Category: The Conversation

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Zoe Wimshurst, Senior Lecturer of Sport Psychology, Health Sciences University

Much of the pre-series attention on the 2025 British and Irish Lions tour of Australia has been on injuries, player omissions and personal rivalries.

One of those rivalries involves the Australian sensation Joseph-Akuso Suaalii facing Lions centre player, Sione Tuipulotu, with whom he had a fiery encounter in a match last year.

Suaalii only switched codes from rugby league to rugby union in 2023 and has just five international caps to his name. But despite his lack of union experience, he has been catching attention lately for more than just his powerful runs and physicality. In recent weeks, Suaalii’s unusual pre-match warm-up has also sparked curiosity, most notably, his use of juggling and peripheral awareness drills to prepare his visual system.

For many spectators, seeing a player showing off their juggling skills is more suited to a circus performance than international rugby. But there is science behind his bizarre approach. This preparation could be giving him an edge the Lions should fear.

Growing evidence

Visual performance in elite sport remains an under-applied area of sport science, yet the evidence for its effectiveness is growing.

My own research has found that a county cricket team which underwent six weeks of visual training improved their basic cricket skills more than a control group which did extra cricket skills exercises. This demonstrates that we need to be looking beyond the confines of the sport itself to bring about maximal performance.

Visual skill in sport is about more than just 20/20 vision. Each sport has its own specific demands, and rugby requires skills such as peripheral awareness, depth perception, rapid eye movement, reaction speed, dynamic visual acuity and eye-body coordination.

Combining these visual skills will allow the most accurate information to be sent to the brain for processing – helping players to make the best decisions, even under intense pressure and high levels of fatigue.

By using exercises such as juggling, Suaalii is training several of these visual skills at once. Juggling requires excellent eye-body coordination, the use of the peripheral system and reaction speed. These are all skills which are also used in rugby for catching high balls kicked by opponents, reading attacking threats and spotting the movement of teammates and opposition players.

Juggling has also been shown to bring about positive structural changes in the human brain – particularly in areas linked to processing visual information – and integrating this with motor control.

This demonstrates that this relatively simple exercise can lead to improvements not only in the eyes, but also the brain. In rugby, the visual array will be constantly changing. A shift in the defensive line, a looping support run, a player slightly slow to recover from a ruck, or a spiralling high kick – the ability to spot, process and respond to these visual cues can be the difference between success and failure.

Suaalii is by no means the first rugby player to train his visual system. Former coach Clive Woodward famously brought in a visual performance coach to work with the England team – and they went on to win the 2003 Rugby World Cup.

I also worked with the Harlequins rugby team in the English Premiership as a visual performance coach. We won three trophies in my first three seasons with the team, which is known for free flowing, creative play. This style of play places extremely high demands on the players’ visual systems.

Lions test series

So what particular visual skills can you look out for over this Lions test series and how might they impact the outcome?

When defending close to their own try line, players should be scanning across the width of the pitch to ensure that they do not become outnumbered on either side of the field. Conversely, the attackers should be making rapid scans to quickly identify any mismatch (for example, a slow front row forward versus a swift and agile winger) they can take advantage of.

In these situations, players can often focus too much on the ball, allowing opposition players to craftily reposition themselves unseen. The best players will, wherever possible, be looking at everything, everywhere, all at once, improving their spatial awareness and enabling them to maintain an overview of the game in their minds.

To catch a kicked spiralling highball, a fullback or winger needs exceptional tracking ability and depth perception. Players in this situation are sometimes let down by “convergence issues”, where as the eyes track an object moving towards them, they can drift outwards or become misaligned. This can cause players to mistime their jump, or for the ball to hit their chest before being caught, wasting vital milliseconds. Training these convergence issues has been shown to bring about improvements in sports performance.

As a scrum-half is collecting the ball from a breakdown, they need quickly to scan the positions of teammates on either side of them, and be aware of the depth of the defensive line. Having this visual information will lead to better decisions and creating faster attacking opportunities.

A crunching tackle may seem like a purely strength-based skill. But to ensure it is both perfectly timed and legal, a defender must perfectly anticipate the speed and direction of the oncoming player. They can then use this information to precisely position their own body to impart their full momentum, while using their reaction speed to make last-second adjustments to ensure they do not put their opponent in danger.

Subtle visual advantages, honed through practice, can influence these moments. During this test series, they may well be the difference between winning and losing. Suaalii’s juggling may seem better suited to the circus, but it could be the secret weapon Australia need to secure the series.

Zoe Wimshurst is the owner and director of Performance Vision Ltd, a company which provides visual training and consultancy services.

– ref. Lions rugby tour: why visual training, including juggling, can be a secret weapon in elite sports – https://theconversation.com/lions-rugby-tour-why-visual-training-including-juggling-can-be-a-secret-weapon-in-elite-sports-261424

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Victoria Canning, Professor of Criminology, Lancaster University

In 2022, somebody in the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) mistakenly shared a spreadsheet containing the personal information associated with 18,714 Afghans and their family members. This data breach, and the efforts to cover it up, raises serious questions about state secrecy, blame-shifting and accountability.

After discovering the mistake in August 2023, the government covered up their spectacular error with an unprecedented injunction “contra mundum” (against the world). This “superinjunction” prohibited journalists and others in the know – like one author of this article (Professor Sara de Jong) – from reporting the breach and even the very existence of the injunction.

When the superinjunction was finally lifted on July 15, John Healey, the defence secretary, revealed that the MoD had operated a secret resettlement scheme for Afghans whose data had been leaked at risk from the Taliban. To date, 900 Afghans and 3,600 family members have been flown to Britain or are currently in transit via this scheme. A further 600 people and their immediate family members are still in Afghanistan, being promised evacuation. Many thousands of others on the list were already resettled in the UK via two other official routes.

