The former safeguarding minister Jess Phillips has warned the big tech firms are winning in the battle over regulation (Alamy)

3 min read7 min

Major tech companies are “winning in a big way” against efforts to make the internet safer for women and children, according to former safeguarding minister Jess Phillips.

Advertisement

Phillips, the Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley, said that during her time in government, parts of Whitehall, including No 10, were reluctant to take action for fear of retaliation by tech giants and the Donald Trump administration.

Speaking on the latest episode of PoliticsHome podcast The Rundown, which will be published on Friday (7 August), Phillips said: “We are too beholden currently in the world to basically five unelected people.”

The Labour MP resigned as a Home Office minister in May, accusing the Keir Starmer administration of not working hard enough to protect women and girls online. Phillips said Starmer was a “decent man” but his reluctance to “have an argument” meant that steps to tackle violence against women and girls (VAWG) were “stalled and delayed”.

Advertisement

In her resignation letter to the then-prime minister, Phillips said that “91 per cent of online child sex abuse is self-generated by children groomed, tricked and exploited into abuse”, and that Google and Apple, the two companies that control the operating systems on almost all smartphones, could quickly and easily install software that would stop them being used by children to take and receive naked pictures.

In June, Starmer gave tech firms a September deadline to make this change, warning that the government would give itself the powers to fine or take criminal action against those that did not comply.

Phillips wants new Prime Minister Andy Burnham to hold them to this, telling the podcast that, as things stand, “tech companies are winning in a big, big way”.

Advertisement

The former minister said there was a divide within Whitehall about how to tackle online safety when she was in government. She described the Home Office as being “hawkish as hell about tech companies”, while No 10 and the now-abolished Department of Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) were nervous about being too aggressive.

Phillips recalled “the sense that tech companies and the US would hold us to ransom on all sorts of different things”, adding: “I’ve had it directly said to my face, ‘well, look, they’ll just put trade levies on us if you try and do anything with tech companies’.”

She said Starmer “was always on my side in conversations”, but that she “just started to feel like I was going slowly mad” waiting for the machinery of government to make it happen.

“If you could hear some of the conversations I had to have with people. There are some people who genuinely just think that people taking dick pics is a human right,” Phillips said. 

Advertisement

“I had to say to somebody once: ‘You know, you won’t die. It’s not water or shelter’.”

Phillips expressed concern that the government’s Online Safety Act is “woeful for women” in its current form and “20 years behind” where it needs to be to tackle evolving online harms.

“As somebody who was seeking to put down lots of amendments to the Online Safety Act while it was passing through, I’ve never known aggressive lobbying like it,” said the Labour MP. “Every single law firm in the whole of London was basically on retainer to one of the big tech companies so that they couldn’t work for anyone else. That is just anti-democratic.”

---

The Rundown is presented by Alain Tolhurst, and is produced and edited by Ewan Cameron for Podot

Advertisement

• Click here to listen to the latest episode of The Rundown, or search for ‘PoliticsHome’ wherever you get your podcasts.

 

Source link

Source link

A December 2024 report from Unipol and HEPI confirmed something students already knew but universities were slow to acknowledge: the maximum student loan in England is now less than the average student rent. You read that right. The government’s own financial support package doesn’t cover your highest single cost.

That reality is changing how students choose universities. And if you’re currently deciding where to study, it should change how you think about it too.

The Numbers That Are Actually Driving the Decision

Student rents in university-owned accommodation rose an average of 12% across UK cities between 2021/22 and 2023/24, with private housing used by universities rising 13% over the same period. Those aren’t anomalies. They’re a consistent trend that hasn’t reversed.

London now averages around £13,600 per year for student accommodation alone, according to HESA data from 2024. Split across twelve months, that’s over £1,133 a month on rent before you’ve bought a single meal or paid a transport fare.

And the supply side isn’t catching up. Purpose-built student accommodation in prime locations consistently exceeds 97% occupancy, with many properties in high-demand cities fully booked by spring, months before the September intake. If you’re applying to a London university and you haven’t started your housing search by February, you’re already late.

