran was not engaged in direct talks with Washington and has “no intention of negotiating for now”.White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt warned on Wednesday that Iran would be “hit harder” than ever before if Tehran did not accept military defeat.Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a conduit for one-fifth of global oil supplies, and its attacks on energy facilities across the Middle East have prompted a surge in energy prices worldwide.Oil prices are up more than 40 percent compared with before the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran on February 28, prompting numerous countries to implement fuel rationing and other energy conservation measures.Market-watchers say prices are likely to rise further until shipping is free to traverse the strait, despite efforts by countries to bolster supply by tapping emergency stockpiles in coordination with the International Energy Agency.While Tehran has repeatedly claimed that the strait is open to ships that are not aligned with its enemies, daily transits have all but collapsed since the start of the conflict.Four vessels were tracked transiting the waterway via their automatic identification systems on Tuesday, down from an average of 120 daily transits before the conflict, according to maritime intelligence firm Windward.

The recent escalation of conflict in the Middle East has sent shockwaves across South Asia, affecting millions of families who depend on remittances from their loved ones working in the Gulf nations. The war between the US and Israel on Iran has resulted in a significant increase in tensions, with Iranian attacks on Gulf neighbours causing widespread fear and uncertainty.For Jaya Khuntia, a father from India's Odisha state, the conflict has brought unimaginable tragedy. His 25-year-old son, Kuna, a pipe fitter in Qatar's capital Doha, died of a heart attack after hearing the sound of missiles and debris from interceptions falling near their residence. Kuna's death has left the family in debt and despair, with their hopes of paying off a 300,000-rupee ($3200) loan for the marriages of their two daughters shattered.Migrant workers from South Asia, totaling nearly 21 million people in the Gulf nations, are often engaged in blue-collar work, building or supporting the industries and services that drive the Gulf's success and prosperity. However, they are also among the most vulnerable, with many working in areas targeted by Iranian attacks, such as oil refineries, construction areas, airports, and docks.The suspension of work at many of these facilities, coupled with fears of a major economic downturn in the region, has left many workers and their families worried about the future of their jobs. Experts warn that remittances from the Middle East, a crucial economic backbone for South Asian nations, could be significantly affected, especially if Gulf economies contract and layoffs follow.For Hamza, a Pakistani migrant laborer working at an oil storage facility in the UAE, the conflict has brought a sense of fear and uncertainty. He witnessed a drone attack on a storage unit and was shaken by the experience. Despite the dangers, he said leaving is not an option, as his family depends on him.Imran Khan, a faculty member at the New Delhi Institute of Management, said migrant laborers from South Asia are often driven by desperation to take up jobs in the Middle East. He warned that these workers are the worst affected during crises, whether war or natural disasters.As the conflict continues, many South Asian workers are planning to return home. Noor, a migrant worker from Bangladesh employed at an oil facility in Saudi Arabia, said he no longer feels safe and plans to return home once his contract ends. His family, too, is deeply affected, with his children crying every time they call him, scared for his life.

Nantes Women's Football Team is creating a stir in French football, with a remarkable season that's putting them in contention for a top-four finish and a potential Champions League spot. Under the guidance of head coach Nicolas Chabot, the team has adopted a unique playing style focused on combinations and teamwork, which has yielded impressive results.The team's success can be attributed to a combination of experienced players and new recruits, including Imane Saoud from Morocco, Mélissa Bethi from Algeria, and Léa Khelifi, a France international. The team's 7.5 million euro budget is dwarfed by other top teams, but they've managed to punch above their weight.Nantes' recent 3-0 win against Strasbourg showcased their skills, with a notable goal that involved eight players and took only 18 seconds to score. The team's 17,491-strong crowd for a match against Marseille also broke their attendance record.With four matches remaining, Nantes are well-positioned to secure a top-four finish and qualify for the playoffs. A second- or third-place finish would guarantee them a spot in the Champions League. The team's success has not gone unnoticed, with fans and the club's men's team taking notice.