The spectacular nature and impact of this data leak should not distract from the fact that it is not entirely unique. The personal data of Afghan applicants had already been exposed by the MoD in an earlier series of data breaches in September 2021.

The superinjunction is only the latest in a string of silences that have prevented accountability on Afghanistan and other issues to do with national security.

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

In the wake of the dramatic Nato withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, the foreign affairs select committee was dependent on whistleblowers to get to the truth about then prime minister Boris Johnson’s prioritisation of an animal charity for evacuation, over others at acute risk. Political accountability over the chaos of the evacuation was compromised by the foreign office who, according to then committee chair Tom Tugendhat, “repeatedly has given us answers that, in our judgement, are at best intentionally evasive, and often deliberately misleading”.

The Ministry of Defence – including Healey in his statement on the data breach – routinely cites the deaths of 457 British soldiers as the “costs of war” in Afghanistan. But the department only released the data on how many Afghan interpreters died alongside them after a freedom of information request by Sara de Jong. The MoD, even after several freedom of information Requests and appeals, refuses to provide further details about the circumstances of their deaths.

Even the latest shocking revelations didn’t end with the lifting of the superinjunction. A secondary injunction was lifted on July 17, revealing that the leaked list also contained the identities of dozens of British officials, including spies and special forces.

Selective secrecy

In the wider context of government leaks and secrecy, critical questions need to be asked about which secrets are kept, by whom and why.

In his judgement lifting the superinjunction, Mr Justice Chamberlain credited media organisations and individual journalists involved with the fact that they had kept the leak confidential. Like Sara, some had become aware of the breach several months before Healey (the then-shadow defence secretary was informed in December 2023). But all kept quiet to keep Afghans at risk safe, not to cover up their own errors.

The government invests in secrecy when it also has its own embarrassment to hide, whether it is an extraordinary superinjunction or secrecy about the prioritisation of a pet charity during the Afghanistan evacuation.

Appeals to national security routinely obstruct media, legal and public access to information to hold the government to account. Meanwhile, many Afghans are left wondering why their and their loved ones’ data was on a spreadsheet that could be emailed around with a click of the wrong button.

Effects on Afghans

The consequences of the cover-up will be felt most acutely by Afghans – those on the leaked list still waiting for evacuation, including family members of Afghans already in the UK, whose own presence may be complicated further by anti-immigration sentiment.

Following the revelations, Healey announced that the secret relocation scheme was now closed, following the sudden decision to close the two official Afghan resettlement schemes.

The decision to shut down the two publicly known resettlement schemes, he claimed, was based on “policy concerns about proportionality, public accountability, cost and fairness”, as well as a commissioned report on the impact of the leak.

He defended his decisions saying that “the taxpayer should be paying £1.2 billion less over the next few years, and that around 9,500 fewer Afghans will come to this country”. In the context of ongoing anti-immigration rhetoric, the mention of costs combined with refugees is as unsurprising as it is inflammatory.

On the day of announcement, affected Afghans were sent a notice by the MoD and a link where they could find out if their data had been compromised. The email said very little about what the MoD could offer, and said a lot about what measures Afghans were now supposed to take: use a virtual private network, limit who can see your social media profiles.

Afghans unlucky enough to be Afghanistan were simply advised that, “If you are outside the UK, please do not try to travel to a third country without a valid passport and visa. If you do so, you will be putting yourself at risk on the journey, and you may face the risk of being deported back to Afghanistan”.

It is almost impossible for Afghans to travel legally without international assistance. And, since the Taliban are not recognised as a legitimate government, embassies are closed for citizens to even obtain legal travel documentation.

Given that the British government recognises the real risk of rights violations in Afghanistan, as well as the ongoing assault on women’s rights by the Taliban, it seems contradictory – and a remarkable abdication of responsibility – to close routes to safety.

Victoria Canning has received funding from UKRI and British Academy.

Sara de Jong has received funding from the British Academy (Mid-Career Fellowship 2022) for research on Afghan interpreters and their claims to protection and rights. She is the chair of the board of trustees of the Sulha Alliance CIO, which advocates for and supports Afghan interpreters employed by the British Army.

– ref. Afghan data leak: how selective state secrecy and cover-ups can harm civilians – https://theconversation.com/afghan-data-leak-how-selective-state-secrecy-and-cover-ups-can-harm-civilians-261394

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sayed Elhoushy, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Queen Mary University of London

With the rise of sustainable tourism (travelling in a way that minimises harm to the environment, and benefits local communities), words such as “sustainable”, “”eco” and “green” appear on countless holiday brochures. From five-star hotels promoting “eco luxury” to airlines pledging to reduce carbon emissions and destinations making various green claims, sustainability is increasingly being used as a marketing tool.

But with so many green claims floating around, it’s hard to know who is really providing sustainable travel and who is just greenwashing. A recent report shows that 53% of green claims are vague, misleading, or unfounded – and half of all green labels offer weak or non-existent verification.

So, how can travellers distinguish genuine sustainability from greenwash that exaggerates environmental claims to attract eco-conscious travellers?

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Sustainability certification is a voluntary, third-party assessment that verifies a product, service, or organisation meets certain environmental, social, or ethical standards. These certifications provide a structure to manage, improve and communicate sustainability performance.

More than 100 sustainable certifications promise that they have vetted tourism businesses so you can have a satisfying and guilt-free holiday.

Yet, not all certifications are made equal, as our recent research shows. Most certification schemes audit actions taken, rather than assessing how effective these are.

They assure you that the hotel you are staying in has an environmental policy or that it is progressively reducing some of its negative effects on the environment, but not that their energy or water consumption is well below that of its competitors, for example.