How Students Are Voting With Their Feet

Here’s the shift that’s happening quietly but clearly. Students are increasingly factoring total cost of living into university choice, not just league table position or course quality.

One in two students reported fears about the student housing shortage in the 2024 National Student Accommodation Survey by Save the Student. That’s not a niche concern. That’s half of all students actively worried about where they’ll live, which is exactly the kind of anxiety that influences where prospective students decide to apply in the first place.

The result is growing interest in regional universities in cities where housing costs are significantly lower. Lincoln, Bolton, and Cardiff consistently appear in affordability comparisons precisely because their total student cost of living sits well below London, Manchester, or Bristol. The degree at the end looks the same on a CV. The debt at the end does not.

The London Premium Is Real and Worth Calculating

Total monthly costs in London run £300 to £500 higher than in most other UK cities, driven by rent that sits 30 to 60% above the national student average, higher transport costs, and higher general spending.

Over three years, that premium compounds to between £10,800 and £18,000 in additional living costs compared to studying somewhere like Sheffield or Nottingham. For many students, that’s the difference between graduating with manageable debt and graduating with debt that follows them for a decade.

The counterintuitive truth: choosing a lower-ranked university in a cheaper city often produces better financial outcomes than choosing a higher-ranked one in London, especially if you’re in a field where the degree classification matters more than the institution name. Law and medicine are exceptions. Most humanities, social sciences, and business degrees are not.

What This Means If You’re Set on London

London’s universities aren’t going to get cheaper. The demand is too high and the housing supply too constrained for that to change in any timeframe relevant to your degree.

So if London is where your course, your career, or your personal circumstances require you to be, the decision isn’t whether to accept the cost. It’s how to manage it as intelligently as possible.

Student apartments in London vary more than most students realise before they start searching. Zone 2 and Zone 3 locations with good Tube access can run £150 to £250 per month cheaper than equivalent rooms in Zone 1, with commutes that add fifteen to twenty minutes to your journey. For most students, that trade-off makes financial sense across a full academic year.

Bills-included accommodation is worth prioritising in London specifically. University halls and PBSA almost always include bills, while shared houses frequently don’t. In a city where energy costs are higher and winter bills spike, an unexpected £80 utility bill on top of already stretched rent is the kind of thing that tips students into arrears. 10% of students were in rent arrears at the time of the Save the Student 2026 survey, up from 7% in 2025, with the average amount owed sitting at £621.

Check amberstudent for verified student apartments in London across different zones and price points. Searching through a platform that lists bills-included options clearly saves you the maths of comparing headline rents that don’t include utilities, which makes genuine cost comparison significantly faster.

The Contract Length Problem Nobody Warns You About

This affects students in every UK city but hits hardest in London, where the base rent is already high.

Most private rental contracts run 51 to 52 weeks. Your academic year runs 38 to 40 weeks. The gap between those two numbers is weeks of rent you pay for a room you’re not living in. In London, at £1,100 per month, ten weeks of unused rent costs you £2,750.

University halls and most PBSA providers offer 40- to 44-week contracts aligned to the academic year. That alignment alone can save you more than the difference in weekly rent between accommodation types. Run the annual total, not the weekly headline, before you sign anything.

The One Comparison Most Students Don’t Make

Before you commit to a university and city, build a simple spreadsheet. Put the annual rent for realistic accommodation in each city you’re considering in one column. Add estimated transport costs. Add average food costs. Then subtract any scholarship or bursary income specific to that institution.

That number, the real annual cost of attending each university, tells you more than any open day ever will. Several institutions in northern England and the Midlands now actively market their lower total cost of attendance as a competitive advantage precisely because students are finally doing this comparison and choosing accordingly.

The universities know the housing crisis is reshaping their intake. Now you know it too, and you can use that information before you make a decision that affects your finances for years after graduation.

