Details of a new UK clinical trial to assess the risks and benefits of puberty-blocking drugs in children and young people questioning their gender have been announced.
Researchers from King's College London say the trial will involve around 220 children under the age of 16 who are going through puberty, and will examine the impact of the drugs on their physical, social and emotional wellbeing.
Some clinicians and campaigners question whether the trial is ethical.
Prof Emily Simonoff, study leader and professor of child and adolescent psychiatry at King's College London (KCL), said: "We know there are ongoing societal discussions about gender transition, but this research is focused solely on informing and improving healthcare by better understanding how to support the physical and mental health of young people with gender incongruence."
Puberty blockers, also known as puberty suppressing hormones (PSH), are drugs used to delay or prevent puberty happening.
They were used to treat some young people with gender incongruence - when someone's gender doesn't match the sex they were registered at birth - or with gender dysphoria, when it causes significant distress.
As a result of the uncertainty over the safety of the drugs, highlighted by the Cass review into gender care, led by paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass, doctors can now only offer the treatment to under-18s as part of a research study.
Last year, the government brought in a UK-wide indefinite ban on the drugs being prescribed privately or by the NHS to children and young people questioning their gender identity.
The new clinical trial, called Pathway, will involve children who are currently accessing gender services and have a diagnosis of gender incongruence.
They will all have reached puberty, but will be younger than 16 - and will have to meet strict criteria, undergo intensive medical and psychological screening before they are allowed to start taking puberty blockers.
A team of specialist NHS doctors must have a full picture of the young person's wellbeing before deciding if they think they are suitable for the treatment.
The young person will also have to show they have a good enough understanding of the potential impact of taking puberty blockers to give their consent, and their parent or legal guardian will need to agree. They will be provided with ongoing psychological support.
To explore the impact of the drugs, the researchers plan to start one group on the treatment straight away and another group 12 months later. The children in these groups will be chosen randomly.
The KCL researchers said there would be no minimum age for taking the drugs, but puberty normally starts around the age of 11 for girls and 12 for boys.
The trial will look at issues such as bone density, brain development and mental health and wellbeing over time.
The research team said the trial had been given ethical approval and was expected to start in January, with five to six children recruited every month. The first results should be available in around four years.
Alongside this, a larger observational study involving 3,000 children will research different types of support and how effective they are.
The puberty blockers trial has already proved controversial, with campaigners threatening legal action.
Keira Bell, who took the Tavistock gender clinic to court in 2020 after she was given puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones as a teenager, said the trial should be halted immediately. If it is not, she says she and another campaigner will start judicial review proceedings at the High Court.
She said it was "disgusting" that children were being put on the drugs when they had already been banned because they were "unsafe".
Some clinicians from the Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender, which campaigns for rigorous science and improved treatment options for gender-questioning people, have also questioned whether the trial can be carried out ethically.
A spokesperson for charity Stonewall, which campaigns for the rights of LGBTQ+ people, said all young people should have access to the very best medical care, guided by evidence.
"We urge the government and policymakers to invest in delivering excellent healthcare for trans young people and to make sure the voices of trans young people and their families are at its core."
Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has announced she will resign from office in January, an unexpected turn for the high-profile Republican days after a public feud with President Donald Trump.
Greene, who became one of Trump's Maga superstars in US politics, posted a video statement on social media announcing she would leave Congress on 5 January 2026.
"I look forward to a new path ahead," she said in a social media post.
The announcement came just a few days after she and President Donald Trump had vehement disagreements over the release of Justice Department files related to late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
In a video statement, Greene ticked off a list of achievements and criticised the president, who threatened to back a Republican candidate to unseat her in next year's election.
"I have too much self respect and dignity, love my family way too much, and do not want my sweet district to have to endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the President we all fought for, only to fight and win my election while Republicans will likely lose the midterms."
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.
Claudia Winkleman and Tess Daly's last edition of Strictly will air on Christmas Day
George Clarke and several of his fellow Strictly Come Dancing stars were scrolling through their social feeds last month when something stopped them in their tracks.
Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman had just announced in an Instagram video that they were stepping down as presenters of the hit BBC One show after 21 and 11 years respectively.
Not that the contestants of the current series knew - this was news to them.
"I think we found out as everybody else did, just on their socials, which I'm constantly refreshing anyway, as I'm a big fan," said Clarke, a YouTuber and podcaster.
"I don't think anybody expected it."
"We'd just finished on Lorraine, and we just looked at our phones and we saw it on social media," added Emmerdale actor Lewis Cope.
"We were so shocked. And then we were told later, it had to be that way, and they couldn't really give anyone a heads up."
"No one saw it coming," drag queen and Strictly star La Voix said.
Daly and Winkleman's revelation sparked a huge reaction online, with the pair saying in a joint statement at the time that they "were always going to leave together and now feels like the right time".
It's the right time for them, but a rocky time for the show - following several controversies in recent years.
And on Thursday night, it emerged that an unnamed Strictly star was arrested last month on suspicion of rape. Hertfordshire Police said the man was released on bail under investigation.
The development is not understood to be related to the current series of Strictly.
