Cuba’s power grid collapsed Saturday leaving the country without electricity for a third time in March as the communist government battles with a decaying infrastructure and a U.S.-imposed oil blockade.

The Cuban Electric Union, which reports to the Ministry of Energy and Mines, announced a total blackout across the island without initially giving a cause for the outage.

The union later said the blackout was caused by an unexpected failure of a generating unit at the Nuevitas thermoelectric plant in Camagüey province.

“From that moment, a cascading effect occurred in the machines that were online,” said a report from the Ministry of Energy and Mines, which activated “micro-islands” of generating units to provide power to vital centers, hospitals and water systems.

Authorities said they were working to restore power.

Power outages, whether nationwide or regional, have become relatively common in the last two years due to breakdowns in the aging infrastructure. The breakdowns are compounded by daily blackouts of up to 12 hours caused by fuel shortages, which also destabilize the system.

The last nationwide blackout occurred on Monday. Saturday’s outage was the second in the past week and the third in March.

The blackouts have a significant impact on the population, whose lives are disrupted by reduced work hours, lack of electricity for cooking, and food spoilage when refrigerators stop working, among many other consequences.

President Miguel Díaz-Canel has said the island has not received oil from foreign suppliers for three months. Cuba produces barely 40% of the fuel it needs to power its economy.

Cuba’s aging grid has drastically eroded in recent years. But the government has also blamed the outages on a U.S. energy blockade after U.S. President Donald Trump in January warned of tariffs on any country that sells or provides oil to Cuba. The Trump administration is demanding that Cuba release political prisoners and move toward political and economic liberalization in return for a lifting of sanctions. Trump also has raised the possibility of a “friendly takeover of Cuba.”

The BBC, working in collaboration with analysts Jeremy Carrasco and Angel Nulani from Riddance, has identified 60 such accounts, mainly on Instagram, that have carried links, or chains of links, to paid-for sexually explicit content on third-party sites. The sites labelled the imagery as AI-generated, but the Instagram accounts did not.

The material was believed to have been dumped overnight into the Manchester, Bolton and Bury canal near close to the Bolton border with Radcliffe.

Several black bags were dumped into the water, and a wire fence was damaged which is thought to have been the access point.

damage was made to a wire fence, which is believed to have been the used access point (Image: Tracey Owen)

by those responsible.

Eric Owen, of Little Britain Anglers found the bags on March 17 and said the waste posed a risk to the canal environment.

He said: “The chemicals used to grow the cannabis wouldn’t be good for wildlife and invertebrates.

“It’s extremely difficult to remove once it’s in the water because it becomes very heavy when soaked.”

The dumped cannabis has since been taken out of the canal by anglers Tracey and Eric Owen and placed on the side of the banking, where it can decompose naturally.

According to Eric, this is not the first time they have dealt with cannabis in the canal (Image: Tracey Owen)

Tracey said: “There are still a few leaves and bits which should rot down.

“We’re going back to rake the soil in a couple of days.

“I presume someone had to get rid of it, but why the canal, who knows?”

The pair who regularly clean up alongside and in the waterways said they are frustrated as it is an ‘ongoing’ issue in waterways across the area.

Similar incidents have been reported in the past, including the discovery of cannabis irrigation equipment in the canal.

In 2021 bags, which were left strewn across the weir, close to Rock Hall, in Moses Gate Country Park, full on cannabis by-products.far

There are more than 1,450 new homes planned as part of Peel Land and Property’s Lee Hall development, but residents and local councillors feel the town is not set up to handle this many new people.

Councillors and residents report issues in three key areas – traffic, which is already said to be bad, school places, and doctor’s surgeries.

Cllr Arthur Price said there are not enough doctors’ surgeries in Bolton to cope with increasing developments.

He added: “If you move here now, where are your kids going to go to school?

“I’ve lived here for 40 years, but it is not the place I moved into.

“Westhoughton is a thriving town – just look at the nightlife.

Westhoughton Councillor David Wilkinson (Image: Bolton Council)

“People deserve better then what they get here – sometimes it feels like I’m banging my head against a brick wall.

“We’re a cash cow – we can’t get upgrades to the roads or services, but they’ll put new houses here.”

And the developments do not stop at Lee Hall.

According to fellow Westhoughton Councillor David Wilkinson, Bolton’s Local Plan for the next few years could see Westhoughton ‘nearly double’ in size.

“If you look at the plans, everywhere else has hardly any developments – it’s mainly Westhoughton.”

A consultation on Bolton’s local plan, which aims to shape developments around the borough for the next 15 years, closed on January 22 this year.

