You search online for a pair of trainers. Minutes later, similar shoes appear on social media feeds. A shopping site offers a limited-time discount and suggests a matching jacket. This is no longer just an advert shown to millions of people. Increasingly, artificial intelligence is helping decide not only what you see, but which sales pitch is most likely to persuade you.

As AI becomes more deeply embedded in online shopping, researchers like me are asking whether these systems are merely making shopping easier, or quietly encouraging us to buy far more than we need. At the same time, a growing body of research suggests that more mindful shopping habits may offer one of the few effective ways for consumers to stay in control of their decisions.

Advertising has always tried to influence consumers. While mass marketing delivered the same message to everyone, AI can build detailed profiles from our interests and online behaviour, continually adjusting recommendations based on what we search for, click on or leave in an online basket.

On online shopping sites this might mean product recommendations linked to a recent search. On social media, it could be a sponsored post resembling content already holding your attention.

Personalisation can be genuinely useful, reducing the effort involved in finding relevant products. But it also allows advertising to become more adaptive. And potentially more persuasive.

That persuasion works because it reduces the mental effort involved in shopping. Instead of comparing hundreds of options, we are presented with a shortlist that feels relevant. Familiarity, customer reviews and scarcity messages such as “only two left” create a sense of urgency.

Of course, AI didn’t invent these techniques. One-click payment, limited-time offers and personalised recommendations have long been features of online retail. What AI changes is the speed and precision with which companies can learn which combination of messages works best for each person. Experimental research suggests that these kinds of online “dark patterns” can produce small but measurable increases in impulse buying.

Research suggests AI may make this influence even harder to recognise. A 2025 peer-reviewed experiment involving 179 participants found that many people struggled to identify advertising embedded within AI chatbot conversations, often interpreting promotional content as helpful advice rather than advertising.

A more recent 2026 preprint involving 2,012 participants reached a similar conclusion. Researchers found that conversational AI steered users towards sponsored books far more often than conventional search rankings, while most participants did not recognise the promotional influence. Because the study has not yet been peer reviewed, its findings should be interpreted with appropriate caution.

When convenience turns into extra consumption

The concern is not that AI removes our ability to choose freely. Rather, it can shorten the gap between wanting something and stopping to consider whether we actually need it. A recommendation arrives at exactly the right moment, perhaps accompanied by a discount or a reminder that an item is nearly sold out. Decisions that once involved reflection can become almost automatic.

That matters not only for household budgets but also for the environment. Every unnecessary purchase requires raw materials, manufacturing, packaging and transport. In Europe, around 20% of garments bought online is returned, while an estimated 22% to 43% of returned online clothing is destroyed.

So, how can consumers respond without abandoning the convenience that AI-powered shopping offers?

One increasingly discussed approach is mindful consumption. Rather than shopping on autopilot, it encourages people to become more aware of what is influencing their decisions and to pause long enough to consider whether a purchase reflects a genuine need or simply a well-timed temptation.

A 2025 study found that people with higher levels of trait mindfulness tended to report lower levels of impulse buying overall. But a brief mindfulness exercise did not reduce immediate buying urges or behaviour. Awareness is therefore not a magic switch.

Putting the pause back into the purchase

In my research with a colleague, mindful consumption begins with three ideas: noticing what influences our decisions, considering the wider consequences of what we buy, and recognising when enough is enough.

This kind of mindfulness is not about meditating before buying a pair of shoes. Psychologist Ellen Langer has long argued that mindfulness can simply mean actively noticing what is happening around us and questioning familiar habits.

Applied to shopping, it means interrupting the automatic purchase. Before buying something unplanned, ask yourself: did I want this before I saw the recommendation? What need will it actually meet? How often will I use it?

It can also help to create small moments of friction. Leave an item in your basket overnight instead of buying immediately. Turn off retail notifications. Remove stored payment details. Shop from a list rather than an endless stream of recommendations. Check whether a recommendation is sponsored and compare it with alternatives outside the platform making the suggestion.

Responsibility, however, should not rest solely with consumers. As AI-powered marketing becomes more sophisticated, platforms should make it easier to distinguish advertising from advice, explain why recommendations are appearing and avoid exploiting people’s vulnerabilities.

