Browse content similar to 18/03/2018. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Hello and welcome to our look ahead
to what the papers will be
bringing us tomorrow.
With me are The New Statesman's
Stephen Bush and Rosamund Urwin,
Financial Services correspondent
at the Sunday Times.
Many of tomorrow's front
pages are already in.
The FT leads with more
on the pressure being placed
on Facebook to explain allegations
that data from millions of its users
helped President Trump
win the US election.
The Guardian also has that story.
It says an investigation has been
launched into possible data breaches
committed by the firm
which was used by Donald Trump's
Both Cambridge Analytica
and Facebook deny any wrongdoing.
The Metro has more on the Foreign
Secretary's rejection of claims made
by Russia that the chemical used
to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal
was made in the UK.
The I reports on President Putin's
landslide election win tonight
along with his reaction
to the dispute over the origin
of the nerve agent
used in Salisbury.
The Telegraph has details on plans
by the government to introduce
stricter regulations and taxation
on tech giants operating in Britain.
The Times says the gambling watchdog
is to relax its drastic
recommendation to limit stakes
on fixed-odds betting machines.
The Mirror reports on the arrest
of TV presenter Ant McPartlin
after he was allegedly involved
in a car accident in south-west
And the Sun is leading
on that story too.
It says the star was arrested
on suspicion of drink driving.
So a fair old spread of different
stories on the front pages but, of
course, Russia is never far away and
that is where we will begin with the
times. A landslide victory to put on
thanks to Britain and the suggestion
is that the confrontation with
Britain over various matters has
boosted and bolstered the victory
that Vladimir Putin is enjoying.
That is what people have said, that
some analysis of saying that it
turned out to be a boost.
Ultimately, the main factor in this
election was that Vladimir Putin was
able to choose his opponent, and
effectively was able to run the
rules of the election. His main
opponent was this hard because of a
fraud conviction that he says was
false. I don't really think that
Britain's reaction one way or
another has been that important, not
the least because it had Britain not
reacted at all than he would have
looked even stronger going into the
election. I don't really see what
else we might have done.
that turnout dropped from 65 to 60%
is being commented upon.
There is a
lovely line in this from a
spokesperson for the campaign. I
would like to thank the UK for
helping with this high turnout which
we ourselves could not have dreamt
of. Of course, that could quite
easily have they meet this happened.
One of the things that they did if
they offered little incentive to
come out and vote. Coffee,
chocolate, whatever. Of course it is
the only way people can oppose
Hooton's re- election, I not voting
at all. That is what you do when you
have no choice on the ballot paper.
If it is down to 60%, I think that
was two hours before polls closed,
so there is a chance the roads, but
if it is that then that is a slight
dent in his otherwise unstoppable
six more years.
Looking at the sun.
Piles of poison. The Foreign
Secretary saying that Russia has
been stockpiling the nerve agent for
quite sometime. I think this was
Boris this morning.
He is saying
exactly that that they are stock
stock boiling -- stockpiling it. The
suggestion was that it might come
from within the UK. But Boris
Johnson says that the trail does
lead inevitably to the Kremlin.
the Daily Telegraph goes one further
without saying that Russian
dissident bodies could be exhumed to
test for Novichok. They want to look
for traces of it.
There have been
various people critical of what you
put's regime who have lived here in
the UK and died in mysterious
circumstances. The Telegraph is
suggesting that some of these people
will be dug up and have their bodies
tested for the presence of this
nerve agent. Because it is
undetectable in its preprepared
form. So you have two harmless
agents that are only deadly when
combined, it could be some people
who have been attacked with it and
we have not noticed until now. The
Telegraph suggests that we will dig
it up. If that happens, that puts
the government in a bind because at
the moment they have expelled 23
diplomats and there has been some
tit-for-tat expulsion. At that
point, if things start to escalate
it is not clear what the British
government can do that will not
leave them looking weak and unable
to respond to the Russian
Moving on to look at
Facebook and, more widely technology
firms to dig the Guardian, firstly.
