:01:28. > :01:36.Not showing any favouritism at all. I will start with The Times. 1
:01:37. > :01:42.million stolen bank cards for sale. Proper journalism at work!
:01:43. > :01:49.Apparently 100,000 Britons on this site, you can buy their details.
:01:50. > :01:53.They went in and they found all the details. What is particularly
:01:54. > :01:59.surprising is, this is not on the dark web, it is only normal
:02:00. > :02:06.internet. It looks like a kind of consumer website. So, it is an
:02:07. > :02:09.interesting thing, around ?27 billion a year is lost on this kind
:02:10. > :02:17.of online fraud. It is an increasing problem. It is bad!
:02:18. > :02:24.It is staggering how easy it is to do. A fantastic piece of journalism
:02:25. > :02:29.by the Times. They went to the site which has a help desk. It seems to
:02:30. > :02:34.be legitimate and typed in the details and got her debit card
:02:35. > :02:38.number and security code and expiry date, everything you need to make
:02:39. > :02:41.the payments online. I think people sitting round the breakfast table on
:02:42. > :02:45.Saturday morning will be staggered how easy it is. People think it will
:02:46. > :02:49.never happen to them. Everyone thinks it will never happen to them
:02:50. > :02:51.until it does and you have to be careful about your password. This
:02:52. > :02:57.investigation says that loads of people use their mother's maiden
:02:58. > :03:01.name. We know that as one of the key questions that you ask and so, those
:03:02. > :03:06.details are conveniently on the site. I think the lesson to all of
:03:07. > :03:10.us, is use complicated passwords, don't use things which are obvious
:03:11. > :03:14.and don't use things which people can find on social media like your
:03:15. > :03:19.birth date on the names of your kids or the name of your cat. I did a
:03:20. > :03:23.really interesting thing about fraud we went on a hacker course to become
:03:24. > :03:27.hackers and it was very, very easy to hack into other people's stuff by
:03:28. > :03:33.looking at their Facebook accounts. It is incredible what people find
:03:34. > :03:40.out about you online. Let's look at The Telegraph. Health watchdog will
:03:41. > :03:51.troll social media for anythingtive comments about hospitals.
:03:52. > :03:55.Is this really what they need to do? People don't know how good their
:03:56. > :03:58.local Health Services are. They have started to bring in rating systems
:03:59. > :04:03.online, but it is based on a couple of reviews. So I think, it is
:04:04. > :04:07.well-intentioned to try and get other bits of information out there
:04:08. > :04:11.from people's Facebook and other ways, but the question people wonder
:04:12. > :04:17.is, is that going to give you a great accurate picture? Do people go
:04:18. > :04:23.on Facebook and moan about their local NHS service? Ben, you're
:04:24. > :04:25.wrong. At the moment, there are Ofsted-style ratings and inspections
:04:26. > :04:28.where people go into hospitals and have a look at it. They are cutting
:04:29. > :04:33.the number of inspections, they are bringing it down by 25% and instead,
:04:34. > :04:37.they're going to go and trawl social media to see if people are moaning
:04:38. > :04:42.about things. This is a disguise for the fact that actually, the quality
:04:43. > :04:49.Care Commission are cutting back on inspections spectacularly and in the
:04:50. > :04:55.wake of Morcambe Bay that's something we should be worried about
:04:56. > :05:00.and the Facebook thing is a gimmick! She can be quite forthright, but we
:05:01. > :05:04.encourage that. I will humbly put forward the idea that going to
:05:05. > :05:08.different data sources and what people are saying outside the
:05:09. > :05:14.official inspectorate whenever he does up their ties isn't a bad thing
:05:15. > :05:17.even if it is not done properly. A 25% cut in the inspections is not
:05:18. > :05:23.good. They have got to bridge that gap in some way. Facebook won't
:05:24. > :05:28.help. Shall we look at the FT? Cameron dilutes sugar tax plan with
:05:29. > :05:33.levy threat if food producers fail to act. We have been waiting forever
:05:34. > :05:36.to have this obesity strategy published and whether or not there
:05:37. > :05:43.will be a sugar tax of any sort? Jamie Oliver writing in the Sunday
:05:44. > :05:48.Times last week which has been re-launched on Sunday, he wrote
:05:49. > :05:53.about and he was on the BBC and Andrew Marr talking about how he was
:05:54. > :05:58.going to go Ninja and he was furious that he thought that Cameron was
:05:59. > :06:02.backing out of the sugar tax and what the FT is telling us tomorrow,
:06:03. > :06:08.implies that's the case. He is going to make them, he says, Coca-Cola
:06:09. > :06:15.will make a modest cut to the sugar content of their product. Oh well
:06:16. > :06:19.done! Is there a better way to go, to go voluntarily and you take them