One major challenge is that consumers are not using these labels to inform their buying decisions. Next time you travel, select businesses certified by an organisation with a proven track record of verification and transparency. There are several things a strong certification should do:

First, it should be third-party verified. This ensures that the green claims are independently checked.

Second, it needs specific and clear criteria. Beware of vague sustainability claims, such as “eco-friendly”. Look for certifications that require transparent reporting on performance for specific environmental actions, such as waste management, or responsible sourcing.

Third, it should go beyond eco-savings. Reducing energy and water consumption saves the hotel money. They should not get a prize for that. Seek evidence of the certification promoting best practice in complex issues like biodiversity conservation and dignity in the workplace.

Examples of sustainable tourism certifications to keep an eye on include Green Key (the largest label in Europe); B Corp (which measures a company’s entire social and environmental impact); The Long Run (a promoter of nature conservation); and Fair Trade Tourism (a promoter of fair working conditions). These certifications require businesses to undergo regular audits to maintain them.

In case you are thinking it’s not your responsibility to find out who is any good – you are right. The EU Green Claims Directive (due to be implemented by 2026) is a new legislation that requires companies to prove their environmental claims and labels, and ensure they are credible and trustworthy. This directive recognises the greenwash problem and will require certification to be based on assessment of actual performance – in tourism, and every other sector of the economy. The directive applies to any business anywhere in the world that sells to consumers from the EU. Expect fewer, but more respected and recognisable labels, that reduce consumer confusion.

Beyond eco-labels

Certification is only part of the picture. Your next holiday can make a greater contribution to local communities while minimising its harm to the environment. Take the time to consider how your trip can be part of a larger, positive contribution. Here are more ways to ensure that your holiday supports local communities and the environment:

Make sure you travel shorter and stay longer. Research shows that transport is a major part of the carbon footprint of your trip. Fly less (if at all). Choose flights with lower carbon footprints – various booking sites now tell customers the carbon footprint for each flight at the time of purchase. And stay longer so you spend more locally, for that same flight.

Read more:
Five ways to make aviation more sustainable right now

Choose tour operators that prioritise locally owned and small suppliers. Buy souvenirs that are made locally, and you can only find in that country. Travel slow – soak in where you are. Hike, cycle, use local transport. You will see more of the real place you are in.

Choose buses and trains over private cars. Rent electric vehicles and select accommodation that provides charging facilities. And enjoy local and seasonal rather than imported food. Eat everything in your plate, rather than create food waste.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Going on holiday? Here’s how to make sure your trip is sustainable – https://theconversation.com/going-on-holiday-heres-how-to-make-sure-your-trip-is-sustainable-255037

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Cate Williams, Knowledge Exchange Fellow at Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University

A tiny midge, no bigger than a pinhead, is bringing UK farming to its knees. The culprit? A strain of the bluetongue virus that’s never been seen before.

As of July 1, the whole of England has been classed as an “infected area” due to bluetongue virus serotype 3 (BTV-3).

There are movement restrictions and testing in place in Scotland, Wales and the island of Ireland. No animals from England – or that have passed through England – are allowed to attend this year’s Royal Welsh Show on July 21-24, for example.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

The virus, which causes illness and death in sheep, cattle, goats and other ruminants, is spread by biting midges. Although it poses no risk to humans and can’t be transmitted from one animal to another, the latest outbreak is more severe than previous ones. And it could cause lasting damage to UK farming.

Bluetongue isn’t new to the UK, however. A different strain, BTV-8 was detected in 2007 and contained. But BTV-3 is a different story. First detected in the Netherlands in late 2023, it was quickly spotted in the UK, where an early containment effort initially appeared successful.

But the virus made a comeback in autumn 2024 – and this time it spread. On its second attempt, the virus was able to circulate and caused an outbreak. With little existing immunity, BTV-3 has now established itself, prompting concerns about animal welfare, food production and farming livelihoods.

What does the disease do?

Sheep tend to be the most severely affected, though all ruminants are at risk. Clinical signs are species-specific but can include swelling of the face, congestion, nasal discharge, ulcers in the mouth and nose, difficulty breathing and abortion or birth deformities.

Bluetongue can cause the animal’s tongue to swell. It can also turn blue from lack of blood flow – although this is somewhat rare.

Bluetongue disease causes suffering in animals, and while there is a vaccine, there is no treatment for the disease once it’s contracted.

BTV-3 appears to be more lethal than earlier strains. In the Netherlands, vets report that BTV-3 is causing more severe symptoms than BTV-8 did.

Vets in England reported that in some herds 25-40% of cows failed to get pregnant, and there was a high rate of birth defects and stillborn calves. One farm in Suffolk started the calving season with 25% of their cows not pregnant and ended with just 48 calves from 97 cows.

Belgium has seen a fall in calf births, reduced milk deliveries and higher mortality in small ruminants compared to the previous three years.

How is it spread?

Bluetongue virus is transmitted by midges from the Culicoides genus. These are tiny, biting insects that thrive in mild, wet conditions.

Multiple midges can bite the same animal, and it only takes one of them to carry BTV before that animal becomes a host for further transmission. When animals are transported long distances, infected individuals can be bitten again and introduce the virus to previously uninfected midge populations.

Climate change is making outbreaks like this more likely. Milder winters and cooler, wetter summers are ideal for midges, increasing both their numbers and their biting activity.

While there’s no danger to human health, the consequences of BTV-3 are far-reaching. Limitations on movement, exports and imports are being imposed to help prevent the spread of the disease, but this could also hamper farming practices and trade.

The disease and its associated restrictions pose another source of stress for farmers, 95% of whom have ranked mental health as the biggest hidden problem in farming.

