Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

The End of an Era for Free-to-Air Cricket As Rudi Koertzen and Billy Bowden removed the bails at The Oval and celebrations began across the country after a grandstand finish to an epochal Ashes, it signalled not only the end of England's 18-year wait to claim back the urn, but the last rites of live Test match cricket on terrestrial TV in the UK. In December 2004, the ECB announced a landmark four-year deal worth £220m that gave Sky exclusive rights to show live cricket, with Channel 4 – which had been showing home Test matches since 1999 – left with nothing. This decision, made more than 20 years ago, remains one of English cricket's most controversial and divisive moments. The Financial Breakthrough Behind the Paywall For Giles Clarke, who led the negotiations in his role as chair of the ECB's marketing committee, it was a simple case of economics. "The alternative was a significant decline in income," said Clarke at the time. "Major cuts would have had to have been made in the funding of the England team, the support structure and to county cricket clubs as well." Clarke insists that the ECB's financial modeling presented a bleak picture if they were to accept Channel 4's bid. "We worked out that at least seven counties would have had to close, and I'm being very serious here. We would have had to cut back on our youth programmes and we couldn't see what we could fund. The game as we knew it, in the opinion of the guys who did the financial modeling, would not exist." In negotiations with Vic Wakeling, Sky's head of sport, Clarke insisted the ECB would need more money if they were to justify the decision to take live cricket off free-to-air. "We sat Vic down and said, 'If you don't [increase your offer], we aren't going to consider doing this with you. You've got to give us a better reason.' We got Sky to increase their bid by £30m. I think we did a bloody good job on the money." The Audience Impact and Accessibility Concerns Channel 4 had innovated in areas that had never been touched before, according to Mark Nicholas, Channel 4's frontman across their seven years as the home of Test cricket in the UK. "We made the game more accessible by the way that we styled it, so it didn't feel too elitist or too difficult." Having won the broadcasting rights before the 1999 season, the same summer that England were defeated by New Zealand on home soil to become officially the worst Test side in the world, Channel 4 brought viewers the team's subsequent rise under Nasser Hussain and then Michael Vaughan, culminating in the Ashes triumph of 2005 when a peak audience of 8.4 million tuned in to watch Ashley Giles and Matthew Hoggard clinch a nail-biter at Trent Bridge. When England sealed the deal at The Oval just over a week later, Channel 4 reported their highest-rating day ever – at 23.2%, the channel's total share of all TV viewing broke the record set by the Big Brother final three years earlier. By then the ink had dried on the ECB's contract with Sky. The Divisive Legacy of the Decision Channel 4 released a statement saying they hoped the ECB "would not come to regret its decision to turn its back on the hundreds of hours of terrestrial exposure that Channel 4 was offering". Their innovative coverage had been widely lauded since they had usurped the BBC to win the broadcasting rights alongside Sky in a two-pronged deal that involved the latter showing one home Test match each summer between 1999 and 2005. Speaking to key figures involved at the time, it's clear that passions still run high. There remains a sense of animosity between the different camps, accusations of underhand PR campaigns, and a refusal to accept that the other side may have a point. There are legacies to protect. In a sense, it's English cricket's Brexit. "We were faced with a horrendous situation but there was no doubt in the minds of all of us who were involved, and there was no doubt in our minds 15 years later, that we did the only thing we could do," says Giles Clarke, reflecting on the deal he struck with Sky 22 years ago. "There have been a lot of lies and rubbish said about this. Channel 4 did not bid for all the Test matches – they only wanted the second series each summer. The BBC said they were not going to bid two days before the did date for bids. Sky had bid for absolutely everything." The Future Outlook for Cricket Broadcasting More than 20 years later, it remains one of English cricket's most divisive and controversial decisions. Did taking live cricket off free-to-air TV secure the future of the English game, or hold it back at exactly the moment it was ready to fly? "When they did the deal in 2004 for 2006 to 2009, they actually only got £55m per year," said Terry Blake, the TCCB's marketing manager and then ECB's commercial director between 1989 and 2003. "So for £10m per year more, which no doubt helped Giles Clarke secure his chairmanship for years to come, they moved it off free-to-air television altogether. I would turn it round and say: imagine the audiences we would have grown and the interest we would have had at the grassroots level had we stayed on free-to-air, even if we'd had to take a slight drop from the £45m per year [received from the 2002-05 deal with Sky and Channel 4]. Whatever money was put into the grassroots because of additional money from Sky, it could never replace the top-down approach." "The music, the graphics, the commentary team, the public's love of it – it had become really rather special," recalls Nicholas. "It was a bit of a cult. The coverage in 2005 was probably universally appreciated more than any other at that stage, so much so that even Kerry Packer in Australia was saying, 'How come they're doing it better than we're doing it?' When you give something such a deep dive, and you're going so well with it, and you feel like you've got so much left to do, it's difficult to stomach that the rights have moved on."

