How a working-class plumber threw a wrench in Starmer’s election plans

Kraig Pakulski 0 18 Article rating: No rating

By Christian Edwards, CNN

London (CNN) — The special election in northern England was supposed to be neck-and-neck-and-neck: a three-way scrap between the governing Labour Party, fighting to keep control of a seat in its historic heartland, and two outsiders – the hard-right populist Reform UK party, and the new-look progressive Green Party.

In the end, it wasn’t even close.

Hannah Spencer, a 34-year-old plumber and member of the local council, won the seat in Gorton and Denton, near the English city of Manchester, with 14,890 votes, more than 40% of the total votes cast. Reform UK, which has led in most national polls for more than a year, came second with 10,578 votes, while Labour trailed in third, with 9,364 votes – around 25% of the total.

“I didn’t grow up wanting to be a politician. I’m a plumber,” Spencer said after the results were announced, apologizing to customers for having to cancel work now that she’s moving to Westminster. Spencer, who campaigned heavily on cost-of-living issues, said she stood as a candidate after questioning the value of “hard work” in today’s Britain.

“Working hard used to get you something. It got you a house. A nice life. Holidays,” she said. “But now, working hard – what does that get you? Because talk to anyone here, and they will tell you. The people who work hard but can’t put food on the table. Can’t get their kids school uniforms. Can’t put the heating on… Life has changed.”

The result is an embarrassing defeat for Prime Minister Keir Starmer in what is the Labour Party’s electoral backyard, made up of working-class voters, students and a large ethnic-minority population. Andrew Gwynne, the outgoing Labour MP who stood down due to health reasons, won the seat with more than 50% of the vote in the 2024 general election. Now, the Green Party has upended Starmer’s claim that only Labour can stop Reform from becoming the next government – an outcome that many experts have been predicting.

Spencer’s victory means the Greens now have five lawmakers in a parliament of 650, but more importantly marks the first time the Greens have won a by-election – a major boost to her party ahead of local elections in May, when voters will choose lawmakers for the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments and elect local council members in England. By-elections – votes held in individual seats between general elections – often have outsized significance, acting as a weathervane for national politics.

“The starting gun has fired on local elections in 70 days’ time,” Zack Polanski, the leader of the Greens, said at a victory rally early Friday morning. “This is an existential crisis for the Labour Party.”

Several recent Labour decisions have now been called into question. Among them is the party’s decision to target Reform UK – an upstart party led by Nigel Farage, the architect of Brexit and a friend of US President Donald Trump – as the “real opposition.” Despite winning just four seats at the last general election, Starmer decided early to elevate Reform to the status of Britain’s potential government-in-waiting, hoping that the prospect of Farage as prime minister would encourage voters to back Labour.

But the Greens’ victory means Labour is now fighting on two fronts. Having proclaimed Reform as the de facto opposition, Labour spent much of its first year in government trying to appeal to right-wing voters by hardening its rhetoric and policy on immigration.

Analysts questioned the wisdom of that strategy at the time. Anand Menon, professor of European politics at King’s College London, told CNN that Labour seemed happy to risk upsetting progressive voters with its tougher stance on immigration, since those voters – faced with a choice between Labour and Reform – would ultimately “vote Labour to keep those bastards out.”

Now, that strategy may have backfired, as Labour realizes that chasing

Anthropic rechaza la última oferta del Pentágono: “No podemos, con conciencia, acceder a su solicitud”

Kraig Pakulski 0 19 Article rating: No rating

Por Hadas Gold, CNN

Anthropic rechazó la última oferta del Pentágono para modificar su contrato, alegando que los cambios no cumplen con las preocupaciones de la compañía sobre el uso de la IA para la vigilancia masiva o para armas totalmente autónomas.

El Pentágono y Anthropic discrepan sobre las restricciones que la compañía impone al uso de Claude, el primer sistema de IA empleado en la red clasificada militar.