Watch: Claudia and Tess announce they're leaving Strictly Come Dancing
Nearly one month on from Daly and Winkleman's announcement, BBC News spoke to the Strictly contestants ahead of the show heading to the Blackpool Tower Ballroom this weekend.
Much attention has turned to who may replace the presenting pair, with Alan Carr and Holly Willoughby among the names being speculated upon.
EastEnders star Balvinder Sopal said "you feel like it's the end of an era, and you don't know what the show is going to look like in the future".
Speaking to the Rest is Entertainment podcast this week, Kate Phillips, the BBC's chief content officer, admitted her inbox had been "inundated" with people expressing interest in the job.
"We have had so many people who are keen to be considered, which is great."
Blackpool week is here at last
AFP via Getty Images
The 19th century Blackpool Tower ballroom will host Strictly this weekend
For many celebrities and professionals, it's a major goal to reach the annual episode filmed at Blackpool Tower ballroom, which usually marks the halfway point in the competition and is a change of scenery from the usual location of Elstree Studios.
La Voix won't be joining the stars in the 19th century ballroom after being forced to withdraw because of injury, so will get a pass through to next week under Strictly rules, but the six other remaining couples will compete alongside live performances from Lewis Capaldi and Steps.
Former Strictly finalists Ashley Roberts, Danny Mac, Jay McGuiness and Layton Williams will also return for the special.
Drag queen La Voix and partner Aljaž pictured during last weekend's show
Who's dancing to what?
Alex and Johannes - Couple's Choice to History Repeating and Look At Me by Propellerheads ft Miss Shirley Bassey and Geri Halliwell
Amber and Nikita - Quickstep to Reach by S Club 7
Balvinder and Julian - Argentine Tango to The Logical Song by Supertramp
George and Alexis - Salsa to Rock This Party (Everybody Dance Now) by Bob Sinclar
Karen and Carlos - Paso Doble to O Fortuna by Carmina Burana
Lewis and Katya - Charleston to I Bet You Look Good on the Dancefloor by Arctic Monkeys
For Cope, it feels like an "achievement" to have reached Blackpool week.
"Although you have the themed weeks leading up to it, it feels like the first big milestone," he said. "And the fish and chips are really nice."
Former England footballer Karen Carney feels similar.
"I spoke to my sister this morning, and she was like, they're really proud we've reached this milestone. They didn't think I'd be able to do it," she said.
All the stars have been putting in long hours as they get ready for the experience.
But former Love Island winner Amber Davies is trying to approach Blackpool as she would any other week.
"I don't want to look back with regrets. I'm literally pushing my mind and my body to the furthest it can go," she said.
Amber Davies, seen here with dance partner Nikita Kuzmin, topped the leaderboard last week
Controversies linger
Amid the glitz of the dancefloor, Strictly, which has been airing since 2004, has faced multiple controversies in recent years relating to the behaviour of some of its professionals and celebrity guests, with some alleging a toxic culture on the show.
We asked the current stars whether they've felt this to be the case.
Doctor Who actress Alex Kingston, for her part, says she "doesn't read stuff like that" in the press.
"The thing that I have found really so extraordinary and unexpected is that everybody is so lovely," she said.
"No one can make Strictly not exhausting and not painful. Your feet kill and your back hurts and you're trying desperately to hold your physical self together week by week, but the emotional support is incredible," La Voix added.
Since we did those interviews, the Sun reported this week that a male Strictly star is alleged to have raped a woman after a BBC event.
According to the paper, the woman was not a contestant or pro on the show.
And then there's that other BBC show...
Another BBC TV behemoth - Traitors - has risen to new heights this year with Celebrity Traitors, with up to 13 million viewers tuning in - more than double the number who watched this year's Strictly launch show.
So, we asked the contestants, has Traitors stolen Strictly's sparkle this year?
Cope, for his part, isn't too worried. "I think it's brilliant, isn't it? Just more great shows on television," he said. "I think it's only a positive."
"There's enough success in the world for everything," Davies agreed.
"And also," she added, "we've got one diamond amongst both of them - Claudia."
Strictly Come Dancing's Blackpool special is on BBC One and BBC iPlayer at 6.35pm on Saturday.
"We are Radiohead. Pleased to meet you," said Thom Yorke in one of his few addresses to the audience
"Whenever you're ready," says Thom Yorke, adopting the tone of a schoolteacher waiting for an unruly class to settle down, as Radiohead get ready to play their encore at London's O2 Arena.
It's a rare flash of humour from the frontman, whose onstage utterings are mostly limited to mumbled "thank yous". But it's also an acknowledgment of how long fans have been waiting for this show.
It is now 10 years since Radiohead last released new material, and 99 months since their last UK gig.
Anticipation for their return has been building ever since they announced a limited run of concerts in September. Setlists from early shows in Spain and Italy have generated news stories ("Radiohead play Nice Dream for the first time since 2009"), as fans pore over the song choices.
According to one source, they've rehearsed 65 different numbers.