The Hollywood Critique from a Master Filmmaker Quentin Tarantino has launched a scathing attack on contemporary Hollywood, describing it as "a flavourless sausage factory" in a recent article for Sight and Sound magazine. The renowned director, famous for films like Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill, expressed his disillusionment with modern cinema, stating that since the pandemic, he finds it almost impossible to enjoy new releases. A Director's Disillusionment with Modern Cinema In his candid assessment, Tarantino noted that "flaws, implausibilities, audience pandering, miscast performers or just plain stupid shit usually torpedoes every new movie coming out of the flavourless sausage factory that used to call itself Hollywood." He contrasted this with his experience of 1980s cinema, which he found forgivable because he "loved going to the movies," whereas today's films "inspire contempt in me than generosity." The Rare Exceptions in Contemporary Film Despite his harsh criticism, Tarantino did acknowledge a few recent films he enjoyed. He highlighted Joe Carnahan's "The Rip" (currently on Netflix), Steven Spielberg's "West Side Story," and Kevin Costner's "Horizon: An American Saga" Chapters 1 and 2 as examples of cinema that still holds his interest. However, he lamented that he has seen "nothing that really held me in its grip and swept me away to the magical land of enjoyment that I used to visit regularly." The Industry Implications of Tarantino's Critique Tarantino's criticism carries significant weight in the film industry, given his status as an acclaimed director whose films have grossed over $2.5 billion worldwide. His comments reflect growing concerns about formulaic storytelling, risk-averse production, and the prioritization of franchise films over original content in contemporary Hollywood. The director's preference for books over modern movies suggests a deeper cultural shift in how audiences are engaging with storytelling mediums. Tarantino's Future Projects and Hollywood Legacy While expressing disillusionment with current Hollywood output, Tarantino remains active in the entertainment industry. He is currently developing "The Popinjay Cavalier," a "swashbuckling" play scheduled to open in London's West End in 2027. His most recent film release was the 2019 hit "Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood," and a follow-up directed by David Fincher is currently in production. Notably, Tarantino scrapped plans for his supposed final film, "The Movie Critic," in 2024, leaving his legacy as a filmmaker still evolving.

China announced on June 4, 2026 that four New Zealand lawmakers are barred from entering the mainland for a year because of a May delegation to Taiwan. Beijing described the trip as a direct challenge to its “serious concerns” and warned of “serious adverse political impacts.” Wellington and Taipei have both condemned the move as interference in democratic parliamentary activity. Beijing’s Formal Ban on Four New Zealand Lawmakers The Chinese embassy in Wellington issued a statement accusing the lawmakers of ignoring repeated warnings and sending “wrong signals” to Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party. The ban targets three centre‑right MPs – Laura McClure, David Wilson, Maureen Pugh – and opposition Labour MP Duncan Webb. The embassy warned that anyone who “crosses the red line on the Taiwan question will face the consequences.” Numbers Behind the Sanctions: One‑Year Travel Restrictions Duration of ban: 12 months for each of the four MPs. Visit date: May 2026 (specific dates not disclosed). China’s trade volume with New Zealand (2023): roughly US$30 billion, making China New Zealand’s largest trading partner. New Zealand’s diplomatic stance: recognises the “one‑China” principle, treating Taiwan as a Chinese province. Repercussions for Sino‑New Zealand Relations Foreign Minister Winston Peters expressed surprise, noting that New Zealand MPs have visited Taiwan for decades without incident. He instructed officials in Beijing and Wellington to engage Chinese authorities to “express concern at this departure from past practice.” Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong also signalled concern, promising to raise the issue in Canberra. The ban arrives at a time when China remains New Zealand’s biggest trading partner, yet political scrutiny of Beijing’s influence in Wellington is growing. Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the ban as unlawful interference, emphasizing that “parliamentary diplomacy is a normal practice among democratic nations.” What the Ban Signals for Future Parliamentary Diplomacy Analysts see the sanction as a test of how far China will go to enforce its red line on Taiwan. If New Zealand’s MPs are required to apologise for the visit to have the ban lifted, it could set a precedent for future diplomatic pressure on foreign legislators. The episode may prompt other democracies to reassess the risks of parliamentary delegations to Taiwan, balancing democratic engagement against potential retaliation from Beijing. In the short term, the four MPs are barred from travel to China until June 2027 unless they issue an apology, as reported by Reuters. The longer‑term impact will depend on whether New Zealand chooses a conciliatory approach or reinforces its support for parliamentary exchanges with Taiwan.