El secretario de Defensa, Pete Hegseth, declaró el martes al CEO de Anthropic, Dario Amodei, que si la compañía no permite que su modelo de IA se utilice “para todos los fines legales”, el Pentágono cancelaría el contrato de US$ 200 millones de Anthropic. Además de la cancelación del contrato, Anthropic sería considerada un “riesgo para la cadena de suministro”, una clasificación normalmente reservada para empresas vinculadas a adversarios extranjeros, según informaron funcionarios del Pentágono.

Anthropic declaró en un comunicado que el nuevo lenguaje del Pentágono se presentó como un compromiso, pero “se combinó con jerga legal que permitía ignorar esas salvaguardias a voluntad”.

En una extensa entrada de blog el jueves, Amodei escribió: “Creo profundamente en la importancia existencial de usar la IA para defender a Estados Unidos y otras democracias, y para derrotar a nuestros adversarios autocráticos”.

Amodei afirmó que Anthropic entiende que es el Pentágono, “ y no las empresas privadas, (el que) toma decisiones militares”. Sin embargo, “en un conjunto limitado de casos, creemos que la IA puede socavar, en lugar de defender, los valores democráticos”. También afirmó que casos de uso como la vigilancia masiva y las armas autónomas están “fuera de los límites de lo que la tecnología actual puede hacer de forma segura y fiable”.

Las dos excepciones de Anthropic no han frenado “la adopción y el uso de nuestros modelos en nuestras fuerzas armadas hasta la fecha”, añadió Amodei.

Amodei afirmó que las amenazas del Pentágono no cambian su postura: “No podemos acceder a su solicitud con conciencia”.

En respuesta, Emil Michael, subsecretario de Investigación e Ingeniería del Pentágono, quien participó en las negociaciones, escribió en X: “Es una pena que @DarioAmodei sea un mentiroso y tenga complejo de Dios. Solo desea controlar personalmente a las Fuerzas Armadas de EE.UU. y no le importa poner en riesgo la seguridad de nuestra nación. El @DeptofWar (Departamento de Guerra) SIEMPRE cumplirá la ley, pero no se doblegará a los caprichos de ninguna empresa tecnológica con fines de lucro”.

Tras la publicación de Amodei, el personal de Anthropic comenzó a expresar públicamente su apoyo a su empleador.

“Durante mis tres años en Anthropic, he visto repetidamente cómo defendemos nuestros valores de maneras que a menudo son invisibles desde fuera. Este es un claro ejemplo de ello”, escribió Trenton Bricken, miembro del equipo técnico de alineación de Anthropic, en X.

“La historia se está desarrollando ante nosotros; ahora es obvio y evidente para cualquiera que tenga ojos para ver por qué la fundación de Anthropic representó una encrucijada crucial en la cronología, y cuán catastrófico habría sido el contrafactual de otro modo”, escribió Gian Segato, gerente de ciencia de datos de Anthropic.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The post Anthropic rechaza la última oferta del Pentágono: “No podemos, con conciencia, acceder a su solicitud” appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

What does the Paramount-WBD merger mean for CNN?

Kraig Pakulski 0 25 Article rating: No rating

By Brian Stelter, CNN

(CNN) — Viewers and readers of CNN might be wondering the same thing that CNN employees are asking right now: What will Paramount’s ownership mean?

Answers are in short supply. Paramount executives have privately talked about the prospect of combining its CBS News unit with CNN. They have also praised CNN’s newsgathering machine and global reach.

But CNN employees and viewers have serious concerns about whether Paramount CEO David Ellison will uphold the news network’s editorial independence amid severe political turbulence.

President Donald Trump, after all, has long sought to weaken CNN, and he viewed the recent bidding war for Warner Bros. Discovery as another way to exert control. “It’s imperative that CNN be sold,” Trump said last December, signaling he favored Paramount’s takeover proposal.

Paramount’s financing has also come under scrutiny, as several Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds are attached to the deal. Journalists worry that such funding could complicate or even chill CNN’s coverage of the region.