By Nathan Spears

Source link

No one starts a relationship expecting it to end. When it does, the practical questions arrive fast. Who stays in the home. How the bills get paid. What happens with the children. What you are actually entitled to.

The answers depend far more on your legal status than most people expect, and the gap between what people assume and what the law provides causes real financial harm every year. Understanding where you stand early gives you a far better chance of a fair outcome. Speaking to Family Law Partners or another family law specialist at the outset can help you avoid decisions that are difficult to undo later.

This guide covers the position in England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate family law systems, and some of the rules below work differently there.

Your rights depend on your legal status

There is no such thing as a common law marriage. It does not exist in England and Wales and never has, no matter how long you have lived together, whether you have children, or whether you share a bank account.

This matters because married couples and civil partners have access to a broad set of financial claims when they separate. Cohabiting couples do not. Two people in outwardly identical situations can end up with completely different outcomes purely because one couple signed a marriage register and the other did not.

So the first question to answer is not what feels fair. It is what legal category you fall into.

If you are married or in a civil partnership

Since April 2022, England and Wales has operated a no-fault divorce system. Neither of you has to prove wrongdoing or blame the other. There is a minimum period of 20 weeks between applying and being able to apply for a conditional order, then a further 6 weeks and 1 day before the final order.

Separately from the divorce itself, you have the right to apply for a financial order. That can cover:

• The family home and any other property
• Savings, investments and business interests
• Pensions, including pension sharing orders
• Maintenance for you and for your children

The court works through a list of factors set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, including the length of the marriage, each person’s income and earning capacity, contributions made to the family, and future needs. The welfare of any child under 18 comes first.

One point is routinely missed. Getting divorced does not, by itself, end your financial claims against each other. Without a financial order approved by the court, a claim can in principle be brought years later. If you want a clean break, it has to be documented properly.

If you are living together

Cohabiting couples are the fastest-growing family type in the UK, with more than 3.5 million cohabiting couple families. The law has not kept pace.

If you separate, you have no automatic right to a share of your partner’s property, savings, income or pension, regardless of how long you were together. What you may have instead:

• A property claim. If you contributed to a home held in your partner’s sole name, you may be able to establish a beneficial interest under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. These claims turn on evidence of what was agreed and what was paid, and they are harder and more expensive to run than a divorce financial claim.
• Claims for your children. Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 allows a parent to seek financial provision for a child, which can include a lump sum or the use of a property until the child reaches adulthood. This is provision for the child, not for you.
• Child maintenance. Available through the Child Maintenance Service regardless of marital status.

If you are currently living together and not planning to marry, a cohabitation agreement or a declaration of trust recording who owns what is far cheaper than litigating the question later.

Your rights as a parent

Parental responsibility gives you a say in major decisions about your child, including schooling, medical treatment and where they live. Mothers have it automatically. Fathers have it if they were married to the mother, or if they are named on the birth certificate for a birth registered from 1 December 2003 onwards.

There is no legal presumption that children’s time should be split equally. The court’s guiding principle is the welfare of the child, and there is a separate presumption that involving both parents benefits the child unless there is a risk of harm.

Most parents never need a court. If you cannot agree, you will usually be required to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting before you can apply for a child arrangements order. Exemptions apply, including where there has been domestic abuse.

Everything the original guidance says about protecting children still holds. Keep arguments away from them. Do not ask them to take sides. Hold routines, meals and school activities steady where you can. None of that is a legal right, but courts do look at which parent has supported the child’s relationship with the other.

The family home

If you are married or in a civil partnership and the home is in your partner’s sole name, you have home rights. You can occupy the property and you can register a notice against the title at HM Land Registry, which prevents a sale going through without your knowledge. This is worth doing early if you have any concern about it.

If you are not married, your position depends on whether you are on the title and, if not, whether you can establish a beneficial interest. Being on the mortgage, paying towards it or paying for renovations does not automatically give you ownership, though it can form part of the evidence.