The Lead: Top Seed's Mental BreakdownAfter letting another big lead slip with an error-strewn performance at the French Open, top-ranked Aryna Sabalenka felt like getting as far away from the courts as possible. "Just want to quit tennis right now," Sabalenka said after wasting a lead of a set and two breaks in a 3-6, 7-5, 6-0 loss to Diana Shnaider in the quarterfinals.The Mental Collapse: From Victory to DespairSabalenka's wait for a first French Open title continues despite the four-time major winner leading 4-1 in the second set and being two points from victory while serving for the match at 5-4. What followed was a complete collapse as she lost 12 of the last 13 games against a player appearing in her first Grand Slam quarterfinal, looking increasingly frustrated and forlorn in the windy conditions."We'll see in a few days. Hopefully, I'll get back on track mentally," Sabalenka admitted after the match. "You know those rooms where you just go in and you smash everything. Probably I will spend a whole day over there destroying stuff. Maybe it will help, maybe not."Her struggles were reminiscent of the match against Coco Gauff in last year's final, when she won the first set before becoming undone with a slew of unforced errors. "I just have to sit back and openly think about what's going on in my head in those tough moments," Sabalenka said. "Because I'm quite an experienced player. I have been through so many things, and I [have] overcome so many things."The French Open Upset: A Tournament of SurprisesIt was another big upset in a tournament filled with them, with defending champion Gauff (third round) and four-time winner Iga Swiatek (fourth round) already out. Jannik Sinner, last year's men's singles runner-up, served for the match in a second-round defeat, and 24-time major winner Novak Djokovic wasted a two-set lead in a third-round loss.According to sports analytics company Opta, this year's French Open is the first major tournament without a former men's or women's singles major champion in the semifinals since the 1977 French Open. The unseeded Chwalinska came through three qualifying rounds to become only the second Polish woman to reach the semifinals at Roland Garros, along with Swiatek."It was such an impressive run, you know," Chwalinska said of British player Emma Raducanu's run to the 2021 US Open title as an 18-year-old qualifier. "Also, she was so young."The Path Forward: New Faces EmergeShnaider next faces Maja Chwalinska, who extended her remarkable Roland Garros run by beating 22nd seed Anna Kalinskaya 7-6 (3), 6-3. Chwalinska's total prize money heading into Roland Garros was $864,030, and reaching the last four here earns her 750,000 euros (about $872,000).In the men's quarterfinals, 10th-seeded Flavio Cobolli beat number four Felix Auger-Aliassime 4-6, 6-4, 6-4, 6-4 and will face fellow Italian Matteo Arnaldi for a spot in the final. Second-seeded Alexander Zverev and number 26 Jakub Mensik will meet in the other semifinal.For Sabalenka, the challenge now is not just physical but mental. "I just think it's [a] combination of everything," she lamented. "You overthink, then you make easy mistakes, then you miss opportunities."