A recent jury verdict in California has held Meta and YouTube liable for the harm caused to a young woman, KGM, due to the addictive nature of their platforms. The plaintiff claimed that her social media use, which began at the age of six, led to injuries including body dysmorphia and thoughts of self-harm.The jury's decision marks a significant milestone in the ongoing debate about the impact of social media on young people. The verdict suggests that companies like Meta and YouTube, which have been accused of designing features to keep users engaged, can be held accountable for the harm caused by their platforms.Critics of the judgment argue that it could lead to a flood of lawsuits against social media companies, while others see it as a necessary step to protect young people from the potential dangers of social media. The verdict may also prompt regulatory changes and increased scrutiny of social media companies' practices.According to a report from Brown University, social media can be addictive due to its ability to activate the brain's reward system, releasing feel-good hormones such as dopamine. This can lead to a vicious cycle of use and addiction, particularly among young people who spend many hours a day on social media.In response to growing concerns, some countries have taken action to protect young people. Australia, for example, has banned children under 16 from using social media. In the US, there have been calls for social media companies to be required to put warning labels on their sites, but such proposals have yet to gain traction.The verdict is also significant given the close ties between the tech industry and the US administration. The appointment of Mark Zuckerberg to the president's council of advisers on science and technology has raised concerns about the influence of tech companies on policy decisions.Ultimately, the jury verdict sends a clear message to tech titans that they will be held accountable for the impact of their platforms on young people. As the debate about social media regulation continues, this verdict is likely to have far-reaching implications for the industry and for the protection of young people online.

Following Donald Trump's recent claims that the US is engaged in 'strong talks' to end the war with Iran, Qatar took the unusual step of publicly distancing itself from any alleged diplomatic negotiations. The Gulf state's government spokesperson Majed al-Ansari explicitly stated, 'Qatar was not involved in any mediation efforts,' adding pointedly, 'If they exist.'This represents a significant departure from Qatar's traditional role as a chief mediator in Middle East conflicts, having previously facilitated negotiations between Israel and Hamas, the US and the Taliban, and peace deals in Lebanon and Sudan.Over the past three weeks, Gulf states have found themselves on the frontlines of the conflict after their mediation efforts to prevent war were ultimately rejected by the US. The pattern of broken negotiations is particularly telling: the US attacked Iran twice during talks aimed at halting the Iranian nuclear program, which were championed by Oman. Discussions last June were halted as the US and Israel conducted strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, and revived talks in February were similarly undermined when Trump began bombing Tehran before the final round of meetings.Since the war began, Gulf states have been forced to spend billions defending against daily Iranian missile and drone attacks, with their economies and sovereignty suffering substantial damage. Analysts suggest their reluctance to engage with the alleged ceasefire efforts reflects both the heavy toll of continued warfare and lingering suspicion about whether Trump's peace initiatives are genuine or merely a pretext for further escalation.As Bilal Saab, senior managing director of advisory group Trends US and former Pentagon official in the first Trump administration, explained: 'They've been burned by their previous experience. They previously thought they played a useful mediating role – until they realised that it was all for naught. Not to mention that they have been directly implicated in the war and are still being attacked by the Iranians. So there's a lot of pent-up frustration and disappointment.'By Wednesday night, the Iranian regime had outright rejected Trump's 15-point plan to end the war, submitted to Tehran via Pakistani generals, as 'extremely unreasonable' and presented their own substantially different proposal.The concern among Gulf states is that any negotiations could become a front for military escalation or even the assassination of additional Iranian leaders. This anxiety is compounded by the simultaneous deployment of thousands of US troops to the region and the persistent fear of being used as pawns in the US and Israel's Middle East strategy.Professor Bader al-Saif of Kuwait University noted: 'Whenever the word negotiation was used by the Trump administration, we unfortunately ended up under the rubric of war.' He emphasized that while Gulf states are reluctant to engage with what they perceive as a potential Trumpian charade, they recognize the critical importance of shaping any realistic peace negotiations that could affect their future.The existential threat to Gulf economic ambitions is particularly concerning. The prospect of Trump ending the war with the current Iranian regime still in place—potentially more vengeful than before and acutely aware of the damage its missiles can inflict on multi-billion-dollar infrastructure—poses significant risks. Additionally, there remains no clear solution to Iran's effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, through which most of the region's oil and gas exports flow.Analysts suggest that beyond relying on US-led negotiations, Gulf states should pursue their own separate dialogue with Iran. As al-Saif stated: 'They shouldn't only count on the US to do the negotiation. They should go and strike a deal with Iran for themselves. This was not our war, and if we can shield ourselves from being impacted any further, we should do it to protect our own national interests.'