Genetic pick and mix

One of the reasons bluetongue is so tricky to manage is its ability to evolve. It has a segmented genome, meaning its genetic material, in this case RNA, is split into ten segments. This characteristic is exclusive to “reassortment viruses” and means that they can easily exchange segments of RNA. It’s like a genetic pick and mix with ten different types of sweets that come in an unlimited number of flavours.

This allows BTV to create new, genetically distinct “serotypes”, which may have a selective advantage or a disadvantage. Those with an advantage will emerge and spread successfully, while those with a disadvantage will not emerge at all. This process, known as “reassortment”, is partly responsible for the numerous influenza pandemics throughout history and has even allowed diseases to jump the species barrier.

Although bluetongue doesn’t affect humans directly, its spread poses a growing threat to the UK’s livestock sector and food supply. It’s important to learn from other countries that are further along in the BTV-3 outbreak so that the likely effects can be anticipated in the UK.

Cate Williams does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Bluetongue outbreak endangers UK livestock – what you need to know about the virus – https://theconversation.com/bluetongue-outbreak-endangers-uk-livestock-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-virus-260229

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Eric Shaw, Honorary Research Fellow in Politics, University of Stirling

At its recent conference in Brighton, the union Unite voted overwhelmingly to expel deputy prime minister Angela Rayner from membership.

The successful motion denounced the way Birmingham’s Labour council has handled a pay dispute with the city’s bin workers, which, it claimed, involved large pay cuts. The motion also condemned the Labour government for supporting the council.

Rayner was suspended because, in the words of Unite general secretary Sharon Graham, she had “backed a rogue council that has peddled lies and smeared its workers fighting huge pay cuts”.

The resolution called upon the union leadership to “re-examine” its relationship with the Labour party. Graham added: “People up and down the country are asking whose side is the Labour government on and coming up with the answer, not workers”.

Rayner’s suspension seems an extraordinary move. The soft-left deputy PM is the most senior pro-union voice in the government and has a long history in the union movement. Crucially, when in opposition, Rayner was primarily responsible for hammering out a package of measures with the unions that was designed to bolster employee rights. These measures are now in the process of being codified in the employment rights bill that is making its way through parliament.

Why Rayner (along with some Birmingham Labour councillors) was selected for expulsion is unclear. Perhaps the union was simply lashing out. The impact of its decision was lessened by the fact that Rayner says she had already resigned from Unite and remains a member of Unison, a union in which she once served as an official.

Unite and Labour

The more significant move was (or appeared to be) the pledge to “re-examine” Unite’s relationship with the party. This should be placed in the context both of recent controversies over attempts to means-test winter fuel payments and cut disability benefits, and of reports of moves to form a new leftwing party under the putative leadership of Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana..

Might Unite disaffiliate from Labour and rally behind the new party? Given that Unite, with its 1.2 million members, is Britain’s second largest union (after Unison), and, over the years, has been a generous donor to Labour, such a move would be significant. Support from Unite could give the new leftwing party real heft and allow it to pose a worrying threat to Labour’s electoral prospects.

Unite’s recent history might suggest this as a possibility. With a long tradition stretching back over three quarters of a century, Unite (and its precursor, the TGWU) has been a stalwart of the Labour left. Under its leftwing general secretary, Len McCluskey, Unite made a major contribution to Ed Miliband’s election as party leader in 2010. McCluskey subsequently attacked Miliband for drifting too far to the right.

The union then played a crucial role in sustaining Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership: indeed, without its support, Corbyn might not have survived so long. And as it became evident that Keir Starmer was determined to wrench the party to the right, Unite once more became the centre of leftwing dissent.

McCluskey retired in 2021, but neither of the two candidates affiliated to his “Unite left” faction won the election to succeed him. Unexpectedly, they were both defeated by Graham, another leftwinger who believed that Unite had become too embroiled in internal Labour party matters and was determined to divert resources away from funding the Labour party to industrial activities.

The dog that hasn’t barked

However, Graham’s desire to divest from Labour should not be taken as a sign that she wants to reinvest in another party. The whole thrust of Graham’s leadership is to give much higher priority to industrial than to political concerns.

Even had she not been so explicit about this, union leaders are, above all, realists. They are concerned with the practicalities of protecting the interests of their members and hence averse to risky political experimentation.

And, however contentious a role Unite has played in the Labour party, multiple ties, in terms of history, tradition, ethos and interest, still bind the two together.

The row between Unite and Labour shouldn’t lead us to overlook the fact that, despite all the controversies and disappointments, the other major union affiliates, including Unison, GMB and USDAW, have largely refrained from public criticism of the government.

This is a sign of loyalty. The unions do not wish to add to the massive problems the Starmer government already faces. But it’s also evidence that, however undersold, the Labour government is delivering on the issues that matter to unions. Its employment rights bill promises the most significant enhancement of individual and collective worker rights in a generation. The unions will allow nothing to jeopardise this.

But for Starmer, there is no room at all for complacency. With a stuttering economy, greatly overstretched public services, a cost of living crisis and very difficult public sector pay negotiations, even the most sympathetic union leaders will come under great pressure from a disgruntled rank and file to take a tougher line with the government. The road ahead will be rocky.

Eric Shaw is a member of the Labour party

– ref. How to understand the row between Angela Rayner and Unite – and what it means for Labour’s relationship with the unions – https://theconversation.com/how-to-understand-the-row-between-angela-rayner-and-unite-and-what-it-means-for-labours-relationship-with-the-unions-261340

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Tinashe Mushakavanhu, Assistant Professor, Harvard University

When the announcement of Chimamanda Adichie Ngozi’s latest novel Dream Count was made, it was regarded as a major event in African literature. The internationally celebrated Nigerian writer had not published a novel in the past 12 years, and her long-awaited return stirred both anticipation and speculation. In the post-COVID context in which the book comes, so much has changed in the world.