The Lead All murders are shocking, but few unsettle a nation in the way that of Rachel Nickell did in 1992. She was stabbed 49 times while walking on Wimbledon Common during the day with her two-year-old son, Alex. The viciousness of the attack, in a public place and in front of a child, lingered darkly in the minds of the public, especially since Alex being the only witness enabled the killer to remain at large for years. A New Perspective on a National Tragedy It is a crime that has been discussed, analysed and dramatised, but never quite in the way The Witness does. Across its three episodes, narrative emphasis rarely falls where we expect it to, because the main characters are not the police or the killer but the family Rachel left behind: Alex (Jahsaiah Williams, then Max Fincham as the older boy) and his devastated father André (Jordan Bolger). This harrowing new perspective proves to be rewarding. The Family's Ordeal André has to deal with the grief of losing his partner, the challenge of becoming a single parent overnight, the complexity of caring for a traumatised young boy and the demands of the police investigation. The Witness is particularly interested in whether Alex, who is too young for anyone to be certain about how well he understands what he saw, will be further damaged by efforts to extract whatever information is locked up in his preschooler's brain. André must make the call about how far to push him. The Media's Intrusive Role Even taking into account the long history of despicable behaviour by the British tabloid press, their portrayal here is startling: they are everywhere, at André and Rachel's home, at the police station and the crime scene, a feral pack barking out crass questions that combine into a wordless roar. When André seeks refuge at his mother's house, reporters and paparazzi work out where it is and camp outside, rifling through the bins and stealing the post. After one visit to the police, André steps into the car park to the familiar wall of aggressive squawking, but now one of the hacks is doing a racist monkey chant to try to provoke him into engaging. Psychological Impact of Trauma As the story hops back and forth in time, we see Alex as a teenager, rebelling in normal ways, with the unique extra fissure of the disagreement between him and his father about how to address their past: Alex doesn't want to, but André knows this is unsustainable. The war between them can make them frustrating protagonists, constantly butting up against problems they don't know how to resolve, and Bolger sometimes struggles to bring depth to a role that requires him to be extremely sad and stressed at all times. When they do eventually find a path, though, it is a sweet redemption, very well earned. The Value of This Perspective If both that section of the narrative and the one following the later cold-case investigation that caught the real killer feel perfunctory, they give us a strange sort of respite from André and Alex's ordeal. They had to live it, without help or relief; The Witness is a valuable insight into what that hell was like.

Lead: A rare Bundibugyo Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and neighboring Uganda has triggered a rapid response, with three vaccine candidates entering emergency‑trial evaluation. While funding from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) accelerates research, the region’s insecurity and community mistrust pose significant hurdles to delivering a vaccine before the epidemic expands. Current Outbreak Metrics and Geographic Spread Confirmed cases in eastern DRC: 321 (as of 2 June 2026) Suspected cases in DRC: 116 Deaths in DRC: 48 Confirmed cases in Uganda: 15 (including 9 initially reported) Deaths in Uganda: 1 The outbreak began in Ituri province, an area already strained by armed conflict, and has reached Kampala, the Ugandan capital, highlighting the risk of cross‑border transmission. Funding and Vaccine Development Landscape IAVI receives $3.2 million to develop a vector‑based vaccine using a weakened animal virus. Moderna receives $50 million for an mRNA‑based candidate, leveraging the platform that proved effective against COVID‑19. University of Oxford receives $8.6 million for a chimpanzee‑adenovirus vector vaccine, similar to its COVID‑19 effort. All three candidates will be manufactured by the Serum Institute of India. CEPI has pledged to fast‑track emergency trials but has not disclosed specific timelines for Phase I/II studies. Historically, vaccine research for the Bundibugyo strain has lagged because the virus accounts for only a small fraction of global Ebola cases. Challenges to Vaccine Deployment in Conflict Zones Ongoing armed conflict in Ituri limits access for health workers and hampers cold‑chain logistics. Community mistrust, fueled by past incidents of treatment‑centre attacks, may lead to vaccine refusal or sabotage. Limited existing infrastructure for large‑scale immunisation in remote border regions. These factors echo previous outbreaks where vaccine roll‑out was delayed despite availability, underscoring the need for coordinated security and communication strategies. Projected Timeline and What Comes Next Initial safety and immunogenicity trials could begin within 12‑18 months, assuming regulatory clearance. Manufacturing scale‑up at the Serum Institute may add several months, potentially delivering doses by late 2027. Effective deployment will require simultaneous conflict‑mitigation efforts and community‑engagement campaigns to overcome stigma. Experts caution that without accelerated trial results and robust on‑the‑ground support, the outbreak could mirror the 2014 West‑Africa epidemic, which infected ~29 000 people and caused >11 000 deaths.