As Israeli settlers intensify violent attacks against Palestinian civilians in the West Bank, often while Israeli forces stand by, a notable shift is occurring in US political circles. Even staunch supporters of Israel within the Democratic party are now publicly denouncing the escalating violence.In recent days, dozens of settlers have engaged in apparently coordinated attacks, torching homes and vehicles while targeting Palestinian civilians. Since the beginning of the month, Israeli settlers and police have killed at least 10 Palestinian civilians in the occupied territory, including two young brothers and their parents who were returning from a Ramadan shopping trip.Among the voices breaking ranks is Ritchie Torres, a New York Democratic representative and one of Israel's most ardent supporters in Congress. In a statement this week, he declared that "the crisis of extremist settler violence in the West Bank must be confronted, and the perpetrators must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law." He called for "zero tolerance for violent extremism, no matter what form it takes."Another pro-Israel Democrat, Daniel Goldman of New York, condemned the violence as an "outrage" and urged House Speaker Mike Johnson to bring to vote proposed legislation seeking to impose sanctions against those "undermining prospects for a two-state solution by committing illegal violent acts." He also criticized the Trump administration for rescinding sanctions against violent settlers that had been issued under the Biden administration.Several other Aipac-backed politicians have joined the condemnation, including Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego, who called on the Israeli government to "stop being complicit," and Arizona Congressman Greg Stanton, who labeled the attacks "acts of terrorism." Ohio Democratic Congresswoman Shontel Brown accused Trump of "green-lighting settler violence," while Nevada Senator Jacky Rosen stated that "violence against Palestinian civilians in the West Bank is a national security threat to Israel and must be treated as such."The political shift comes as US public support for Israel has plummeted. An NBC News poll found that two-thirds of Democrats now say their sympathies lie with Palestinians over Israelis—a dramatic reversal with significant implications for upcoming elections. Meanwhile, 68% of Republicans continue to express stronger support for Israel.A Guardian analysis revealed that Israel has not prosecuted any of its citizens for killing Palestinian civilians in the occupied West Bank since the start of the decade. The UN has warned that the Israeli government has accelerated illegal settlement expansion, forcibly displacing approximately 36,000 Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem over the past year.Political analysts suggest these pro-Israel Democrats are "trapped between the money they've relied on to make their campaigns work and the voters they actually need to win," with condemnation of settler violence offering a way to express discontent without challenging the Israeli state itself.

Poland staged a comeback to defeat Albania 2-1, with Robert Lewandowski scoring his 89th goal for his country. This win sets up a playoff final against Sweden for a spot in the World Cup.Denmark dominated North Macedonia 4-0, with Mikkel Damsgaard, Gustav Isaksen, and Christian Nørgaard scoring in the second half. They will now face the Czech Republic in their playoff final.Kosovo is on the brink of their first major tournament appearance after a thrilling 4-3 win over Slovakia. They will host Turkey in their playoff final.Turkey secured a 1-0 win over Romania, with Ferdi Kadioglu scoring the decisive goal following a superb pass from Arda Guler. This victory brings them closer to ending their long World Cup absence.

Brendan Gleeson has been named best actor at the Critics' Circle theatre awards for his West End debut in Conor McPherson's pub drama The Weir. He beat fellow nominees including Bryan Cranston and Paapa Essiedu, both recognised for All My Sons, and James Hameed and Arti Shah, the duo who together portray Paddington in the new musical about Michael Bond's bear.The Weir, directed by McPherson, was entirely omitted from the nominations for this year's Olivier awards and is being turned into a film with Gleeson and the rest of the West End cast.All My Sons, a critically adored production of Arthur Miller's 1946 classic at Wyndham's theatre, won in two categories at the Critics' Circle awards: best revival of a play or musical and best director for Ivo van Hove. A new production of Stephen Sondheim and James Lapine's Into the Woods, directed by Jordan Fein at the Bridge theatre, also won two prizes – best designer (Tom Scutt) and the inaugural award for best ensemble or cast.The winners, voted for by professional theatre critics, were revealed at a ceremony at the National Theatre in London on Thursday. Paddington: The Musical, with music and lyrics by Tom Fletcher and book by Jessica Swale, won best new musical. James Graham's Punch, based on the real story of a fatal blow, received the Michael Billington award for best new play (named in 2019 in honour of the Guardian's theatre critic after he stepped down from reviewing). Ava Pickett won most promising playwright for her Tudor drama 1536, which was staged at the Almeida theatre in London in 2025, transfers to the West End in May and is being turned into a BBC drama series.Rosamund Pike saw off competition from Kate Fleetwood (Into the Woods), Marianne Jean-Baptiste (All My Sons) and Rachel Zegler (Evita) to win best actress for her acclaimed performance as a judge in Suzie Miller's Inter Alia. Ruby Ashbourne Serkis was named most promising newcomer for her performance in a revival of Tom Stoppard's Indian Ink which opened at Hampstead theatre days after the revered playwright's death. The award for best Shakespearean performance went to Hayley Atwell for her Beatrice (alongside Tom Hiddleston, nominated for the same prize, as Benedick) in Much Ado About Nothing at Theatre Royal Drury Lane.