AI’s greatest power is not that it forces us to buy. It is that it makes temptation more personal, more timely and easier to accept. Mindful consumption restores something digital shopping increasingly removes: a genuine moment to decide whether wanting should become buying.

RIO DE JANEIRO (AP) — Brazilian presidential candidate Flávio Bolsonaro on Wednesday picked his running mate, a lawmaker from his party who will run for vice president in the October election after centrist parties largely failed to endorse his candidacy or opted to stay neutral in the race.

The senator and a son of former President Jair Bolsonaro was confirmed as the presidential candidate of his father’s Liberal Party last month. He will run against incumbent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, and the two could go into a runoff if neither gets a majority vote.

But unlike his father, the younger Bolsonaro does not have the support of centrist parties in Brazil from which a vice-presidential candidate would have been expected. That lack of support has compounded his difficulties in choosing a running mate.

Alfredo Gaspar has been a member of Brazil’s lower house since 2023. Before that, he worked as a prosecutor and served as secretary of public security of the northeastern state of Alagoas.

“He is someone I’ve come to admire, and everyone here has come to admire him as well – for his courage, his honesty, and his track record in public security,” Flávio Bolsonaro said.

In his speech, Gaspar thanked Flávio Bolsonaro for trusting him and committed to their joint project, describing himself as a “simple person, someone from the northeast, but someone with a life story marked by a great deal of hard work.”

Bolsonaro had tried but failed to win over Agriculture Minister Tereza Cristina, who would have been a high-profile female running mate. His political movement has historically suffered from lower support from women voters.

Cristina’s party has a stronghold in Congress and was key for Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency. It was not expected to field a presidential candidate and its distancing from the younger Bolsonaro has been surprising.

Since announcing that he had been chosen by his father to run in the election against Lula, Flávio Bolsonaro has run into a series of obstacles.

Support for his bid started to wane in May, after he admitted he had requested millions of dollars from jailed banker Daniel Vorcaro to pay for a film about his father’s life, a revelation that shocked many allies.

Bolsonaro then visited the White House and the U.S. State Department, touting his family’s ties with U.S. President Donald Trump.

However, many voters, business leaders and politicians now blame him for the new tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on some Brazilian exports of up to 37.5%.

In June, Bolsonaro faced another blow: His stepmother recorded a video to say he had been disrespectful to her. They have since made amends.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of Latin America and the Caribbean at https://apnews.com/hub/latin-america

?

Select your team for football news tailored to you

Forshaw Demolition is a family-owned business that has operated for 23 years and boasts more than 80 years of combined experience.

It provides services such as asbestos removal, industrial decommissioning, and the dismantling of concrete and steel structures, including road and rail bridges.

The company also delivers residential, city centre, and high-rise demolition projects.

The Forshaw website explains that the company takes on schemes right across the UK, usually valued between £10,000 and £2 million.

Forshaw Demolition enters administration after 23 years

Now, after 23 years in business, Forshaw Demolition has fallen into administration.

Richard Cole, Stephen Kenny, and Amy Lowden from KBL Advisory Limited were appointed joint administrators on July 24, according to The Gazette.

What happens when a company goes into administration?

When a company enters administration, it means that it is unable to pay expenses, debts, or other liabilities, according to SquareUp.com.

Companies House adds: “When a company goes into administration, they have entered a legal process (under the Insolvency Act 1986) with the aim of achieving one of the statutory objectives of an administration. This may be to rescue a viable business that is insolvent due to cashflow problems.

“An appointment of an administrator (a licensed insolvency practitioner) will be made by directors, a creditor or the court to fulfil the administration process.”

A statutory moratorium is put in place once a company enters administration, giving it “breathing space” to allow for financial restructuring plans to be drawn up free from creditor enforcement actions.

A company can continue to trade while in administration, but daily management and control are handed over to the administrators.

Companies House continues: “Within 8 weeks it is the administrators’ role to formulate administration proposals.

“Creditors are then asked to vote by a decision procedure to approve the administrators’ proposals.

“If the administration involves a sale of all or part of the company’s business, the proceeds (after the costs of the procedure) will be distributed to creditors in a statutory order of priority.”