Looking Ahead

The end of a relationship is difficult, but it does not have to leave you powerless. Find out which legal category you are in, get advice before you make irreversible decisions, and keep your paperwork in order. Every situation is different, and early advice usually costs far less than fixing a rushed agreement afterwards.

Disclaimer

This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you are facing separation or divorce, please seek advice from a qualified family law solicitor about your own circumstances.

By Nathan Spears

Source link

South Korean police searched the headquarters of the Korea Football Association (KFA) on 6 August as part of a criminal investigation into the appointment of national team manager Hong Myung-bo. This investigation comes a month after the country’s participation in the 2026 World Cup. Investigators are examining allegations of administrative irregularities and unlawful interference in the 2024 hiring process.

The raids follow South Korea’s shock group-stage exit at the 2026 World Cup. This result reignited criticism of Hong’s appointment and intensified public and political demands for accountability. This came after one of the national team’s worst tournament performances.

Inside the criminal investigation

According to Reuters, Seoul Police Financial Crimes Unit is investigating allegations of obstruction of business linked to Hong Myung-bo’s appointment. The inquiry centres on whether the Korea Football Association followed its own rules and coach selection procedures.

Police are now reviewing documents seized from the association’s headquarters to determine whether anyone improperly interfered with the selection committee. In addition, they are checking if anyone breached the approved hiring process in July 2024.

The controversy predates the World Cup

The controversy predates the World Cup. Hong Myung-bo’s appointment drew widespread criticism from the outset after he was selected following a brief meeting with Korea Football Association officials. At the same time, the selection committee was still considering several foreign candidates.

The South Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism later found that the association had breached its own procedures when appointing Hong and former coach Jürgen Klinsmann.

While it found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing or grounds to cancel either contract, the current police investigation marks the first criminal inquiry into the appointment process.

The World Cup fall out

South Korea’s group-stage exit at the 2026 World Cup has piled further pressure on the Korea Football Association (KFA).

Tipped as one of the favourites to reach the knockout stages, the team instead suffered an early exit. This prompted Hong Myung-bo’s resignation and triggered a series of parliamentary and administrative inquiries. Those investigations have now escalated into a criminal probe.

No charges have been brought against Hong Myung-bo or any KFA officials, and the association has yet to comment on the police searches.

Investigators are continuing to examine whether the appointment process involved irregularities that could warrant legal action.

Featured image via the Canary

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

Source link

The SNP’s latest accounts are out.

And the zombie shambles on for another year.

The headline figures sound reasonable – the party has turned a 2024 deficit of nearly £400,000 into a surplus of just over £500,000. Unfortunately that’s only had the effect of increasing its bank balance by around £110,000 to £384,320.

And that should be a big worry, because 2025 was a “fallow year”, with no general election to contest. Spending figures for this year’s Holyrood vote won’t be out for a while yet, but the SNP spent £1.5m on the last one and anything remotely similar in scale will have blown a huge hole in the coffers.

Advertisement

And there’s no safety net left to fall back on. The party has emptied every last piggy bank, cupboard and cardboard box under the bed to survive to this point, rummaged down the back of every sofa and used up its best tricks. It’s slashed the staff budget by a third, for example, saving half a million quid a year.

The unfortunate branch offices, which have been plundered for the last few years to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds, have taken another couple of sucker punches, with the “branch dividend” (membership fees returned from the central party to local branches) slashed by 40% and insult added to injury with the imposition of a £56,000 levy to unsuccessfully fight the Hamilton by-election.

The average SNP branch now looks like Aberdeen FC at the turn of the century.

The “Miscellaneous income” table above shows that the party is also still heavily reliant on the Grim Reaper – almost 60% of its £500K surplus was thanks to legacies from the deceased. Rumours that national treasurer Peter Grant, desperate to ensure a continuing income stream, has been seen skulking around the back of the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (aka The Death Star) in a dark cloak are unconfirmed at time of writing.