At the O2, the band sift through their entire discography - from the arena rock anthems of 1994's The Bends to the celestial ballads of A Moon Shaped Pool, via the layered electronics of Kid A, currently celebrating its 25th anniversary.
There are some signs that Radiohead are a bit rusty. A few timing and tuning issues crop up, which could easily be the result of a first night in a new venue, but which feel odd for a band of such technical proficiency.
But when it comes together, it's a rapturous, spell-binding sight.
Band members switched instruments several times within songs
They begin with the spacey, hypnotic Planet Telex, and follow it up with a crunchy version of 2+2=5, written in 2003 as a reaction to George W Bush's "War on Terror", and taking on new urgency in a world where political norms have seemingly been turned upside down.
By the third song, Sit Down, Stand Up, they're flexing their musical muscles, with an extended outro of percussive lunacy, aided by US session musician Chris Vatalaro.
His addition to the line-up is a giveaway. Radiohead's secret sauce has always been their rhythm section - who manage to locate sinewy, danceable grooves even when presented with their bandmate's most challenging material.
The prowling bassline of National Anthem and the slamming drum loops of Idioteque, in particular, give the audience ample opportunity to jump up and down.
That said, it's amusing to watch bassist Colin Greenwood try (and fail) to get the crowd clapping in time to the glitchy and unconventional rhythms of 15 Step.
Instead, most of them simply bob their heads up and down in unified appreciation of the music. At times, it looks like a convention of nodding dogs.
Cushioned between the more experimental songs, however, were the real crowd-pleasers: An elegiac version of Lucky, a beautifully twisted No Surprises and a genuinely sublime version of Weird Fishes/Arpeggi.
I have a theory, however, that the band's notorious dislike of "the old stuff" is an elaborate ruse. They've never really stopped playing songs from The Bends and OK Computer - but the suggestion they won't makes it all the more exciting when they break into something anthemic like Fake Plastic Trees.
That song opened Friday night's encore, which dwelt largely on their 90s material, including Let Down - a deep cut that's had a new lease of life on TikTok - and the epic Paranoid Android.
Alex Lake / @twoshortdays
The tour continues until 12 December
Introducing a muscular version of Just, Yorke explains that it was written "on a freezing cold farm in 1994", in a period where they thought they'd only be remembered for one song: Their 1992 breakout Creep.
We all know the story ended differently, but the reunion does find Radiohead in a strange position.
This tour comes with no new material, and the last seven years have been so fertile with side projects, most notably Thom Yorke and guitarist Jonny Greenwood's three albums as The Smile, that it seemed Radiohead's members might have permanently moved on.
Several factors got in the way - grief, parenthood, mental health and rumours of intra-band tension over Israel.
As recently as August, Yorke said a reunion was "not on the cards from where I'm sitting".
All of which makes the decision to play in the round, packed like sardines in a crushed tin can, all the more significant.
The group are symbolically returning to the rehearsal room, playing off each other as much as they are playing to the audience.
Yorke glides across the stage, doing that dance he does, moving from acoustic guitar to electric piano and back again.
During Idioteque, guitarist Ed O'Brien catches him mid-transit, and they holler the lyrics directly to one another. At the start of Jigsaw Falling Into Place, Yorke and Greenwood face each other and play duelling guitars.
It suggests the tour has been an act of healing, even if the band have been assigned separate dressing rooms for the first time in their career.
Whether that leads to anything more is still up for debate. "We haven't thought past the tour," Yorke recently told the Times. "I'm just stunned we got this far."
The delighted fans who queued for the Tube home singing Karma Police will be hoping everything is in its right place for a fully-fledged comeback.
Watch: "I’ll be cheering for him" - Trump praises Mamdani after first meeting
US President Donald Trump met New York City's newly elected mayor Zohran Mamdani at the White House in what was billed as the political showdown of the year - but instead became a praise fest.
In his election victory speech, the self-described Democratic socialist mayor called Trump a "despot."
And before Friday's meeting, the president's spokeswoman had billed Mamdani's visit as a "communist coming to the White House".
But standing side-by-side in the Oval Office, the two men struck a surprisingly conciliatory tone.
Over and over, both men emphasised their shared interest in addressing New York City's affordability crisis. They smiled often, and Trump even appeared amused as reporters asked him about the political attacks Mamdani had fired his way.
The tone of the meeting appeared to strike political observers off guard, but offered a signal that both men understand that tackling the affordability crisis is critical to their political success.
Whether the truce will last once Mamdani takes office on 1 January remains to be seen.
Until then, "I'll be cheering for him," Trump said.
Trump full of praise
The conciliatory tone was evident from the moment they started speaking to the press.
Facing the media after a private meeting, Mamdani stood to Trump's right with his hand clasped, as the president sat behind the Resolute Desk. Their body language was relaxed – particularly Trump.
Not only did Trump refrain from attacking Mamdani, he actually praised him numerous times.
Trump expressed hope that Mamdani would be a "really great mayor".
Later, the president added he was "confident that he can do a very good job".
Brushing off questions about jihad and fascism
Getty Images
Mamdani and Trump traded political barbs throughout the mayoral election. A reporter in the room reminded the two men that Trump had called Mamdani a "communist" and Mamdani referred to the president as a "despot".