Furthermore, David Ellison’s father, Larry, the Oracle billionaire, is one of the richest men in the world and a close ally of the president. Larry is deeply involved in the Trump-approved deal that kept TikTok online in the United States.

The bidding war abruptly ended on Thursday when Netflix declined to counter Paramount’s latest bid. Paramount’s leaders were caught off guard by Netflix’s capitulation, just like everyone else; thus, the company hasn’t commented yet on its victory, or telegraphed its intentions for CNN.

But Ellison has talked in recent months about his belief that “the majority of the country longs for news that is balanced and fact-based.”

On the day he officially took control of Paramount last August, he expressed big ambitions for the demoralized CBS News division, saying he wanted it to “speak to the biggest audience possible.”

He asserted that CBS News coverage could appeal to “70%” of Americans, ranging “from center left to center right” — a vision of the audience that mirrors CNN’s own.

Arguably, Ellison’s biggest statement about the future of news was with his wallet: In October, he spent $150 million to acquire The Free Press and make its co-founder, Bari Weiss, the editor-in-chief of CBS News.

That decision, and several ensuing controversies at CBS News, have unnerved journalists both inside and outside the company.

And more broadly, Paramount’s attempts to put on a Trump-friendly face — while seeking the Trump administration’s blessing for its business deals — have led to Democratic accusations of corruption and promises of future investigations.

Former FTC commissioner Alvaro Bedoya wrote on X, “To win over Trump, they canceled Colbert, blocked a CECOT investigation, and blocked Talarico. Much more will follow. Block this rotten deal.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Thursday night that he might try to block it: “The California Department of Justice has an open investigation, and we intend to be vigorous in our review.”

But Paramount executives see a path to completing the merger by the end of the year, a source familiar with the company’s thinking said.

Mixed signals in Ellison’s Paramount

Paramount in the Ellison era is a complicated place, with competing narratives about what’s going on.

The same company that cancelled Stephen Colbert’s late-night show on CBS also renewed Jon Stewart’s contract on Comedy Central and ordered more episodes of the Trump-skewering comedy “South Park.”

The same news boss, Weiss, who delayed a “60 Minutes” story that was critical of the Trump administration, also greenlit the story for TV a few weeks later and expressed regret about the controversy.

And the same CEO, Ellison, who has forged a close relationshi

El ministro de Defensa de Pakistán habla de una “guerra abierta” con los talibanes de Afganistán. ¿Qué está pasando?

Kraig Pakulski 0 14 Article rating: No rating

Por Sophia Saifi, Masoud Popalzai y Rhea Mogul, CNN

Afganistán y Pakistán se enfrentan de nuevo con mortíferos bombardeos y fuego de mortero a través de su escarpada frontera. El ministro de Defensa de Islamabad afirmó que la paciencia de su país se había “agotado” y declaró una “guerra abierta” contra su vecino, gobernado por los talibanes.

Se trata del último estallido de un conflicto intermitente que enfrenta al ejército pakistaní, bien financiado, poderoso y con armas nucleares, contra los curtidos combatientes talibanes afganos con décadas de experiencia en combate, y con una victoria sobre las fuerzas estadounidenses y de la OTAN en 2021 tras años de insurgencia.

Esto es lo que sabemos sobre los últimos hechos de violencia, que amenazan con exacerbar la inestabilidad en la región.

El jueves por la noche, el ejército talibán lanzó ataques contra posiciones pakistaníes a lo largo de algunos tramos de su porosa y disputada frontera, que se extiende por 2.577 kilómetros a través de escarpadas montañas y desierto.

Kabul afirmó que esos ataques fueron en represalia por el bombardeo pakistaní de lo que, según afirma, eran campamentos de militantes en Afganistán durante el fin de semana, que dejó al menos 18 muertos.

En respuesta, la madrugada del viernes Pakistán lanzó la operación Ghazab Lil Haqq, u “Operación Furia Justa”.