The first leg of her three city homecoming book tour coincided with my stay in Lagos as a curatorial fellow at Guest Artist Space Foundation, dedicated to facilitating cultural exchange and supporting creative practices. After Lagos, Chimamanda took the tour to Nigeria’s capital city Abuja and finally Enugu, where she was born and grew up.

Read more:
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s new book Dream Count explores love in all its complicated messiness

As a scholar of African literature, I arrived here in search of literary Lagos. But my attachment to the city may also just be romantic, a nostalgia born out of years of reading about it in fiction. No doubt, Lagos is a city of imagination and creativity.

Chimamanda’s book event was a reminder that literary celebrity, when it happens in Africa, can exist on its own terms. It’s rooted in a popular imaginary that embraces both the writer and the spectacle.

Lagos superstar

The launch in Lagos took place at a conference centre on the evening of Friday 27 June. The MUSON is a multipurpose civic auditorium located in the centre of Lagos Island which can accommodate up to 1,000 guests. And on this night, the auditorium was packed.

When I arrive, the scene outside is buzzing. A crowd gathers in front of a large canvas banner bearing a radiant image of the author. It’s more than just decoration; it’s a backdrop. It is an occasion for the selfie, a digital marker that you were there. There is even a hashtag for this: #dreamcountlagos. People take turns posing in front of it, curating their presence in the frame of Chimamanda’s aura.

The atmosphere is festive, electric. And yet beneath the surface shimmer is something more urgent: a hunger for story, for presence, for return. Perhaps that explains why people come not just to witness, but to be counted.

Inside the lobby, piles of Chimamanda’s books are neatly arranged on long tables. People are not just buying a copy. They are buying several in the hope that the author will autograph them. The sight is striking, almost surreal. In many parts of the continent, a book launch is often a quiet affair. Writers are lucky to sell a handful of copies. But this is something else entirely. This is not just a book launch, it is a cultural moment.

It would have been easy to mistake the event for a political townhall. There was a VIP section reserved for the who’s who of Lagos, but those class distinctions easily dissolved into the collective energy of the room. The auditorium was filled with genuine enthusiasm.

Even after a delay of more than an hour, when Chimamanda finally walked in, she was met with rapturous applause. She wore a bright yellow dress, an Instagrammable outfit, suited for the many fans who rushed forward to take selfies with her. Chimamanda, no doubt, is as much a fashion icon as she is a literary figure.

On stage, she was joined by media personality Ebuka Obi-Uchendu, widely known as the host of the reality TV show Big Brother Africa. But here, he was also something more intimate: the author’s friend. Chimamanda even credited him with being a “great reader”. This is a rare compliment in a literary world that often separates celebrity from critical engagement.

Their conversation was relaxed and full of laughter, offering the audience both intimacy and insight. Chimamanda addressed the question that had lingered for years: her decade-long silence. She spoke candidly of writer’s block, of the grief that came with losing both her parents in quick succession, and how that loss eventually reignited her desire to write.

Dream Count, she explained, is shaped by that rupture. It is one of the major post-COVID novels from Africa, and centres on the lives of four women. It is a book about love, friendship and independence.

Africans do read

When she spoke about her characters on stage, it was as though she was talking about relatives that the audience recognised. They responded by shouting out the characters’ names, to the delight of the author.

When I asked people about the launch afterwards, many said that it was a very Nigerian event – big, colourful, exuberant, festive. It was indeed a celebration that felt communal, even joyous. It was also a public demonstration of how literature can still command space and attention, not just in private reading rooms or crammed bookstores, but on a civic scale.

Read more:
Lagos fashion: how designers make global trends uniquely Nigerian

This was a remarkable event because it defied the tired cliché that Africans do not read. People, mostly young, came out in their hundreds. They bought books, they took selfies with their “favourite” author, they screamed the names of fictional characters as though greeting friends.

But more significant was Chimamanda’s choice to work with a local publisher, Narrative Landscape Press, which produced the Nigerian edition of Dream Count that is now available and accessible locally, at the same time as its release in Europe and North America. That alone is a radical act.

In returning to Nigeria to launch her book, Chimamanda also disrupts the assumption that African literary prestige must only be validated abroad. Even though she belongs to a cohort of African writers shaped by the diaspora, she actively insists on presence – on homecoming – not as simply nostalgia, but as active engagement.

Of course, Chimamanda is an exception. Her stature as a global literary figure, combined with her deep connection to home, allows her to move between worlds with remarkable ease. Few writers command the kind of multigenerational, cross-class attention she does. I found myself wishing though that more book launches could carry this same sense of occasion, of meaning, of return. That they could gather people in such numbers, not just to celebrate the writer, but to affirm the African book as something still worth gathering for.

And perhaps that is what made this book launch unforgettable: not just the celebrity or the spectacle, but the sense that literature still matters here, and that it belongs to the people.

Tinashe Mushakavanhu does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Chimamanda’s Lagos homecoming wasn’t just a book launch, it was a cultural moment – https://theconversation.com/chimamandas-lagos-homecoming-wasnt-just-a-book-launch-it-was-a-cultural-moment-261112

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Leigh Carriage, Senior Lecturer in Music, Southern Cross University

Connie Francis dominated the music charts in the late 1950s and early 1960s with hits like Stupid Cupid, Pretty Little Baby and Don’t Break the Heart That Loves You.

The pop star, author and actor has died at 87, and will be remembered for recording the soundtrack songs of post-World War II America.

An early life of music

Francis was born Concetta Rosa Maria Franconero in Newark, New Jersey, to Italian immigrant parents. At a very early age, Francis was encouraged to take accordion and singing lessons, compete in talent shows, and later she would perform occasionally on the children’s production Star Time Kids on NBC, remaining there until she was 17.