But today, both deflected multiple questions about their previous statements and pivoted back to praise.
Trump even let Mamdani answer a question about whether the mayor-elect thought the president was a "fascist".
"That's ok, you can just say yes," Trump interjected, giving Mamdani a light tap on the arm and smiling. "It's easier than explaining."
The closest Trump got to criticising Mamdani's politics was telling reporters, "He's got views that are little out there".
Perhaps most strikingly, Trump swatted away an attack that one of his top political allies running for governor of New York had lodged against Mamdani.
"Do you think you're standing next to a 'jihadist' right now in the oval office?" a reporter asked, quoting Republican Congresswoman Elise Stefanik.
"No I don't," Trump quickly said.
"You say things sometimes in a campaign," Trump said of Stefanik. "She's a very capable person."
Bonding over New York roots
Mamdani and Trump have something in common: they're both New Yorkers, and both have called the borough of Queens home.
Trump's childhood home is in the neighbourhood of Jamaica Estates, while Mamdani currently resides in Astoria.
The two had a "shared love" of the city, Mamdani said.
Though Trump rarely spends time in his namesake Manhattan skyscraper these days, he spoke fondly of his hometown throughout the news conference.
"This city could be unbelievable, if he could be a spectacular success, I'll be very happy," Trump said.
At one point, Trump even suggested that in a different political lifetime, he would have liked to be mayor of New York himself.
Affordability focus
Perhaps part of the reason the two men appeared in lock step on Friday was their shared focus on cost-of-living issues.
Trump won his re-election last year by relentlessly hammering the issue of high inflation that had frustrated voters in 2024. As consumers grow restless about the cost of groceries, housing, and other essentials, Trump has tried to convey a message of economic stability.
But in elections earlier this month, Republicans struggled and Democrats won key races. All eyes are peering forward to the midterm elections next year, where control of the US Congress will be up for grabs.
During his election campaign, Mamdani maintained a laser-focus on the lack of affordable housing and proposed freezing rent increases on certain rent-stabilised apartments, among other housing proposals.
Mamdani said he and the president had discussed how to "deliver affordability to New Yorkers".
Whenever he was asked a question about their differing views, the mayor-elect brought the conversation back to this topic.
Facing one question about their different views on achieving peace in the Middle East, Mamdani responded that Trump voters had expressed to him a wish for "an end to forever wars" and for leaders to address "the cost of living crisis".
A complication for Republicans' strategy?
There are still major political issues that could quickly put the two men back in opposition.
A reporter asked about the potential for federal immigration enforcement in the city, which has outraged Democrats and some immigrant communities in New York.
Mamdani said he discussed federal immigration enforcement operations in New York, and the concerns from residents about how they are being conducted.
Trump said they discussed crime more than immigration.
"He doesn't want to see crime and I don't want to see crime," the president said. He had "very little doubt" the two would get along on that issue.
Trump even stunningly said he would feel safe living in a Mamdani-led New York.
But as the Trump administration continues to set aggressive deportation goals, it's possible that the two men could wind up in opposition to each other once again.
Also, another potential problem lingers beyond the pair and their specific policies.
Republicans have hinted that they want to use Mamdani as a political foil in the upcoming 2026 midterm elections, where control of the US Congress will be on the ballot.
But in the Oval Office while praising Mamdani, the president said he believed the new mayor would "surprise some conservative people".
This could complicate Trump's own political party's strategy.
In my many years as a journalist, I never thought I would be asking someone how it feels to have trout sperm injected into their face.
And yet, here I am.
Abby Warnes is lying on a large, black padded chair at a small aesthetics clinic in south Manchester.
She winces as a small cannula is delicately inserted into her cheek.
"Ouch. Ouch," she exclaims.
I should make it clear that 29-year-old Abby is not actually receiving a pure dose of trout sperm.
The lower part of her face is being injected with tiny fragments of DNA, known as polynucleotides, which have been extracted from either trout or salmon sperm.
Why? Well, interestingly, our DNA is pretty similar to that of a fish.
So the hope is Abby's body will not only welcome these tiny strands of fish DNA, her skin cells will be spurred into action, producing more collagen and elastin, two proteins which are vital for maintaining the structural integrity of our skin.
For Abby, the aim is to freshen her skin, keep it healthy, and hopefully, treat the acne she's lived with for many years by reducing scarring and redness.
"I just want to target those problem areas," she explains.
Abby is having injections in her lower face to help rejuvenate her skin and tackle “problem areas”
Polynucleotides are being touted as the next big skincare "miracle" and are rapidly gaining popularity after a number of celebrities have spoken candidly about their "salmon sperm facials".
Earlier this year, Charli XCX told her nine million Instagram followers that she felt "fillers are kind of over now", and explained she had moved onto polynucleotides, which are "kinda like deep vitamins".
Kim and Khloe Kardashian are also reportedly avid fans. And when asked about her skincare routine on a recent episode of Jimmy Kimmel Live, Jennifer Aniston responded: "Don't I have beautiful salmon skin?"
EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock
Charli XCX says she uses polynucleotides which are "kinda like" injectable vitamins for the skin
So, despite their fishy beginnings, are polynucleotides transforming skincare?
"We are having a Benjamin Button moment," Suzanne Mansfield, who works for aesthetics company Dermafocus, tells me.
That's a reference to the 2008 film The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, where Brad Pitt plays a man who ages backwards. By the time he's in his later years, he has the skin of a baby's bottom.
While such an effect is highly unlikely and would probably be a tad disconcerting, Ms Mansfield says polynucleotides are forging the way when it comes to regenerative skincare.
"All we are doing, by using it in the aesthetics industry," she says, "is enhancing something the body already does. That's why these are so special."
But they also come with a pretty hefty price tag.
A single session of polynucleotide injections can cost anywhere from £200 to £500 - and it's recommended you have three of these over several weeks.
After that clinics tend to advise you need to top up every six to nine months to maintain the look.
Back at the clinic, Abby's treatment is almost finished.
"Just one area left," Helena Dunk, the aesthetic nurse practitioner who owns the clinic, Skin HD, reassures her.
She says polynucleotides have massively increased in popularity over the past 18 months.
"Half my clients really notice a huge difference - their skin feels more hydrated, healthier, younger - while the other half don't see such a big change. But their skin does tend to feel tighter and fresher."
Abby has already had the area under her eyes injected as part of a three-course treatment at the clinic - and she's really pleased with the results.
She received lots of tiny injections of polynucleotides, which was a "pretty painful procedure", but says it's helped reduce the dark circles under her eyes.
Charlotte Bickley
Charlotte says she has been left with black rings under her eyes after being injected with polynucleotides before her wedding
Consultant dermatologist Dr John Pagliaro, based in Brisbane, Australia, says that while we know that nucleotides play an important role in our bodies - they are the building blocks of our DNA for a start - he questions whether "injecting salmon DNA, cut into little pieces" into our faces is going to work as well as our own nucleotides.
"We do not have good, strong data," he says. "As a medical specialist, I would want to see at least a few more years of big, credible studies showing safety and efficacy before I started using them in my practice. We're just not there yet."
Charlotte Bickley describes her foray into the world of polynucleotides as "salmon-gate".
The 31-year-old from New York had the treatment last year as part of her "wedding glow up", shortly before she was due to get married.
But Charlotte ended up with a skin infection, inflammation and darker rings under her eyes than before she had the treatment.
"I got the complete opposite of what I wanted," she says. "I trusted that doctor, but he's left me scarred."
Charlotte believes she was injected too deeply under her eyes, causing a negative reaction. There can be side effects - such as redness, swelling and bruising but these tend to be temporary.
In some cases, people can have an allergic reaction, or, if polynucleotides are not injected properly, there are longer term risks, such as skin pigmentation and infections.
Polynucleotides are widely used across the UK. They are registered as medical devices with the Medicines Health and Regulatory Authority (MHRA) but they are not regulated like medicines.
They have not been approved by the UK’s equivalent in the US, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
"I just keep thinking, 'Why did I go through with it?'" Charlotte says. "When something goes wrong on my face I hyperfixate on it."
She's paid thousands in medical bills to try to rectify the situation, but 10 months on, there's still some scarring below her eyes.
"I would never have salmon DNA injected into my face again," Charlotte says, "ever."
Ashton Collins, director of Save Face, an organisation which campaigns for better regulation of the cosmetic industry and who runs a government-approved register of clinics in the UK, says polynucleotides are generally considered a safe treatment when administered by a medically-trained professional and the brand of polynucleotides used is from a reputable company.
"But, we are now seeing products coming onto the market that haven't been tested properly, that's the worry," she says.
Dr Sophie Shotter, president of the British College of Aesthetic Medicine, agrees.
"Due to the lack of regulation, anyone can use products that have not been robustly tested. It is a real issue."
In her opinion, are polynucleotides effective though?
"I have them on my shelf, in my toolbox. I definitely offer them to clients, who want a natural look and want to potentially invest long-term," Dr Shotter says.
"Polynucleotides as a treatment is not the panacea. There are plenty of other treatments out there that can do similar, and have more data behind them."
There is no one treatment that will work for everyone, she adds.
"We all respond differently to different things, and that is not always predictable."
Several of Saturday's papers lead with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's "agonising choice", as the Daily Mail writes, over whether to accept a US-backed peace deal with Russia. "Trump turns the screw" is the Mail's headline, which reports that Ukraine has been told it has until Thursday to accept the "humiliating peace deal".
Zelensky warns his country is facing a choice between "losing US support or forfeiting its dignity" over the peace deal, according to the Financial Times. European allies are caught "off-guard" by the plan, which was drafted by aides of the US and Russian presidents, and say it amounts to "capitulation" to Moscow's demands. Zelensky says he will not reject the initiative "out of hand", but will "offer alternatives" in dialogue with Washington.
In an address to the country, the Ukrainian president says his country faces its "most difficult moment in history", the Independent leads. Elsewhere, the paper reports on a "remarkable" 19-wicket first day of the Ashes in Perth, in which captain Ben Stokes led a "ferocious fightback against Australia".