:06:20. > :06:23.with you? The idea that Cameron is ditching the idea that he backed
:06:24. > :06:28.previously is misleading because he was always against a sugar tax. He
:06:29. > :06:33.said, "I am against taxation as a Tory." He said a month ago, I will
:06:34. > :06:37.consider it, but he is always one for trying to use this as a way to
:06:38. > :06:42.strong arm companies to do these measures. What you mean Ben is
:06:43. > :06:46.Eleanor you are wrong. I think you're right that Cameron is trying
:06:47. > :06:51.to wriggle out of this. We have got a massive obesity problem. One in
:06:52. > :06:56.three children are obese. There is a massive problem with fizzy drinks
:06:57. > :06:59.and sugary snackses a parent I really want something to be done
:07:00. > :07:04.about this. They have done it with salt. They have reduced the amount
:07:05. > :07:11.of salt in products, but a big stick saying if you don't do this in a
:07:12. > :07:17.serious way, we will come after you. There is a tussle about whether the
:07:18. > :07:21.Government should hammer advertisers for advertising during any time
:07:22. > :07:24.before 9pm or not. The Culture Secretary is one side and the Health
:07:25. > :07:31.Secretary is on another. It is worth watching that. I thought we hadn't
:07:32. > :07:37.much time, but I think we're OK. Daily Mail, police, "We won't name
:07:38. > :07:41.fugitives. Suspected killers and rapists are on the run." You guess
:07:42. > :07:46.it is because of Human Rights? It sends alarm bells flashing in The
:07:47. > :07:50.Daily Mail hall. It will infuriate families across the country if they
:07:51. > :07:54.think their children, their relatives are at a threat from
:07:55. > :07:58.people who the police are refusing to name. They do name and put out
:07:59. > :08:03.the photos when dangerous people are on the loose, clearly some suspects
:08:04. > :08:09.are named. This is to say they won't release the name of people because
:08:10. > :08:15.of data protection, it is classic Daily Mail because Data Protection
:08:16. > :08:18.Act send them into a frenzy. The police have sometimes used data
:08:19. > :08:24.protection and maybe they have been wrong. They asked for freedom
:08:25. > :08:28.information requests from 45 police forces asking who is on your wanted
:08:29. > :08:32.list? This is rapist, murderers and 21 forces said they wouldn't release
:08:33. > :08:35.the details on the grounds of data protection and the privacy grounds
:08:36. > :08:40.in the Human Rights Act. People might not always like this, but even
:08:41. > :08:44.criminals have Human Rights. Well, people are meant to be considered
:08:45. > :08:49.innocent until proven guilty. But even when they are in prison, they
:08:50. > :08:54.still have Human Rights? They do, Martine. I'm making the point,
:08:55. > :09:01.people may not like it. It is your children who are possibly at risk.
:09:02. > :09:06.Good Telegraph point! Lets look at the Independent. A sad
:09:07. > :09:13.day. While we can. RIP. No more dead tree edition. Well, we can still
:09:14. > :09:26.feature the front page even when you go online. Will you? Remorseless
:09:27. > :09:30.Assad vows re-take Syria? There are so many different people at play. It
:09:31. > :09:36.is impossible to see how they can get around the table. You have
:09:37. > :09:40.western forces, Isil and Assad. If he is not and Russians, obviously,
:09:41. > :09:44.if he is not playing ball with the peace process, it is impossible to
:09:45. > :09:47.see how they can come to any kind of settlement and it is hours before
:09:48. > :09:52.the rest of the guys were saying, "OK, we're ready to hold fire. He is
:09:53. > :09:56.saying, I'll do whatever it takes: " At lunch time, they said the masses
:09:57. > :09:59.of nations were saying, there was going to be a ceasefire and Assad
:10:00. > :10:03.goes, "It makes no sense for us to give up any part of Syria. We want
:10:04. > :10:09.the whole lot backment we will take a long time. We will incur a heavy
:10:10. > :10:14.price." Anyone who thinks there is a solution in Syria any time soon is
:10:15. > :10:20.barking up the wrong tree. But it seems that maybe the Americans said
:10:21. > :10:25.to President Putin, you know, we'll resort to Plan B and things will get
:10:26. > :10:29.tougher if you don't agree to the seization, there could be all things
:10:30. > :10:34.going around behind the scenes? The fact that Assad said this, in
:10:35. > :10:39.vehement terms, it doesn't look good for the ceasefire. He invited
:10:40. > :10:43.journalists into the palace to brief them on this. They have got Islamic
:10:44. > :10:47.State to deal with. Who weren't part of the plan. Staying with the
:10:48. > :11:00.Independent while we have got you here. Calais refugees terrorised by
:11:01. > :11:05.armed far-right militia. People being hand clufd and stripped naked.