Within these early recordings you can hear her style begin to develop: her tone, great pitching, her versatility in vocal range. Her vocal delivery is technically controlled and stylistically structured, often nuanced – and even at this early stage demonstrating such power coupled with an adaptability for a broad range of repertoire.

At 17, Francis signed a contract with MGM Records.

One of her early recordings was the song Who’s Sorry Now?, written by Ted Snyder with lyrics by Bert Kalmar and Harry Ruby in 1923. Her version was released in 1957 and struggled to get noticed.

The following year, Francis appeared with the ballad on American Bandstand. This performance exposed Francis’ talent for interpretation and her ability to bridge the teen and adult fanbase.

The song would become a hit.

It’s useful to listen to the original version to gain more insight into Francis’ vocal approach and styling. The original is an instrumental song of its time, with light whimsical call and response motives in a foxtrot feel.

But in Francis’ version, she demonstrates her ability to revitalise a late 1950s pop music aesthetic. In an emotional delivery she croons her own rendition, with the country styling elements of Patsy Cline.

The voice of a generation

Following Who’s Sorry Now?, Stupid Cupid (1958), Where The Boys Are (1960, the titular song of a feature film starring Francis) and Lipstick on Your Collar (1959) became the soundtrack songs of post-war America.

Francis was supported with songs penned by the some of the best songwriters from the Brill Building, a creative collective in Manhattan that housed professional songwriters, working with staff writers Edna Lewis and George Goehring.

In 1960, Francis released her hit Everybody’s Somebody’s Fool written by Jack Keller and Howard Greenfield. It was a teeny-bopper classic, and she became the first women to top the Billboard Hot 100.

Styled after some of the other greats of the time – such as Frank Sinatra (1915–98), Dean Martin (1917–95) and Louis Prima (1910–70) – Francis’ performance on the Ed Sullivan show highlighted her connection to her Italian heritage and ability to draw from a broad repertoire.

On the show, she performed Mama and La Paloma. Each performance is very carefully styled, a thoughtful approach to dynamics, sung in both English and Italian.

Don’t Break the Heart That Loves You, a number one hit from 1962, features Francis’ gorgeous crooning harmonies. Then, the song breaks down into an earnest spoken part and finishes with a powerful belted vocal part of long notes.

The song is full of confidence and hope.

Away from the microphone

Francis had two key roles in films, starring in Where the Boys Are (1960) and the comedy Follow the Boys (1963).

She was an author of two books. The second, Who’s Sorry Now?, became a New York Times bestseller.

Francis was involved with humanitarian causes. She was particularly involved with Women Against Rape, following her own violent rape in 1974, and the Valour Victims Assistance Legal Organisation, dedicated to supporting the legal rights of crime victims. A lesser known song in her repertoire, fitting to include here, is her version of Born Free from 1968.

As a singer, Francis worked at her craft and transitioned effortlessly from one genre to another, performing for over five decades. She will be remembered as a trailblazing solo artist, leaving a strong legacy in popular music culture.

She was the voice of one generation when she was a star. And in her final year she became the voice of a new generation as Pretty Little Baby, released in 1962, went viral on TikTok, with more than 1.4 million videos using her voice to share stories of their lives.

Leigh Carriage does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Connie Francis was the voice of a generation and the soundtrack of post-war America – https://theconversation.com/connie-francis-was-the-voice-of-a-generation-and-the-soundtrack-of-post-war-america-261467

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Are Skeie Hermansen, Professor of Sociology, University of Oslo

As many countries grapple with ageing populations, falling birthrates, labour shortages and fiscal pressures, the ability to successfully integrate immigrants is becoming an increasingly pressing matter.

However, our new study found that salaries of immigrants in Europe and North America are nearly 18% lower than those of natives, as foreign-born workers struggle to access higher-paying jobs. To reach this conclusion, we analysed the salaries of 13.5 million people in nine immigrant-receiving countries: Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the United States. Data was taken from the period of 2016 to 2019.

Immigrants in these countries earned less primarily because they were unable to access higher-paying jobs. Three-quarters of the migrant pay gap was the result of a lack of access to well-paid jobs, while only one-quarter of the gap was attributed to pay differences between migrant and native-born workers in the same job.

The high-income countries we examined in Europe and North America all face similar demographic challenges, with low fertility rates resulting in an ageing population and labour shortages. Pro-natalist policies are unlikely to change this demographic destiny, but sound immigration policies can help.

Across these countries with vastly different labour market institutions and immigrant populations, a common theme emerged: countries are not making good use of immigrants’ human capital.

Stark regional differences

We found that immigrants earn 17.9% less than natives on average, although the pay gap varied widely by country. In Spain, a relatively recent large-scale receiver of immigrants, the pay gap was over 29%. In Sweden – a country where many employed immigrants find work in the public sector – it was just 7%. These results don’t include immigrants who are unemployed or in the informal economy.

Where immigrants were born also mattered. The highest average overall pay gaps were for immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa (26.1%) and the Middle East and North Africa (23.7%). For immigrants from Europe, North America and other Western countries, the difference in average pay compared to natives was a much more modest 9%.

Our results suggest that the children of immigrants faced substantially better earning prospects than their parents. For the countries where second-generation data was available – Canada, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden – the gap narrowed over time, and the children of immigrants had a substantially smaller earnings gap, earning an average of 5.7% less than workers with native-born parents.

The struggle to access higher-paying jobs

Beyond quantifying the gap, we wanted to understand the roots of pay disparities. To create better policies, it is important to know whether immigrants are paid less than natives when they’re doing the same job in the same company, or whether these differences arise because immigrants typically work in lower-paying jobs.