The Lead: Tech Hub's Resistance to Data Expansion Seattle's city government is on the verge of passing a year-long ban on the construction of new datacenters, making it the largest city yet in the US to consider such a moratorium as nationwide backlash grows. Four companies sought to build five large datacenters in areas serviced by Seattle's public utility; if approved, they would have consumed approximately a third of the city's current daily demand for electricity. The Technical Breakthrough: Seattle's Regulatory Response On Wednesday, city council committees unanimously passed the moratorium and an accompanying resolution. A full council vote on both measures is expected on Tuesday, which activists see as a formality after weeks of engagement with city officials on the topic. Lawmakers cited the two measures as an effort to protect residents from rising utility costs and environmental hazards. They said they plan to spend the duration of the moratorium drafting regulations tailored to the AI industry's massive facilities. The Financial Impact: Energy Consumption and Economic Concerns The proposed datacenters would have consumed approximately a third of Seattle's current daily demand for electricity, raising significant concerns about utility costs and resource allocation. During a moratorium, officials may establish pollution standards, energy connection requirements and contract terms, labor standards, and other rules specific to datacenters. The moratorium and accompanying resolution enable Seattle's public utility to establish separate rates for new "large load" customers, a category that includes large datacenters. The Industry Impact: Tech's Own Backlash The swift response to the proposed datacenters represents a major rebuke in tech's own backyard. A hub for the technology sector, Seattle's metro area serves as the headquarters for Microsoft and Amazon, which have laid off thousands of local workers over the past year as they spend a projected $390bn on AI investments in 2026. Seattle's tech workers have shown up in large numbers to organize against the proposed datacenters, with many viewing AI as synonymous with job losses despite increased productivity. The Regional Implications: Washington State's Precedent Lawmakers and advocates hope Seattle's status as a tech city can encourage more jurisdictions to join the dozens of other local governments moving to regulate datacenters, which are bipartisanly unpopular. Debora Juarez, who chairs the committee overseeing Seattle's public utility, noted that the datacenters' water use could threaten local Indigenous groups' treaty and water rights, which spurred tribes to be among the first to organize against new datacenters. Seattle's tech and climate activists are also working with groups in other parts of Washington state, seeing a Seattle win against datacenters as a replicable regional roadmap. The Future Outlook: Regulatory Uncertainty for AI Infrastructure Seattle mayor Katie Wilson indicated that the pause would allow the city to determine whether datacenters are a "good use of urban land" and potentially draft public benefit requirements, such as requisite investments in affordable housing and transit projects, in exchange for approval. Activists intentionally favored a year-long moratorium over a full-out ban because the former strategy could assemble a larger coalition in its favor, while potentially delivering the same end result. If an AI market bubble bursts in the coming year, the facilities are unlikely to be built, regardless of the moratorium's outcome.

A New Lease on Life for Stage Four PatientsThe landscape of terminal cancer treatment is witnessing a potential turning point following the success of a pioneering smart drug. Pat Brogan, a 68-year-old from Cowdenbeath, Scotland, who was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer in 2021, has seen his tumors shrink by almost a third after joining a clinical trial in 2025. The breakthrough offers a stark contrast to his initial prognosis, allowing him to anticipate major life milestones previously thought impossible.The Mechanism Behind GRWD5769The core of this clinical breakthrough lies in the smart drug GRWD5769. Traditional immunotherapies sometimes fail because cancer cells develop an invisibility cloak, effectively hiding from the body's immune defenses. GRWD5769 disrupts this camouflage. By disabling the cloaking mechanism, the drug clears the path for standard immunotherapy to locate, target, and eradicate the disease cells. This combination approach was recently highlighted at the world’s largest oncology conference in Chicago.Measurable Tumor Reduction and Patient OutcomesThe clinical data translates directly into profound quality-of-life improvements for patients like Brogan. Prior to the trial, Brogan had undergone three years of chemotherapy and immunotherapy before his tumors began growing again. The introduction of GRWD5769 yielded rapid, tangible results:Almost 33% reduction in overall tumor size.Restored ability to live a relatively normal life despite a stage four diagnosis.Capacity to resume daily activities, including daily walks and international travel.Brogan, who previously prepared to say his goodbyes, is now planning a trip to Spain and preparing to walk his daughter down the aisle in June.Shifting the Paradigm in Immunotherapy ResistanceBrogan's case represents a critical victory in the ongoing battle against treatment-resistant cancers. When standard immunotherapy fails, patients are often left with highly toxic, intensive chemotherapy alternatives with low success rates. The success of GRWD5769 demonstrates that overcoming cellular resistance—rather than just bombarding the body with harsh chemicals—can yield better survival rates and vastly superior patient quality of life. The work led by Prof Stefan Symeonides and his team in Edinburgh underscores the value of targeted clinical research contributing to global oncological advancements.The Future of Targeted Oncology TrialsAs the medical community digests the findings presented in Chicago, the focus will inevitably shift toward expanding the trial parameters for GRWD5769. If larger cohorts mimic Brogan's success, this mechanism of stripping away a tumor's invisibility could become a standard adjunct to immunotherapy across various cancer types. For patients who have exhausted conventional options, these smart drugs represent the next vital frontier in extending both life expectancy and quality of life.