Advertisement

The party could certainly do with a bunch of wealthy supporters popping their clogs, because significant support from the living was all but non-existent. The below is the entirety of reportable donations in 2025.

There was £132,000 from the ever-generous UK taxpayer, but less than £10,000 in total in reportable donations from anyone else: £7,200 (in non-cash, premises-based contributions) from Cor Unum Ltd – a company which is itself deceased – and £2,600 to the Portobello branch from an Andrew Mackie, and that was it.

(Cor Unum appears to have been owned by lottery winners Chris and Colin Weir, although the nature of its business is somewhat opaque.)

Smaller contributions which don’t have to be individually recorded under electoral law provided rather more, but still well under half 2024’s figure.

Advertisement

There were some poignant notes. The infamous campervan is now as invisible to the accounts as it was to Nicola Sturgeon when she visited Peter Murrell’s mum.

But it’s the underlying story that’s really bleak, because ultimately the SNP is a party that just can’t afford to live. With Westminster, Holyrood and council elections three years out of every five (Brexit was actually a life-saver for the party, sparing the cost of European elections), and membership still falling steadily, the arithmetic is merciless.

(The figures for 2025 were given only as “around 51,000” in the accounts, a decline of around 10%, with the precise number apparently being too painful to relate and Humza Yousaf’s promise of six-monthly updates long forgotten.)

Averaged out over the five-year political cycle, the SNP is intrinsically a money-losing business and it’s running out of Hail Mary plays. Losses are bigger, and more frequent, than profits. Gravity is irresistible. Its plaintive cries about recovery of the money stolen by Peter Murrell would at best represent a stay of execution.

Advertisement

It’s been quite conspicuous that the party’s been uncharacteristically quiet on the subject of Andy Burnham’s coup against Keir Starmer. Normally when a new Prime Minister takes office without there having been a general election, opposition parties make a big song and dance about a vote being required in order to give the new PM a proper mandate.

But as far as we’ve noticed there hasn’t been a peep from the SNP on that subject, because if Burnham – the UK’s seventh PM in the last decade – reneged on his pledge NOT to hold a snap election it’d be a financial disaster of cataclysmic proportions.

Absent that, unfortunately, the independence movement must wait patiently for the slow erosion of time to do its work before there’s any hope of the SNP shuffling off this mortal coil and a vacancy for a serious indy party opening up. The good news is that on these numbers, that shouldn’t be too many years off now.

Source link

This summer of heatwaves has made the climate crisis impossible to avoid for most Brits as temperatures continue to break records.

Andy Burnham’s government has pledged to help bring down the cost of living, but ministers have been remarkably quiet over the consequences of this excessively hot summer.

A spate of record-breaking heatwaves have swept across Europe and the UK is currently in the middle of its third drought in five years.

The Green Party has urged the prime minister to hold an emergency COBRA meeting on how to meet this challenge – and it’s far from the only voice calling for action.

Advertisement

Here’s a look at what’s at stake as the stifling summer continues.

1. Food Shortages

The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) warned on Sunday that food shortages could be on the horizon following periods of extreme weather.

NFU president Tom Bradshaw told the BBC the government should give farmers tax breaks to build water storage systems on their lands.

Advertisement

Winter floods made it difficult to sow seeds and the current drought means any crops which were planted are struggling to grow.

Wheat is growing to just half its normal height and farmers across England have been forced to harvest earlier in the year to salvage what remains.

The climate impacts, together with the loss of EU-derived subsidies which protected farming, means that a third of British farmers are now making a loss or narrowly breaking even.

Livestock farmers are struggling as well due to low grass growth, and are resorting to using their winter supplies.

Advertisement

The issue stretches to farms around the world. Bradshaw warned the countries which we rely on for food are also facing changing climates.

These pressures have driven the price of fresh food up. Wholesale tomatoes have risen in price by more than 60%, iceberg lettuce by 90%, and potatoes by more than 40%.

2. Water Supply

The Met Office reported England had just 8% of its average July rainfall last month.