By a wide margin, we found that immigrants end up working in lower-paying industries, occupations and companies; three-quarters of the gap was due to this type of labour-market sorting. The pay gap for the same work in the same company was just 4.6% on average across the nine countries.

These differences represent a failure of immigration policy to incorporate immigrants, as immigrants are relegated to jobs where they cannot contribute to their full potential. Our analyses rule out that the lack of access to higher-paying jobs simply reflects a difference in skill between immigrants and native-born workers. We also found that the size of the pay gap and the key role of unequal access to well-paid jobs is similar for immigrants with and without a university education.

This means that the immigrant-native pay gap in large part represents a market inefficiency and policy failure, with significant social consequences for both immigrants and immigrant-receiving countries.

Leer más:
What Britons and Europeans really think about immigration – new analysis

Policy implications

Although equal pay for equal work policies may seem like a viable solution, they won’t close the immigrant pay gap. This is because they only help those who have already secured work, but immigrants face barriers to employment that begin long before even applying for a job. This includes convoluted processes to validate university degrees or other qualifications, and exclusion from professional networks.

The policy focus should therefore be on improving access to better jobs.

To make this happen, governments should invest in programmes such as language training, education and vocational skills for immigrants. They should ensure immigrants have early access to employment information, networks, job-search assistance and employer referrals. They should implement standardised and transparent recognition of foreign degrees and credentials, helping immigrants to access jobs matching their skills and training.

This is particularly important for Europe as it races to attract – and retain – skilled immigrants who may be having second thoughts about the US in the Trump era. In the European Union, around 40% of university-educated non-EU immigrants are employed in jobs that do not require a degree, an underutilisation of skills known as brain waste.

Some countries are already taking steps to remedy this. Germany’s Skilled Immigration Act – which took effect in 2024 – allows foreign graduates to work while their degrees are being formally recognised. In 2025, France reformed its Passeport Talent permit to attract skilled professionals and address labour shortages, especially in healthcare.

These kinds of policies help ensure that foreign-born workers can contribute at their full capacity, and that countries can reap the full benefits of immigration in terms of productivity gains, higher tax revenue and reduced inequality.

If immigrants can’t get access to good jobs, their skills are underutilised and society loses out. Smart immigration policy doesn’t end at the border – it starts there.

Are Skeie Hermansen has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s
Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 851149), the Research Council of Norway (grant 287016), and the Center for Advanced Study at The Norwegian Academy of Science
and Letters (Young CAS grant 2019/2020).

Marta M. Elvira receives funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, grant PID2020-
118807RB-I00/AEI /10.13039/501100011033

Andrew Penner no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.

– ref. Immigrants in Europe and North America earn 18% less than natives – here’s why – https://theconversation.com/immigrants-in-europe-and-north-america-earn-18-less-than-natives-heres-why-261188

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachael Kent, Senior Lecturer in Digital Economy & Society Education, Department of Digital Humanities, King’s College London

On a sunny afternoon, I was scrolling through social media when I came across a video of a young woman tossing her sunscreen into a bin. “I don’t trust this stuff anymore,” she said to the camera, holding the bottle up like a piece of damning evidence.

The clip had been viewed over half a million times, with commenters applauding her for “ditching chemicals” and recommending homemade alternatives like coconut oil and zinc powder.

In my research on the effect of digital technology on health, I’ve seen how posts like this can shape real-world behaviour. And anecdotally, dermatologists have reported seeing more patients with severe sunburns or suspicious moles who say they stopped using sunscreen after watching similar videos.

Sunscreen misinformation created by social media influencers is spreading and this isn’t just a random trend. It’s being fuelled by the platforms designed to host influencer content.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

In my book, The Digital Health Self, I explain how social media platforms are not neutral arenas for sharing information. They are commercial ecosystems engineered to maximise engagement and time spent online – metrics that directly drive advertising revenue.

Content that sparks emotion – outrage, fear, inspiration – is boosted to the top of your feed. That’s why posts questioning or rejecting science often spread further than measured, evidence-based advice.

Health misinformation thrives in this environment. A personal story about throwing out sunscreen performs well because it’s dramatic and emotionally charged. Algorithms reward such content with higher visibility: likes, shares and comments all signal popularity.

Each second a user spends watching or reacting gives the platform more data – and more opportunities to serve targeted ads. This is how health misinformation becomes profitable.

In my work, I describe social media platforms as “unregulated public health platforms”. They influence what users see and believe about health, but unlike public health institutions, they’re not bound by standards for accuracy or harm reduction.

If an influencer claims sunscreen is toxic, that message won’t be factchecked or flagged – it will often be amplified. Why? Because controversy fuels engagement.

Read more:
Misinformation lends itself to social contagion – here’s how to recognize and combat it

I call this environment “the credibility arena”: a space where trust is built not through expertise, but through performance and aesthetic appeal. As I write in my book: “Trust is earned not by what is known, but by how well one narrates suffering, recovery, and resilience.”

A creator crying on camera about “toxins” can feel more authentic to viewers than a calm, clinical explanation of ultraviolet radiation from a medical expert.

This shift has real consequences. Ultraviolet rays are invisible, constant and damaging. They penetrate cloud cover and harm skin even on cool days.

Decades of research, especially in countries like Australia with high skin cancer rates, show that regular use of broad-spectrum sunscreen dramatically reduces risk. And yet, myths spreading online are urging people to do the opposite: to abandon sunscreen as dangerous or unnecessary.

This trend isn’t driven solely by individual creators. It’s embedded in how content is designed, framed and presented. Algorithms prioritise short, emotionally-charged videos. Interfaces highlight trending sounds and hashtags. Recommendation systems push users toward extreme or dramatic content.

These features all shape what we see and how we interpret it. The “For You” page isn’t neutral. It’s engineered to keep you scrolling, and shock value outperforms nuance every time.