Trump confirms the Thursday deadline for Ukraine to respond to the peace plan, but the White House denies reports that the US could "cut off" intelligence sharing if Zelensky rejects it, the Times reports. European leaders, alongside the UK, are working to "strengthen" the deal, "amid concern that Ukraine would be at risk of further attacks if it weakened its armed forces".
The Daily Mirror leads on the jailing for 10-and-a half years of an "ally" of Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, for accepting pro-Russia bribes. Former Reform UK in Wales leader Nathan Gill, whom the paper describes as a "former party bigwig", took up to £40,000 from tycoon Oleg Voloshyn for "making pro-Russian speeches".
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer is urging Farage to "root out links between Reform UK and Russia" following the conviction of Gill, the Guardian reports. The paper says the government believes Reform UK is "vulnerable" to criticism that Farage and his allies have been "too pro-Russia". Police have said there was no link to Farage in their investigation into Gill.
The Conservative Party would retain just 14 seats if an election was called now, according to internal party polling leaked to the Telegraph. An insider tells the paper that the party faces an "existential threat" from Reform UK, which the poll forecasts would win a 46-seat majority. Another source says the Tories are at risk of being "consigned to the history books".
Challenges facing the Labour Party are the focus for the i Weekend, which reports that the PM is "losing control" of his party's MPs ahead of the Budget. Some Labour MPs have become "a bit feral" over uncertainty about Sir Keir's leadership, according to ex-advisers to Downing Street. Backbenchers and ministers are urging more help for "hard-up people" amid the "cost of living crunch".
Sarah Ferguson is "considering offers" for a "tell-all TV interview", the first since her ex-husband Andrew Mountbatten Windsor relinquished his titles over links with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the Sun reports. Some US networks are "willing to pay six-figure sums to secure the chat" with the former Duchess of York.
MPs are considering whether to establish an "injury-in-service medal" for police officers who are forced to quit after sustaining injuries during active duty, the Daily Express reports.
Finally, the Daily Star leads on a boss who has mandated his staff to take time off to see their children's Christmas events - including pantos. "Oh, yes he did," the paper writes.
There's a new song doing the rounds, and in the immortal words of Kylie Minogue, you just can't get it out of your head.
But what if it was created by a robot, or the artist themself is a product of artificial intelligence (AI)? Do streaming sites have an obligation to label music as AI-generated? And does it even matter, if you like what you hear?
A survey published last week suggested 97% of respondents could not spot an AI-generated song. But there are some telltale signs - if you know where to look.
Here's a quick guide.
No live performances or social media presence
AI music became one of last summer's hottest topics after accusations the band The Velvet Sundown was AI-generated sent them viral.
The band, who had no record label and a minimal social media footprint, quickly racked up hundreds of thousands of monthly listeners on Spotify after releasing two albums just weeks apart - and the music world grew suspicious.
The band initially denied the claims, later describing themselves as a synthetic project "guided by human creative direction, and composed, voiced and visualised with the support of artificial intelligence".
They claimed the project was an "artistic provocation", not a trick, but many fans felt betrayed.
Internet sleuths were suspicious of the band's airbrushed photos, which featured non-descript backgrounds and a warm orange filter.
There was also no record of them having performed live – no glowing reviews from fans posted online, nor any concert photos or videos. The band members had not given interviews and did not appear to have individual social media accounts.
Looking into the real-life and social media presence of an artist can be one helpful indicator of whether or not they are real. But experts tell the BBC that fast-developing, sophisticated technology means it is increasingly hard to know when a song has been made using AI.
Still, while it may be tricky, they say there are signs listeners can be alert to.
'A mashup of rock hits in a blender'
When LJ Rich started creating AI music around five years ago, she recalls how it could only generate three seconds at a time, taking about 10 hours to create a minute of audio.
Now, an entire song can be summoned rapidly with a single prompt, sparking what industry experts have described as an "explosion" of AI music, sometimes referred to as "slop" - on streaming platforms.
A song with a formulaic feel - sweet but without much substance or emotional weight - can be a sign of AI, says the musician and technology speaker, as well as vocals that feel breathless.
AI songs tend to stick to generic verse-chorus structures, and usually don't have a satisfying ending. AI is also more likely to create lyrics that follow a correct grammatical structure, says Rich, whereas some of the most beautiful or memorable words penned by humans don't always make sense.
Just ask Alicia Keys and her "concrete jungle where dreams are made of", or The Rolling Stones and their flirtation with double negatives in (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction.
"If it doesn't feel emotional, it's a really big part," the former BBC Click presenter continues. "Does it create that tension and resolution that is a fundamental part of the music that we love? Does it have a story inside it?"
Another tell-tale sign is unrealistic levels of productivity. Professor Gina Neff, from the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy at the University of Cambridge, describes how one artist was recently believed to be AI after dropping multiple soundalike albums simultaneously.
Their songs resembled a mashup of 80s rock bands – like "really classic rock hits that had been put in a blender".