Administration will end automatically after 12 months unless the administrator asks the court or creditors for an extension.

Through administration, a company can be:

• Rescued and passed back to the directors
• Enter liquidation
• Be dissolved

Other UK companies that have closed or entered administration/liquidation in 2026

It has been a tough year for the UK high street, with several other retailers entering administration or liquidation and others announcing widespread store closures.

Major high street brands LK Bennett, Claire’s, and Quiz have been forced to close all their remaining stores after falling into administration.

UK fashion retailer Leading Labels is also set to close its remaining 15 stores after falling into liquidation.

Whitbread recently confirmed it will be closing all its UK restaurants in September:

• Brewers Fayre (89 locations) – September 7
• Beefeater (106) – September 10
• Bar + Block – September 3
• Table Table – September 3
• Cookhouse + Pub – September 3

TG Jones and the British Heart Foundation will also both be closing around 150 stores across the UK.

Other retailers have been forced to close stores this year, including:

Several UK travel companies have also ceased trading or entered administration in 2026:

Meanwhile, four UK airlines have fallen into administration or liquidation:

UK delivery company Yodel is set to be phased out after being acquired by InPost.

It’s also been reported that Morrisons is looking to sell some of its in-store pharmacies as it continues to cut costs.

It hasn’t all been bad news for the UK high street, with several major brands announcing new store openings for 2026, including Aldi, M&S, and Superdrug.

Meanwhile, brands including Evans and Bodycare have returned to the UK high street this year after previously closing all their stores.

Which business/store closure in 2026 has impacted you the most? Let us know in the comments below.

A former neo-Nazi selected by the Conservatives to fight a council election next year has pulled out after a backlash against his candidacy.

Joshua Bonehill-Paine was convicted of racially harassing Jewish former Labour MP Luciana Berger in 2016, while already serving a separate jail sentence for sharing antisemitic posts.

Tory leader Kemi Badenoch had defended the decision to select him as a candidate for the new Somerset Council seat of Crewkerne South, saying he had been rehabilitated and her party “believes in second chances”.

But Bonehill-Paine said he had now withdrawn his candidacy, and had been offered a position as an anti-extremism adviser to the party.

In a social media post, he said the position with the Conservative Party’s Culture and Integration Commission would focus on advising on how to prevent young men from being radicalised.

Berger, who now sits as Baroness Berger in the House of Lords, branded the appointment an “insult,” adding that making him a party adviser was “no better than allowing him to stand as a council candidate”.

Bonehill-Paine spent three years in prison after he was jailed in 2015 for posting antisemitic material ahead of a planned neo-Nazi rally. He was convicted of racially harassing then-Labour MP Berger the following year.

He has described his past views as “indefensible” and says he has spent years opposing antisemitism since leaving prison in 2018.

But the party’s decision to pick him for the Somerset seat sparked a huge political backlash, with Jewish groups declining the offer of a meeting with him.

Baroness Berger, who attended court at the OId Bailey in London to give evidence in Bonehill-Paine’s trial, has said his past behaviour fell “very, very short” of the standard required to stand for public office.

Speaking earlier, she said Bonehill-Paine’s harassment “affected my life in lots of different ways because of the volume of the material that he was disseminating and putting out, the extremity of it in terms of just frankly how shocking and awful it was”.

In sentencing remarks, the judge said it was “difficult to envisage a worse case than this of racially aggravated harassment of this kind”, adding Bonehill-Paine had “sat in the dock smirking throughout the trial” and had “plainly enjoyed” Baroness Berger’s discomfort.

Progressive Abdul El-Sayed was declared the winner in Michigan’s Senate seat Wednesday morning, after clinging to a narrow lead in an extremely tight race against centrist Rep. Haley Stevens.

A win for El-Sayed, a former public health official, will come as a shock to the Democratic establishment and to American Israel Public Affairs Committee, D.C.’s top Israel lobby group. Stevens, a moderate establishment-backed candidate, has received tens of millions of dollars from AIPAC in support of her campaign.