That’s why videos about “ditching chemicals” thrive, even as posts on other aspects of women’s health are shadowbanned or suppressed. Shadowbanning refers to when a platform limits the visibility of content – making it harder to find, without informing the user – often due to vague or inconsistently applied moderation rules.

The system rewards spectacle, not science. Once creators discover that a particular format, like tossing products into a bin, boosts engagement, it’s replicated over and over again. Visibility isn’t organic. It’s manufactured.

Those who throw away their sunscreen often believe they’re doing the right thing. They’re drawn to creators who feel relatable, sincere and independent — especially when official health campaigns seem cold, patronising or out of touch. But the consequences can be serious. Sun damage accumulates silently, raising skin cancer risk with every hour spent unprotected.

Sunscreen isn’t perfect. It needs to be reapplied properly and paired with shade and protective clothing. But the evidence for its effectiveness is clear and robust.

The real danger lies in a system that not only allows misinformation to spread, but also incentivises it. A system in which false claims can boost an influencer’s reach and a platform’s revenue.

Read more:
Four ways you can design social media posts to combat health misinformation

To resist harmful health trends, we need to understand the systems that promote them. In the case of sunscreen, rejecting protection isn’t just a personal decision – it’s a symptom of a digital culture that turns health into content, and often profits from the harm it causes.

Rachael Kent does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage – https://theconversation.com/scroll-watch-burn-sunscreen-misinformation-and-its-real-world-damage-261137

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alexandros Antoniou, Senior Lecturer in Media Law, University of Essex

When thousands of Afghans were quietly flown to the UK under a secret relocation scheme, few knew it was triggered by an error. A defence official had accidentally leaked the personal data of nearly 19,000 Afghan nationals who had worked with British forces and were at risk of Taliban reprisals.

It has now also been revealed that the leaked list contained the identities of UK special forces and spies.

Even fewer knew that this misstep was being kept from the public by a rare and powerful legal device: a superinjunction. Now, after nearly two years of legal wrangling, the High Court has lifted that order, reopening the conversation about when secrecy in the justice system goes too far.

What is a superinjunction?

An injunction is a court order that stops someone from doing something (like publishing a story) or requires them to do something (like taking down an online post or handing back confidential documents).

A superinjunction goes one step further and does two things: it bans the publication of certain information (usually to protect privacy, safety or national security) and also bans anyone from revealing that the court order even exists.

In essence, it is a tool that provides legal invisibility: the story is hidden and so is the fact that it is being hidden. While an injunction works like a padlock on a filing cabinet, a superinjunction means you cannot even tell anyone the cabinet is even there.

Superinjunctions are exceptionally rare and controversial, precisely because they run counter to the principle of open justice. This is the idea that courts must operate in public, and that their decisions can be seen, scrutinised and questioned. Any derogation from open justice must be continuously justified and treated with considerable caution, especially where media freedom is curtailed.

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

Historically, superinjunctions have been used sparingly in cases involving blackmail, risks of violence against witnesses, the protection of children or to prevent tipping-off a subject before an order can be served (such as in fraud investigations), always with the aim of preventing harm or ensuring that justice is done.

The superinjunction committee (which was established in 2010 by Lord Neuberger to review growing concerns about such orders) made clear that the use of these legal tools must meet strict tests of necessity and proportionality. And, that they are only granted where serious harm (for example to life, safety or the administration of justice) is credibly at stake.

Why was a superinjunction granted in the Afghan data breach case?

In this case, the government argued that revealing the data leak could put lives in danger. The leaked spreadsheet contained names, contact details and, in some cases, family information of Afghan nationals who had applied to resettle in the UK. Many feared Taliban retaliation.

So, in September 2023, the Ministry of Defence asked the High Court for an injunction to stop media outlets from reporting on the leak. The judge did not just grant that request, he escalated it to a superinjunction, banning any mention of the case or the fact of the order.

It was described at the time as “unprecedented” in its scope. Journalists, even those who had already discovered the breach, were effectively gagged. The public had no idea any of it was happening.

Why did the court later decide to lift the secrecy?

After multiple hearings and appeals, High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain ruled on July 15 2025 that the superinjunction should be discharged once and for all. A government-commissioned review found that the leak may not have spread as widely as initially feared, and that Taliban reprisals were unlikely to be triggered solely by someone appearing on the leaked list.

The judge concluded that while the leak was deeply serious, continued secrecy was no longer necessary, and that the harm of suppressing public debate and scrutiny now outweighed the risks of disclosure. To put it plainly, the balance tipped.

Protection v cover-up

Superinjunctions are not inherently wrong. There are situations where short-term secrecy is essential, for instance for the purposes of shielding vulnerable parties like children or genuinely guarding national security.

But the Afghan case exemplifies the dangers of allowing secrecy to persist too long or too broadly. For nearly two years, the public was kept in the dark about a data breach involving tens of thousands of lives – including British citizens – and a government response that may ultimately cost the taxpayer “several billion pounds”.

In this context, secrecy risked becoming a form of institutional self-protection, shielding the Ministry of Defence and the government from political fallout, legal scrutiny and accountability, rather than safeguarding people from actual harm.

The principle of open justice is at the heart of democratic life. Superinjunctions, by their nature, run directly against that principle. There are times when secrecy might be seen as necessary, but it must always be tightly scoped and justified with evidence while serving the public interest; not convenience or image. By lifting this superinjunction, the courts affirmed that the British public has a right to know not only what went wrong, but that something went wrong at all.

Alexandros Antoniou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why did the government hide a data leak about Afghans working with British forces and why did the courts finally reveal it? – https://theconversation.com/why-did-the-government-hide-a-data-leak-about-afghans-working-with-british-forces-and-why-did-the-courts-finally-reveal-it-261437