“People say to me all the time ‘there’s never money to fix roads or amenities’, but then they find £70m for a golf course.

Westhoughton’s Manchester Road is very busy at peak times (Image: Dan Dougherty)

“And this link road – people who’ve looked at it have told me it won’t be enough for the amount of people they’re expecting.”

“We’ve not had a new school built in Westhoughton for over 40 years,” said Cllr Wilkinson, “and that was Eatock Primary.”

He added: “And as far as the high school, kids there are already being shipped out to other schools because there isn’t enough room,” said Cllr Wilkinson, “It isn’t big enough now! And pupils from Lee Hall alone will make it far far worse.”

The bedroom door had malfunctioned so when it was closed with the person inside, it couldn’t reopen.

Richmond Fire Station despatched a crew to rescue the trapped person at 9.48 yesterday evening.

The firefighters used their specialist tools to get the door open and free the person inside, who suffered no injuries during the incident, which happened at an address in Richmond.

The Irish government has signalled that it is exploring options to introduce age restrictions on social media use for under-16s. The proposal sits within the government’s new National Digital and AI Strategy 2030, which frames online safety and age verification as part of Ireland’s broader ambition to act as a European digital regulatory hub.

The proposals include a “digital wallet” age-verification system. Detailed technical specifications have not yet been published. However, digital identity wallet models typically work by allowing a user to verify their age once through a trusted authority. After that, they can share only a simple confirmation – such as whether they are over 16 – rather than handing over full identity documents. The government has not set out the final architecture, but the stated aim is to reduce repeated data sharing with individual platforms.

Ireland is not alone in looking at age restrictions. Australia introduced a statutory ban, and other European countries are considering stricter access rules. But Ireland’s position is distinctive. It hosts the European headquarters of many major technology companies. It also plays a central role in EU enforcement of the Digital Services Act, which requires very large platforms to assess and mitigate systemic risks to minors.

The debate is not simply whether social media is good or bad for children. Blanket restrictions for under-16s raise an important question: are bans the most effective way to reduce harm? Or do they offer reassurance while leaving deeper problems – such as platform design – unchanged?

The Irish context

Ireland’s situation is significant because structural regulatory tools already exist at European level. Under the EU Digital Services Act, very large platforms must conduct systemic risk assessments, including risks to minors, and implement mitigation measures. Ireland plays a key role in this through Coimisiún na Meán, the country’s statutory media and online safety regulator.

Established under the Online Safety and Media Regulation Act 2022, the regulator has powers to oversee video-sharing platforms, develop binding online safety codes and investigative non-compliance by the technology companies based in Ireland. This includes in relation to the EU Digital Services Act in Ireland. This raises the question of whether new access restrictions are set to be introduced before these structural obligations are fully deployed.

Ireland’s proposed digital wallet pilot also intersects with EU plans for a European Digital Identity framework. The EU’s forthcoming European Digital Identity Wallet is intended to support digital proof of certain facts about a person, such as their age. No specific design for any Irish pilot has been produced. However, alignment with EU interoperability standards would be required if it is to integrate into the wider European system.

Evidence driving the debate

Ireland’s proposed ban is framed primarily in child-protection terms. These include concerns about youth mental health pressures, exposure to harmful or age-inappropriate material, and risks such as online grooming and exploitation. These concerns are not unfounded.

A 2020 review of research studies found associations between heavy social media use and anxiety or depressive symptoms. However, large-scale analyses suggest that average effects on wellbeing are small and highly variable. They can differ significantly depending on context and individual vulnerability. Risks exist, but they are not uniform.

Exposure to harmful content, including self-harm material, misogynistic narratives, or extremist content, is often shaped by how platforms recommend and amplify posts. Research from my colleagues in the DCU Anti-Bullying Centre shows how recommender systems can contribute to the circulation of toxic content.

Social media platforms are not neutral spaces. Their business models rely on maximising engagement and attention. Recommender systems prioritise emotionally charged material, and feedback mechanisms reward visibility and interaction.

These systems operate regardless of age. If a 17-year-old and a 15-year-old encounter harmful amplified content, the risk doesn’t go away for one user just because they’re over 16.

Age restrictions may form part of a broader safeguarding approach. However, on their own, they do not address recommender systems, addictive design features or the amplification of harmful material.

Risk and opportunity

At the same time, research consistently shows that risk and opportunity are intertwined. Children who are more active online may encounter greater exposure to harm. On the other hand, they may also gain more social connection and access to information. That complexity matters when designing policies intended to reduce harm without undermining participation.

Research on children’s own experiences suggests that many see social media as a normal part of their lives and use in-app safety tools to manage risks. Many also say they prefer safer platform design and clearer accountability rather than outright bans.