:11:06. > :11:13.These people couldn't be anymore vulnerable before these reports.
:11:14. > :11:16.They have left their homes. Children, orphaned, you cannot
:11:17. > :11:22.imagine anymore vulnerable people. It is horrific to see and it is
:11:23. > :11:25.common. They have got ten different testimonies being reported. This
:11:26. > :11:29.does seem like it is a proper problem. It is vague this report
:11:30. > :11:35.about exactly who the far-right fa Englishias are. It says they are
:11:36. > :11:40.being taken off and awful things are happening to them. It is
:11:41. > :11:45.unsatisfying for me that they haven't got enough detail on who is
:11:46. > :11:50.doing it. They seem to be a sitting target. If you think of the stoking
:11:51. > :11:56.of the far-right going on in France and Europe, it is not too surprising
:11:57. > :11:59.that the Calais Jungle has become a magnet for the vigilantes or people
:12:00. > :12:02.who are anti-migrant and I think it is really sad. Poor people. It comes
:12:03. > :12:06.on the back of the week that David Cameron warned this is what is going
:12:07. > :12:09.to come to Britain if we go for Brexit, that was the front page of
:12:10. > :12:13.the Telegraph on Monday. But we don't believe that for a second.
:12:14. > :12:19.David Cameron is claiming it, whether we believe it or not. It is
:12:20. > :12:25.widely discredited. But the PM is sticking to his line.
:12:26. > :12:29.It is sad about the Independent. Let's talk about the Independent and
:12:30. > :12:34.the I because we know that the Independent and the Independent on
:12:35. > :12:38.Sunday going online. The I has a different fate ahead of it, I think.
:12:39. > :12:44.The reports it will be sold and some people from the Independent will go
:12:45. > :12:49.on supplying copy to it. The I sells 270,000 copies which is a lot. The
:12:50. > :12:54.Independent, which is only 50 pence, the Independent, only sells between
:12:55. > :12:57.30 and 50,000, that's why it is going online, but what I don't
:12:58. > :13:01.understand is how they are going to keep up a full newspaper staff to
:13:02. > :13:05.keep it online when they haven't got any online advertising and there is
:13:06. > :13:10.a problem hitting many newspaper groups at the moment and the
:13:11. > :13:15.Guardian said they had big losses and the big online experiment isn't
:13:16. > :13:19.working. We had a pay war so we make money from our subscribers on our
:13:20. > :13:26.pay wall, but no one has really cracked this. There is a massive
:13:27. > :13:32.slump in advertising across the press is hitting everyone, but there
:13:33. > :13:37.are different ways around this, and at News UK, we are investing heavily
:13:38. > :13:39.in the newspapers. We are just about to re-launch a magazine. There is
:13:40. > :13:46.money and investment going into the titles and that's the opposite.
:13:47. > :13:50.Here on the I, it says free from party political bias and five years
:13:51. > :13:56.young. How long that will continue on who decides to buy it? There are
:13:57. > :14:00.two things that are going to be in the midst. It is free and impartial
:14:01. > :14:04.compared to some of the papers, but it won't have the same impact online
:14:05. > :14:07.as it will in newspapers around Westminster all the MPs read the
:14:08. > :14:14.front pages and the second one is the staff, not all of them are going
:14:15. > :14:17.to be able to stay Let's hope they find a way to stay. We will keep
:14:18. > :14:23.looking at what you're doing on the Papers. We look at buzz feed. That's
:14:24. > :14:29.it from the papers this hour. Ben survived! He will be back with
:14:30. > :14:33.Eleanor at 11.30pm. You can cope with us, you can cope
:14:34. > :14:38.with anything. Coming up next, it is Sportsday.