The Lead From blacklists for UK passport holders to being asked to work illegally while on holiday, the plethora of extra costs and red tape thrown up post-Brexit are restricting opportunities for British actors seeking work in the EU. Mainland Europe has always been a springboard for those in the creative industries, from gaining crucial first credits on a TV, film or theatre production to building a marketable resume and paying the bills while attempting to make it big in the UK or US. The New Barriers for UK Performers Since Brexit, new barriers that have had a devastating effect for performers include visa rules that only allow work for up to 90 out of 180 days, inclusive of any European holiday time, and myriad customs, tax and other documents that can take an inordinate amount of time and cost to get processed, and can vary between countries. The performers' union Equity cited one common example of a member being taxed on their accommodation costs because that was classified as a "benefit in kind", which had a big impact on their net wages. Spotlight pointed out that, for UK performers, social security costs are deducted in the country where they are working – anywhere from 12% to 22% of their pay. This can be reclaimed but the process can take many months, and often requires paying accountants to chase the money. The Decline in European Opportunities Between 2016 and 2023, performing arts exports to the EU fell from £1.15bn to £929m, according to the Office for National Statistics. By contrast, figures for creative industry exports to non-EU countries show an 18% increase over the same period, from £1.57bn to £1.87bn. The National Theatre halted tours to mainland Europe in 2021 and Europe's largest educational touring company, White Horse Theatre, which has provided English-language performances to schools and theatres across Europe for almost half a century, said last year that Brexit threatened its future. In evidence provided to an investigation being conducted by the culture select committee on the impact of Brexit on performers going to the EU, Spotlight said that jobs on TV commercials were now "almost completely unavailable to UK performers". The Impact on Different Segments of the Industry While performers with star status continue to have a streamlined experience, it is jobbing actors who are often finding they are no longer on the list for parts. One past regular source of work was in adverts filmed abroad, such as the long-running "Get away!" campaign for the now defunct package holiday pioneer Lunn Poly, which featured British tourists filmed in locations such as the Balearic islands. In its written evidence sourced from the experiences of its members, Spotlight said it was "aware of named holiday companies that no longer audition UK-only passport holders" to appear in adverts filmed in the bloc. The difficulty for performers also extends to the many other crew involved. One casting director said that, pre-Brexit, one TV campaign employed 45 people based in the UK but similar campaigns are now being cast from Spain or another EU country. The paperwork involved, and the quick-turnaround nature of shooting, has meant that it is simply easier to not bother auditioning UK talent. The Growing Crisis for Emerging Talent It is young UK performers, and in particular those from a working-class background, who have been most hit by the loss of the EU for work and experience. Students and new graduates would previously have typically secured summer contracts for theme parks, tours and cruises, which are now largely closed off post Brexit because of factors such as the visa changes. According to Spotlight, casting directors have seen a significant decrease in working-class actors in particular picking up jobs in the EU. Unlike actors from wealthier backgrounds, who have access to finances to cover things such as visa costs and sometimes having to wait many months for payments relating to working in mainland Europe, they simply cannot afford to accept a job in the EU. The Future Outlook for UK Performers Agents have turned to encouraging actors to check their heritage to see if they are eligible for some form of dual citizenship, an Irish passport, for example, while some businesses based in the EU now actively blacklist UK-only passport holders. However, the "most concerning" anecdotal evidence is of UK performers being asked to skip getting a legitimate work visa if the paperwork can't be finalised in time, and to lie and work while claiming to be on holiday. Spotlight calls this practice a "ticking timebomb" that could involve the use of sanctions for performers and agents caught taking this route to secure work. The agency said this would include "deportation and potential blacklisting" from future opportunities. "The simple answer is Brexit has been catastrophic for the creative industries," says Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group. "We as a country made the decision to leave Europe. This is self-inflicted. Europe don't really want us unless they have to."