Children’s rights bodies in Ireland have similarly emphasised the need to balance protection with participation. They also point out that children’s views should be considered in the development of any pilot measures.

Ireland’s proposal reflects a broader shift away from relying solely on platform self-regulation. However, the key question is whether systems that amplify harmful content and reward attention can be effectively governed.

Ireland’s Digital and AI Strategy 2030 positions the country as both a host to global platforms and a digital regulatory leader. That dual role gives particular weight to how these measures are designed and enforced. Ultimately, the effectiveness of Ireland’s approach will depend not only on age thresholds, but on how robustly structural risk obligations are implemented.

Farrel Hegarty, who plays Lou Michaelis in the ITV soap, has said that she is now “out of the show” once again.

The soap star made a shock exit just months after being introduced last year, before returning last month.

Coronation Street star Farrel Hegarty leaves ITV soap again

Coming up… Theo plans a surprise wedding, Dev is taken to the police station, and can Ben persuade Will to open up about Megan?

Read more here: https://t.co/yST9U3ReJO#Corrie pic.twitter.com/I9niVUVKnD

Advertisement

— Coronation Street (@itvcorrie) March 17, 2026

Hegarty joined the cast of Coronation Street towards the beginning of 2025, debuting alongside on-screen husband Mick Michaelis, played by Joe Layton.

She was subsequently revealed as the mother of Brody Michaelis (Ryan Mulvey), who is in a young offender’s institution.

Brody’s father is later revealed not to be Mick, but Kit Green (Jacob Roberts).

Her character was sent to prison in July 2025, with Hegarty departing the show before returning in February 2026.

Now, Farrel is set to leave the show once again after her brief return, and she spoke about her latest departure on the Girlfriend Material podcast.

She said: “I’m out of the show now.

“I’ve stopped filming.

“I came back in Corrie for, like, a short stint.

“I was in it for six months and I came back because I’m [her character is] in prison.

“She’s in prison, she’s not a good girl.”

Farrel had previously said how she would get emotional filming her last scenes, having planned to move abroad before landing her role in Corrie.

She told The Mirror : “Watching the other actors is like a masterclass in acting.

“When I do film my final scenes, I’ll probably cry.”

Who has been on Coronation Street the longest?

While Farrel’s time on Coronation Street has not been the longest stint, there are several actors who have been on the Cobbles for years.

William Roache holds the Guinness World Record for the longest-serving actor in a television soap opera, having played Ken Barlow on Coronation Street since 1960.

Barbara Knox, who plays Rita Tanner, has been on the show since 1964.

She first appeared as Rita for one episode before returning to the show as a full-time cast member in 1972.

Sue Nicholls (Audrey Roberts) has been on Corrie since the 1980s, with Michael Le Vell (Kevin Webster), having been on the show since 1983, notably returning in 2014.

Other long-standing actors include Sally Dynevor (Sally Metcalfe) and Simon Gregson (Steve McDonald), who have also been on the show for a few decades.

Who is your favourite character on Coronation Street? Let us know in the comments.

A woman decided to pit McVitie’s biscuits against Marks and Spencer versions of them – and the results will probably leave you gobsmacked while wondering how they decided

Advertisement

A woman put the legendary McVitie’s biscuits head to head with Marks and Spencer, and the results are bound to leave you gobsmacked.

McVitie’s biscuits have a fantastic reputation, with their Digestives reigning supreme for years and years (since 1830, in fact). With the perfect thin layer of chocolate over a delightfully tasty biscuit that’s buttery and delightful, how could they possibly be beaten when it comes to taste? But when Laura Khoshaba and her mum Ann, who always appears off-screen in her videos, put the biscuits to the test, they couldn’t decide whether McVitie’s or Marks and Spencer deserved the top spot.

Milk Chocolate Digestives

First off, Ann said she thought the “M&S one looks prettier,” but, of course, it’s not always about appearance, and more the taste too.

When they tried the McVitie’s one, Laura said she “loves Chocolate Digestives,” and Ann claimed it was “good”.

They then put it through a dunk test, where Laura said the McVitie’s one was “amazing”. Ann also revealed she buys them all the time because they’re “really good”.

McVitie’s Digestives can be purchased from all supermarkets, and cost just £1.50 at B&M.

When Laura bit into the M&S one, she said: “Do you know what I like about this? It’s crunchier. And the chocolate is amazing.” Ann then admitted “the M&S chocolate, in my opinion, is the best chocolate”.