Pressure on Facebook and data firm
over a mass breach of personal data
files. This is that Cambridge
Analytica. And a reporter who has
been looking at them for quite some
time with some deep investigation,
what is the suggestion here?
suggestion is that data was
improperly obtained by Cambridge
Analytica under the cover of being
for research purposes. It was
actually used to make advertisers
and influence the American
presidential election. Alexander Nix
testified to the Commons Select
Committee in the past and he is now
being accused of being economical
with the truth. He and Mark
Zuckerberg will be callback to
account for how Facebook keeps
control of the user's data and
prevents it from being used in ways
we may not like.
and Facebook say that we have done
nothing wrong at all. But it is
quite sensitive, the use of people's
data. We are supposed to give our
consent for how it is used.
wonder if this is one of those
things that really splits people.
Some people do seem to be rather
blase about how their data is used,
actually. And then there is another
group of us who really feel that
this is a pressing issue of our time
that needs addressing. I think we
will see a lot more scrutiny of the
tech firms in this regard. And I
think we will, you know, the whole
thing of their original sort of
slightly idealistic fix the world...
This is where it turns. It actually
says OK, we have some real problems
with the way this operates --
companies operate. We have things
like this where it comes out and we
have a light shone on them and they
do not look great.
That leads us
nicely to the Telegraph and the wild
West era of technology firms. A
cabinet minister responsible for
overseeing them says that things
will get more difficult. How?
is not just about regulation. It is
also talking about tax cost, of
course, many of these companies not
only have gotten away with a
regulation like existence for a
while, I have also not paid much in
the way of corporation tax. And so
he is talking about looking at the
way they operate, the major
technology firms, and looking at
forcing them to accept increasing
regulation. Some companies are ahead
of us. Germany has strict rules,
rules about finding tech companies
if they do not handle abusive or
hate speech adequately.
I wonder why
we have been behind other countries.
We have been talking about the
problems of lack of regulation and
certainly lack of tax being paid for
It is probably because our
legal structure is permissive. If it
is not strict forbidden you can do.
Or so, for a long time, pervading
ideology of the government party has
been that basically freedom is great
and, yeah, these are just wonderful
entrepreneurs. Thing the tech firms
have been able to do and Matt
Hancock almost says this is become
an entirely new type of company who
does not need to follow any of the
old rules. Are Facebook pretends it
is not a publisher. Actually, as he
says, that era of pretending that
these are not normal companies that
should follow normal rules is, I
think, thankfully, coming to an end.
Yes. They have really -- reached a
certain level of maturity. Looking
at city AM added every -- different
story. Campaigners plead for a tax
break as 18 pubs close every week.
This is a campaign that always
fights for tax breaks at pubs. Here
they say that pubs are being hit by
a triple whammy of high beer duty,
business rates and VAT. This is
where it is squeezing a lot of
businesses, not just pubs. But they
point out that 460 pubs closed in
the second half of 2017. Does
obviously sound like a high number,
that is almost 18 a week. Most are
in London however at the same time,
they have to find ways to operate
and some pubs are frightening in
How much of it is
down to our changing habits? People
drinking at home more?
Pubs have a
long standing problem of people
drinking less alcoholic drinks in
general and drinking more of them at
home. However, business rates are a
big looming problem for the high
street and a big looming problem for
the government as well. The effect
of them so far seems to have been
much more severe than many people
expected. ICD my own part of London,
businesses that succeed in terms of
bums on seats but do not succeed in
terms of making enough money because
of the raise in business rate. I
think the lobby group has a point
here and we are in danger of having
an homogenous high-street.
rates disproportionately hit certain
places and London would be one of
That is it for the papers
tonight. You can see all the front
pages of the papers online.
Therefore you seven days a
[email protected], don't fret, if you
miss it you can watch it later on I
play a. Thank you to both of you for
sharing your Sunday night with a.
Film review is next.