Votes continued to be counted into Wednesday morning, and El-Sayed was declared the winner by the Associated Press shortly before he was due to appear at a press conference. He told MS NOW that his team was “focused on trying to figure out how we bring the party together” to defeat the Republican nominee, Mike Rogers. Polls had shown El-Sayed with a much stronger lead ahead of election day, but Stevens was bolstered by the last-minute endorsements of the incumbent, Sen. Gary Peters, as well as Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

At a press conference Wednesday morning, El-Sayed was flanked by Mallory McMorrow, one of the two candidates in the three-person race that narrowed in July with her decision to suspend her campaign. The nominee condemned the “bitter, divisive and cynical” campaigng against him before calling for unity, telling Democratic voters “there is so much more that unites us now.”

“The campaign that Mike Rogers, Donald Trump, and their GOP MAGA allies are launching is already more bitter. All you gotta do is look at the ads you’re already watching on TV, started today,” said El-Sayed. “They think they want to use my whole name against me. Mike, listen man, If you can’t say the name — it’s Abdulrahman — keep the name out your damn mouth.”

Both El-Sayed and Stevens took the stage after midnight to share their optimism with supporters. Stevens’ campaign said Wednesday morning that she called El-Sayed to congratulate him and endorse him for the general election.

“Tomorrow, we begin to mend fences,” El Sayed said. “Whatever happens tonight, we have a responsibility to assure that we unite to make sure that Mike Rogers never sees the inside of the U.S. Senate.”

During her late-night speech, Stevens told supporters: “We knew this was going to be a close race, and that’s exactly what we’ve got: a close race. But friends, I am feeling good about this race. I am feeling fired up,” according to the New York Times.

President Donald Trump responded to the election results on Wednesday morning, writing on Truth Social: “Great news for the Republican Party. El-Sayed, a Communist loser who hates Jews and Israel, is the projected winner in his race with the Socialist. As usual, the Polls were way off on this one. She was not expected to do nearly as well as she did. Now, the Dumocrats crazy policies will only get worse!”

Democratic National Committee chairman Ken Martin congratulated El-Sayed in a statement, saying, “Congratulations to Abdul El-Sayed on his hard-fought victory in Michigan’s Democratic primary. From leading the Detroit Health Department to fighting to expand access to affordable healthcare and create more opportunities for working families, he has dedicated his career to public service.

“Michigan voters chose a candidate who will fight to lower costs, strengthen communities, stand up for working Americans, and build an economy that works for everyone. Democrats are united in working together to keep this seat blue and send El-Sayed to the U.S. Senate,” added the party chair.

Even though the race had not been called, El-Sayed sent out a fundraising email around 7 a.m. Wednesday reading “We won.” He was declared the winner by NBC News, though other major media outlets, including the Associated Press and The New York Times, had not yet named a winner at the time the email was sent.

The reason for the networks’ hesitance was the incredibly slim margin which the race came down to: El-Sayed won with a 1-point margin at the time the race was called, leading by just about 15,000 votes out of more than 1.4 million cast in the primary.

While many more progressive Democratic candidates have found success in the U.S. House primaries, including in New York and Denver, those cities are deep-blue cities, whereas Michigan is more mixed politically. Even as progressives have made strides across the country, former Rep. Cori Bush, known as a member of the “Squad,” lost her former St.Louis, Missouri-based seat in a Democratic primary rematch to Rep. Wesley Bell, who was also backed by AIPAC. However, a progressive victory in Michigan would indicate a more significant milestone for progressives.

El-Sayed was in the lead as initial results came in Tuesday night, but Stevens started closing that gap as votes came in from Wayne County.

Either El-Sayed or Stevens will face Rogers in the general election in November. Each candidate is looking to succeed Democratic Senator Gary Peters, the moderate incumbent who is set to retire.

Peters and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer both endorsed Stevens, while El-Sayed received support from the Democratic Party’s progressive wing in Congress, including Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

With reporting by the Associated Press

It began after The Telegraph reported how animal rights group PETA stated they want ‘vegan black pudding’ to be used at the famous black pudding competition, held every year in Ramsbottom.

Cllr Tom Pilkington – himself a vegan – offered his reaction Facebook, noting too that no official complaint was actually submitted to the event organisers.