“I might prefer the M&S. Let’s dunk it and see,” Laura said. And after the dunk test, she didn’t change her mind, revealed the M&S digestive biscuits were her favourite.

But she did say they’re “both really nice”. The M&S Chocolate Digestives were also cheaper than the McVitie’s ones, coming in at £1.25.

Jaffa Cakes

Next, they tried both retailers’ versions of Jaffa Cakes, showing the M&S Jaffa Cakes are a rectangular shape, whereas the McVitie’s Jaffa Cakes are circular.

When Laura tried the McVitie’s one, she said she “loves” them, but Ann wasn’t a fan, commenting there was “too much jam” in the McVitie’s version.

McVitie’s Jaffa Cakes can be purchased for £1.25 from Morrisons.

They then tried the Marks and Spencer ones, saying they were “a million times better,” with Ann claiming had “less jam,” which pleased her.

Once again, Ann couldn’t stop talking about how good the Marks and Spencer chocolate is, saying the biscuit part was even “nicer”.

They also said they liked the fact the M&S Jaffa Cakes were thinner, with Ann finding the McVitie’s ones “too sickly”.

In the comments, people asked them to “not disrespect McVitie’s,” joking they must be “sponsored by M&S”.

Another said: “Anyone who actually eats these products regularly that these two have compared will almost always prefer Cadburys/McVitie’s over that bougie a** M&S version.”

The ITV series brings together a host of popular famous faces as they try to prank members of the public

ITV viewers have branded Celebrity Sabotage ‘utter rubbish’ after being left unimpressed by its first episode of the new prank series.

Premiering on Saturday night (March 21) after Britain’s Got Talent, ITV are hoping the the new series brings in younger viewers. It features I’m A Celebrity 2023 winner Sam Thompson, The Masked Singer host Joel Dommett, and Loose Women duo Judi Love and YouTuber GK Barry as part of a team.

Get MEN Premium now for just £1 HERE – or get involved in our WhatsApp group by clicking HERE. And don’t miss out on our brilliant selection of newsletters HERE.

Each episode sees members of the public unwittingly take part in a fake ITV show. Complete with a famous host, the team of celebrity saboteurs watch from nearby and attempt to cause chaos at every turn, without getting caught.

The fake shows include Couple Goals, hosted by husband and wife Matt and Emma Willis, The Applicant, hosted by former Dragons’ Den star Sara Davies and The Backstabber, hosted by Rylan Clark, who rose to fame on The X Factor.

For each successfully executed sabotage mission, money will be added to a secret cash prize pot. With up to £30,000 up for grabs, which isn’t revealed until the end of each episode when it is distributed equally among all the contestants.

Teasing what to expect from the series, Joel told PA this week: “We had so much fun making it, and all I can hope is that the fun comes across on screen. We worked really hard to make it as fun as possible and to give some money to some really deserving people.

“Genuinely, this show has been one of the highlights of my career! You never really know what a new show will be like. I really hope people watching it enjoy it as much as we enjoyed making it.”

Episode one saw the stars entering their secret HQ, which was located behind in a bookcase in a lavish country home. Joining them as a guest saboteur this week was UK comedy legend Jo Brand.

The first fake show to be put under the spotlight was The Applicant, with Sara Davies showing off some of her business skills. Viewers saw a host of contestants explaining why their business skills would make them a worthy victor.

Highlights from the episode included when Judi knocked off a tower of glasses and blamed it on a contestant and Sam switching a USB full of business images for an empty one. The latter did this without getting caught by hiding in a knight’s armour.

Those who tuned in to Celebrity Sabotage’s first episode were left divided as they took to X, previously known as Twitter, to share their frustrations with its series premiere.

@Kazzie_P_60 said: “How do programmes like these ever get commissioned? Utter rubbish #celebritysabotage.” @Pickitflickit added: “There’s a great idea in there but it is a right old mess #Celebritysabotage.”

@philm2244 wrote: “How has Saturday night entertainment come to this? #celebritysabotage.” @Terrismith32115 stated: “Who is the target audience for this my 8yo hasnt so much as smirked and im just about ready to turn it off #celebritysabotage

@AlexPaterson0 argued: “Just what we need on a Saturday night, just a good light hearted show #CelebritySabotage.” @TGherewego: “#CelebritySabotage I’m going to assume all the fake shows are rip offs of other shows, and that’s kinda love that.”

“I did not always agree with everything that Robert Mueller did,” Andrew Weissmann, a member of Mueller’s team, told BBC’s Carl Nasman. “I think it’s really important for people to know how much integrity and how much thoughtfulness went into his decision-making and how much faith he had, maybe more than I did, in the American people, in citizens and in Congress.”