"This will be fine for background music for most people," she continues, "but it won't work for creating the superstars of the future who, of course, draw on the past but then make something completely new out of it."
'AI hasn't felt heartbreak yet'
Sometimes, what might stand out is a song that sounds almost too perfect, lacking minor flaws and variances.
This could mean no strain in the vocals, and overly polished production, according to Tony Rigg, music industry advisor and lecturer in music industry management at the University of Lancashire.
He adds that odd phrasing, unnatural emotional delivery, and lyrics that feel generic or repetitive can also be clues.
"AI hasn't felt heartbreak yet... It knows patterns," he explains. "What makes music human is not just sound but the stories behind it."
It's also worth paying close attention to the vocals. AI "singers" often sound a little slurred. Consonants and plosives (hard sounds like "p" and "t") aren't quite right. You might hear "ghost" harmonies, where backing vocals appear and disappear at random.
However, Rigg calls these signs "hints not proof", acknowledging it is not very easy for the casual listener to detect AI-generated songs.
Getty Images
Musician Imogen Heap has developed an AI voice model called ai.Mogen
As well as being used to generate full songs, AI is also becoming a tool some established artists are using to support their creativity.
There currently isn't any obligation – or consistent way – for artists to let fans know if and how they are using AI.
Some are very open: the Beatles, for example, used machine learning to extract the voice of John Lennon from a 1970s cassette recording to release what they called their "last song", Now and Then, in 2023.
And artists including Imogen Heap and Timbaland have created AI personas and released singles under their names.
Last month, Heap released the song Aftercare with her AI model ai.Mogen, trained on her voice.
She created the voice model as a chatbot - a "desperate attempt" to keep up with a deluge of messages and requests including from fans - but more recently, it has featured on several songs and allowed Heap to take part in more collaborations than she otherwise would have due to time constraints.
While "it does sound different if you really know my voice", she says she has put a lot of work into making the AI version of her voice sound human and doesn't think listeners would be able to tell.
Heap isn't trying to mislead listeners – ai.Mogen is listed as a co-contributor on the track.
But she hopes if people feel a human connection to the song, without already knowing part of the vocals are sung by her AI model, they might reconsider any preconceived negative ideas or fears they have about AI.
"I hope that people listen, don't realise, find peace in that," she tells the BBC.
She says she isn't against using AI to actually create music, but it's just not something she's got around to doing yet.
Heap believes there should be more transparency around what goes into a song, and how AI has been used.
Citing the example of someone reading the label of a microwave ready meal so they know the ingredients, she says: "We need that for music, and we need that for AI."
Steps toward transparency
There is currently no legal obligation for streaming platforms to label AI-generated songs, despite increasing calls for them to signpost such tracks.
In January, the streaming platform Deezer launched an AI detection tool, followed this summer by a system which tags AI-generated music.
Deezer says its detection system can flag tracks made with the most prolific AI music creation tools, and is working on expanding its ability to detect music made by others. It says the risk of false positives - eg incorrectly flagging a track created by a human - is very low.
This week, the company said a third (34%) of content uploaded to its platform was fully AI-generated – about 50,000 tracks a day.
Manuel Moussallam, Deezer's director of research, says his team was so surprised by how many tracks were flagged up by the detector when it first launched they were "pretty convinced we had an issue".
The tool quickly flagged up the music by The Velvet Sundown – the band who went viral over the summer – as being "100% AI-generated".
Other platforms have recently announced steps toward more transparency.
In September, Spotify said it would roll out a new spam filter later this year to identify "bad actors", and prevent "slop" being recommended to listeners. In the past year, it has removed more than 75 million spam tracks.
It is also supporting a way to enable artists to say where and how AI was used in a track, through a system by a consortium of industry members called DDEX. This information will be included in the metadata of a track and displayed on its app.
Spotify says it is about recognising listeners' desire for more information, as well as "strengthening trust".
"It's not about punishing artists who use AI responsibly or down-ranking tracks for disclosing information about how they were made."
After all that - does it matter?
If you've fallen hard for a new artist, does it matter if they or their songs are made by AI?
Some believe the presence of AI is irrelevant – engagement is driven by enjoyment, and music people love is already serving its primary purpose.
Others say music fans should be able to make informed choices about what they listen to.
The firing put the school at the center of national debates over gender identity and academic freedom. A faculty panel ruled unanimously against the termination.
South Africa held a "social summit" ahead of the main event, in a bid to involve civil society voices in the G20's decisions
When it assumed the presidency of the G20 last year, South Africa hoped that as the first African country to host the gathering of world leaders, it could champion issues that mattered the most to developing nations.
For instance, it wanted the 20 heads of state from the world's biggest economies to consider arguments that borrowing should be cheaper for developing countries, which pay two to four times more in interest on debts than more advanced economies.
Other themes of this weekend's summit include securing climate change financing, increasing the participation of African countries in multilateral forums and ensuring that they get the best value out of their critical minerals.
But so far, discourse surrounding the meeting has been dominated by Donald Trump's very public decision not to attend.