Los ataques aéreos pakistaníes impactaron Kabul, la provincia sudoriental de Paktia y Kandahar, considerada la cuna espiritual de los talibanes, donde se cree que reside el líder secreto del grupo, Hibatullah Akhundzada.

Pakistán afirmó que sus ataques de la madrugada de este viernes tuvieron como objetivo instalaciones de defensa de los talibanes afganos, una escalada significativa en la estrategia de represalia del país.

Una residente de Kabul describió el momento en que su familia se despertó por una fuerte explosión el viernes.

“Estaba aterrorizada”, dijo la mujer, cuya identidad CNN no revela por razones de seguridad.

“Entonces oímos disparos. Cuando miramos por la ventana de nuestro apartamento, vimos llamas como balas elevándose hacia el cielo”, dijo, al añadir que no podía dormir y que seguía despierta a las 5 de la mañana, temiendo lo que pudiera pasar después.

“Desde la primera explosión, las luces de la mayoría de las casas y apartamentos a nuestro alrededor han estado encendidas”, dijo la mujer. “Estoy segura de que todos los residentes de Kabul están sentados con el temor de ser alcanzados por una bomba”.

Muhammad Ullah, residente del distrito de Baizai, en el noroeste de Pakistán, describió haber escuchado “una serie de explosiones” el jueves por la noche, con sonidos que continuaron hasta la mañana.

Ambas partes han reportado cifras diferentes de víctimas por el ataque del viernes. Pakistán afirmó que su ejército había matado a 133 combatientes talibanes afganos, mientras que Afganistán dijo que ocho de sus soldados habían muerto. CNN no puede verificar los informes de la remota región donde se desarrollan los combates.

En el distrito de Bajaur, en el noroeste de Pakistán, un proyectil de mortero disparado por los talibanes afganos impactó en una vivienda, lo que hirió a cinco personas, entre ellas dos niños y una mujer, según el agente de policía Fazal Akbar.

El ministro de Información de Pakistán también declaró el viernes que militantes del Talibán pakistaní intentaron lanzar ataques con drones en el noroeste desde el interior del país, lo cual fue frustrado por los sistemas antidrones de Pakistán.

“Los incidentes han vuelto a poner de manifiesto los vínculos directos entre el régimen talibán afgano y el terrorismo en Pakistán”, declaró el ministro de Información de Pakistán, Attaullah Tarar.

Sí. A pesar de compartir estrechos lazos económicos y culturales, ambos países tienen una historia compleja.

El pasado octubre

Wholesale inflation was hotter than expected in January

Kraig Pakulski 0 16 Article rating: No rating
A worker handles components for a steel sieve at HCC

By Alicia Wallace, CNN

(CNN) — US wholesale inflation heated up more than expected in January, new data showed Friday.

The Producer Price Index, which measures the average change in prices seen by producers and manufacturers, rose 0.5% last month, a pickup from December’s 0.4% rate, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The annual rate of inflation nudged down to 2.9% from 3%.

Gas and food prices tumbled during the month; however, those decreases were countered by a sharp increase in “trade services,” a category that measures profit margins for wholesalers and retailers.

Trade services can be highly volatile on a monthly basis and economists have closely watched this category during the past year as it could serve as a signal for whether businesses are absorbing the higher costs US importers are paying for tariffs.

Trade services leapt 2.5% in January, a potential indication that costs could be passed along to other businesses and consumers.

Economists were expecting wholesale inflation to increase 0.3%, which would have resulted in a 2.6% annual rate.

When excluding food and energy, the core PPI gauge (which provides a measure of the underlying inflation trend) picked up sharply. Prices rose 0.8% versus 0.6% in December to bring the annual rate to 3.6%, the highest in 10 months.

This story is developing and will be updated.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

The post Wholesale inflation was hotter than expected in January appeared first on News Channel 3-12.

RSS
First28072808280928102812281428152816Last