(Image: Phil Taylor)

Cllr Pilkington said: “Odd really, as the article claims a letter has been sent to the event organisers, but according to them they’ve not received one.

“For the record, I love the fact the black pudding throwing brings so much footfall to our town, supporting all our wonderful businesses.

“The organisers do a great job.

“Vegan black puddings are a thing and readily available, making a cracking addition to a vegan brekkie.

“Of course, personally I’d prefer vegan products to be used at events, but this isn’t an issue to be militant about, yet.

“I can still take part as a vegan if I wish and at the same time, celebrate the fact the town will once again be thriving.”

He also reflected on the broader role of veganism in his political work.

He said: “Being vegan and involved in politics can be an uneasy relationship.

Cllr Tom Pilkington (Image: Tom Pilkington)

“There are environmental and pressure groups always looking for support from an aligned mind.

“You have to be pragmatic and allocate your time according to your most pressing priorities.

“I do, have and will continue to campaign for animal welfare causes.”

He said it was important for residents and visitors to enjoy the event and support the town.

He said: “In the meantime, let’s enjoy The Black Pudding Throwing Championships, Pudfest, support our businesses and have a great time in Ramsbottom.”

The World Black Pudding Throwing Championship has become one of Ramsbottom’s best-known attractions since its launch in 1984, drawing entrants and spectators from across the UK and overseas.

Before the contest, each pudding is wrapped in stockings to help prevent it from bursting on impact and to improve its flight through the air.

The incident happened at the junction of Moor Lane and Spa Road.

A Bolton News reporter at the scene witnessed the aftermath of the collision, which appeared to involve a black Volvo displaying P-plates and a bus.

The junction of Moor Lane and Spa Road (Image: NQ)

The black Volvo had sustained damage to its front left side, while the bus had visible damage to the front left side near the passenger entrance.

It was not clear which bus service was involved, as the route number display had been switched off.

By around 3pm, all passengers appeared to have disembarked from the bus.

Three men were standing in the middle of the junction near the two damaged vehicles.

Black Volvo displaying P-plates and a bus (Image: NQ)

Traffic was manoeuvring around the scene, with queues forming as motorists navigated past the crashed vehicles.

Greater Manchester Police has been contacted for comment.

It is unclear at this stage how the collision occurred or whether anyone was injured.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating why a plane was allowed to take off as President Donald Trump’s helicopter was approaching Reagan National Airport Tuesday afternoon in what appears to be a violation of safety procedures put in place after last year’s midair collision near that busy Washington D.C. airport.

The incident occurred as Marine One left the White House for Andrews Air Force Base with the president aboard for the first leg of a West Coast trip. A commercial jet took off at the same time. The FAA decided after 67 people died on Jan. 29, 2025 when an airliner collided with an Army Black Hawk helicopter that all takeoffs and landings at Reagan would be halted anytime a helicopter passes by the airport.

The airplane that took off Tuesday was climbing above Marine One as the helicopter approached, so the two aircraft were not on a collision course.

The FAA said in a statement that “there was a momentary loss of separation after which the aircraft continued to move away from one another.”

“The air traffic controller was in contact with both the commercial pilot and Marine One pilot during the loss of separation,” the FAA said.

The White House emphasized that President Trump was not in danger during the incident.

“Marine One flights are piloted by some of the best aviators in the world, and at no point was the President in harm’s way,” said White House spokesman, Kush Desai.

And the Marine Corps defended the actions of their helicopter pilots.

“There were no ‘close calls’ with the routine Marine One movement,” Tuesday, said Marine Corps spokesman, Capt. Jacob Sugg in an email. “Washington National Tower did not delay the helicopter crew, ask them to hold, or otherwise alter their flight profile. To the contrary, the ATC team approved the requested route and provided timely and appropriate traffic information.”

The Wall Street Journal first reported the incident.

The airspace near the White House and Reagan is heavily congested with military and commercial aircraft.

The Federal Aviation Administration took steps to ensure that helicopters and airplanes would no longer share the same airspace around Reagan National Airport shortly after the investigation into last year’s midair collision began. The rules also prohibit air traffic controllers from relying on visual separation and require all military aircraft to broadcast their locations.