The relationship between the two countries has become increasingly fraught over the past year - the US expelled the South African ambassador to Washington, cut some of its aid funding and slapped South Africa with tariffs of 30% (the highest rate in sub-Saharan Africa).
And finally, after initially saying he would send Vice-President JD Vance to the G20 summit, Trump abruptly announced two weeks ago that no US representatives would attend.
The government in South Africa's capital, Pretoria, has tried to maintain a defiant but diplomatic tone. It has firmly denied claims of a white genocide and insisted that the summit would proceed with or without the US.
In a sudden about face, and with less than 48 hours to go before the G20 conference, the US announced that it would be sending a small team of its in-country diplomats to the handover ceremony, but that it wouldn't take part in any discussions.
As tension between the two nations shows no sign of letting up, there are concerns that South African diplomats may be frozen out of meetings when the US takes over the G20 presidency next year.
South Africa's Finance Minister, Enoch Godongwana, told reporters earlier this week that there's only one way they would not attend next year's meetings.
"We are members of the G20, we're not an invited country. So we don't need an invitation from anybody," he said.
"If the United States do not want us to participate, the only way they can do it is to decline us visas."
Bloomberg via Getty Images
At a meeting earlier this year, Donald Trump ambushed Cyril Ramaphosa, South Africa's president, with widely discredited claims that white South Africans were being persecuted
So will South Africa manage to reach its aims without the presence of the world's wealthiest nation? Professor Richard Calland, from the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, thinks it can.
"I think that people who are serious-minded in their analysis will not attach much weight to [the US' absence]," he says.
"Ironically, the absence of President Trump may create more space for real consensus, because people won't be constantly looking over their shoulder at him and trying to anticipate or navigate his conduct and his positioning."
Prof Calland adds that the absence of the US may enable middle powers to step up and push for the reforms they want by issuing a joint declaration.
Answering reporters' questions at the summit's venue in Johannesburg on Monday, South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola echoed this sentiment.
"[The United States] are absent, so in their absence, the countries that are present must make a decision.
"We are forging ahead to persuade the countries that are present that we must adopt a leaders' declaration because the institution cannot be bogged down by someone who's absent," he said.
The leaders' declaration is a culmination of work done throughout the year to build consensus on issues affecting the global economy, including trade barriers, technological advancements and climate change. It outlines what decisions the members have agreed to act on moving forward.
President Trump isn't the only head of state who will not be attending. China's Xi Jinping is sending his Premier Li Qiang, who has represented the president in a number of meetings this year.
Mr Lamola was keen to downplay the significance of these absences, saying sometimes heads of state are not able to attend major events, and it is "nothing abnormal" for them to send a replacement.
Other global powers have expressed their support of South Africa's presidency of the G20, including France, the UK and the European Union, which signed a deal with South Africa on Thursday agreeing to boost the extraction and, more importantly, the domestic processing, of critical minerals.
African countries have long argued that processing minerals in their countries before exporting them would boost their economies by providing much-needed development, jobs and income.
These are the types of initiatives that Pretoria has spent the year lobbying for across various working groups and ministerial meetings.
South Africa is the last G20 country to take over the presidency in this current cycle. It's also the last country in the global south to host the gathering. Indonesia, India and Brazil have led the summit over the past three years.
As such, the South African government says it wants to use its presidency to bridge the developmental divide between the global north and south. It wants to push for equity, sustainability and shared prosperity.
Although building consensus through multilateral institutions like the G20 is becoming increasingly fraught in a divided world, Prof Calland argues that it is needed more than ever.
"Human life on Earth is facing an existential set of challenges, whether it's climate change, demographic shifts, technological revolution and so on.
"All of these are hugely difficult pressure points for human society. And you can't deal with them unless there is international collaboration and cooperation," he says.
President Trump and his supporters argue that multilateral organisations do little to change real people's lives, preferring instead bilateral deals done directly between two countries.
But South Africa and other developing countries argue that issues like reducing the cost of borrowing for poorer countries require the input of international institutions like the IMF and cannot be done through one-on-one deals.
In many ways, South Africa's presidency of the G20 is part of a wider debate around multilateralism and its effectiveness.
If South Africa is able to convince other G20 members to issue a joint declaration on Sunday, it might have succeeded in proving that consensus can be reached without the participation of the world's most powerful country.
Zohran Mamdani and President Trump seemed to cast aside their months of traded insults, a development that seemed good for New York City but odd to some followers.
After a private meeting in the Oval Office, Zohran Mamdani, the mayor-elect of New York City, and President Trump held a joint news conference that was strikingly friendly and warm.
Ms. Greene, who was elected in 2020, had positioned herself as a die-hard Trump supporter until a series of recent ruptures with the president, who recently unendorsed her.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, the onetime MAGA loyalist who rose to prominence for her ardent support of President Donald Trump, says she is resigning from Congress after a public feud with him.
In a statement released Friday, the Georgia Republican criticized the direction of the political movement she once supported.
Her relationship with Trump soured after she joined calls from Democrats to release files related to the investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which Trump had initially opposed. Trump subsequently rescinded his endorsement of Greene and broke with her last week.
Greene said she will step down from office on Jan. 5.
Login