Advertisement

It is expected to be recorded as the driest July to date. In some parts of the country, it has not rained in more than a month.

Approximately 23 million people across England and Wales are under a hosepipe ban now, and to top it off, there’s also been a surge of wildfires, particularly in Suffolk.

Habitats are being destroyed as a result, and there are fears of irreversible ecological collapse, according to Natural England.

The water policy manager at Wildlife Trusts, Ali Morse, told the Guardian: “This week we’ve seen drought declared across half of England, but even under normal conditions, water scarcity is emerging as an urgent issue.

Advertisement

“If we don’t secure new water supplies and become more efficient with our use, it’s clear that, under a changing climate, we won’t have enough water to meet the needs of both society and the environment in future … but what most don’t realise is that across large parts of the country, we’re already reaching this limit.”

BROOK MITCHELL via AFP via Getty Images

3. Energy Concerns

Electricity demand typically goes up during extreme heatwaves, as people turn to air conditioning and fans, while their fridges go into overdrive to stay cool, putting further pressure on the system.

The very equipment controlling the grid might also struggle as power lines and insulators expand in high temperatures.

Advertisement

Overhead lines and underground cables can droop in hot weather too, bringing them close to surrounding environments with trees, buildings and the ground.

National Grid warned this week that “power cuts may be more common than usual”, as hot weather slows down the network.

The system told the Mirror: “Sustained heat like this puts extra pressure on our network. Equipment doesn’t get the chance to cool down overnight, and demand for cooling during the day adds to the strain.

“Longer heatwaves increase the risk of heat-related faults, which can cause power cuts for our customers.”

Advertisement

National Grid also advised Brits to keep a torch nearby with a spare set of batteries in case of unexpected power cuts.

4. Transport Strains

London bus drivers plan to strike later this month over working conditions with cab temperatures reaching almost 40C lately.

Soil shrinkage has disrupted rail services as well, while heat can warp rails, forcing operators to lower speed limits for safety.

Advertisement

The International Transport Forum warned that heatwaves are putting passengers at risk across Europe.

It said: “High temperatures can buckle railway tracks, strain power and cooling systems, and make buses, trains and stations unsafe or uncomfortable.

“Heat also increases the risk of heat exhaustion and heat stroke among transport workers, with implications for operational safety.”

The intergovernmental organisation called for vehicles to be modernised with effective cooling systems and more reflective materials to be used to reduce heat absorption, too.

Advertisement

5. Homes And Workspaces

UK buildings are built to retain warmth with thick walls and small windows but that means during heatwaves, it can feel impossible to cool down.

Most properties do not have air conditioning installed, either.

Not only are current homes and offices struggling to cope with the extreme weather, there’s a consequence for new homes, too.

Advertisement

Many of the areas in England where the government was hoping to build more homes are now facing major water shortages.

That means ministers may struggle to achieve their promise to build 1.5 million homes by the end of this parliament.

Secretary general of the TUC Paul Nowak told the Guardian: “As heatwaves become our new normal, we need to find ways to work and live with hot weather.

“That means new laws on maximum working temperatures, adapting buildings and workplaces to keep them cool, and ambitious climate action to tackle the problem at its root.”

Advertisement

Labour said last month it was considering making it illegal to work when it is “too hot”.

6. Health Fears

England is heading for its highest number of heat-related deaths this summer with an estimated 2,877 people who died in the May and June heatwaves.

The UK’s Health Security Agency (UKHSA) released heat health alerts for eight regions of England this week, amid particular concern for the elderly.

Advertisement

UKHSA’s Polly Ashmore said: “We are urging health and social care services in affected regions to ensure they are prepared, and reminding people to look out for elderly relatives, neighbours and those with underlying health conditions, making sure they are aware of the forecast and following the necessary advice.

“Simple steps such as staying hydrated, avoiding the sun during the hottest part of the day and keeping your home cool are some of the key ways to help keep yourself and others safe during periods of hot weather.”

The NHS has also been urged to adapt to the rising temperatures.

Health secretary Yvette Cooper said this week that A&E pressures during summer will end up being as intense as those during the winter flu season.

Advertisement

The Royal College of GPs also advised doctors to cancel surgeries in extreme weather.

Radiotherapy machines and NRI scanners have failed in the heat too.

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Source link

The furore surrounding the film the Odyssey exposes, again, how right-wing media discourse, tinged with overt racism, can be weaponised to fuel culture wars. Furthermore, it is used to score political points.

Amid the cacophony of praise surrounding Christopher Nolan’s Hollywood retelling of the Homer epic, it’s easy to forget that the controversy erupted long before its release. Not long after casting was made public, Nolan’s film was drawn into a wider right-wing cultural war battleground. The official trailer received the highest number of dislikes of any Nolan release. Even Elon Musk jumped on the bandwagon, bringing his familiar inflammatory culture-war commentary to the ‘discussion’ (because at this point and we expect nothing less).

The media pile-on

Before audiences had even seen the film, Nolan’s the Odyssey had been subject to a media pile-on.

Content farms and multimillion-dollar news networks churned out derogatory coverage. They confidently predicted the film would flop, however, inconveniently for them, the Odyssey has since become Nolan’s highest-grossing film.

This was predictably met with denial from some of the same pundits who helped manufacture the very outrage. Their rage-bait content exposes a fundamental misunderstanding of film history. In addition, it reveals a lack of knowledge about the Odyssey and Greek mythology. In other words, this is culture-war bluster masquerading as meaningful engagement. Much of the shallow discourse rests on the view of the Odyssey as a sacred text. They suggest it can be corrupted through reinterpretation.

This view refuses to acknowledge that Nolan’s Odyssey itself is a retelling. Yet it’s this belief that, ‘reinterpretation represents erasure’, which has driven much of the outrage so far. The expectation that adaptations must remain “untouched” fundamentally misunderstands the Odyssey’s legacy.

The Critical Drinker subreddit is having a meltdown over THE ODYSSEY having an 8.4 on IMDb.

If Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb are invalid, what’s next? Letterboxd? pic.twitter.com/8qoSQbve5r

— Duhlorean (@Duhlorean98) July 19, 2026

Advertisement

Or. The reality is we live in this time, and not in Ancient Greece, and Homer himself wrote his story 400 to 500 years after the Trojan War. Homer’s work isn’t a documentary. He didn’t know Agamemnon, he didn’t know a single person in his story. He wrote it thematic to…

— JR — (@JRGhaddar) August 2, 2026

The right-wing race card

The backlash also revealed clear racism overtones. Lupita Nyong’o’s casting as Helen of Troy, a mythical character from Ancient Greek literature, was met with vitriolic backlash.

Critics disguised their racist objections behind claims that the actress wasn’t “attractive enough.” Meanwhile, others nakedly expressed their racist “offence” at the decision to cast a Black woman.

Helen of Troy actress Lupita Nyong'o promotes ‘The Odyssey’ with bizarre Instagram dance video.

In Greek mythology, Helen of Troy is described as ‘the most beautiful woman in the world’ and ‘the face that launched a thousand ships.’ pic.twitter.com/QsnyM1XDl1

Advertisement

— Oli London (@OliLondonTV) July 25, 2026

The casting of trans actor Elliot Page was another target of the backlash. Rampant misinformation falsely claimed he had been cast as Achilles at the time. In reality, he was actually cast as Sinon, a Greek soldier.

Others took aim at Travis Scott’s casting, while critics argued — often without basis — that Nolan’s inclusion of minority actors erased Greek culture and betrayed the “original text”.

As discussed earlier, the Odyssey has been shaped by generations of storytellers before being attributed to the enigmatic Homer. As such, the story cannot be understood as the work of a single author.

‘Defenders of representation’ get it wrong

Although the film’s casting decisions have been rightly defended against racist backlash, the wider conversation exposed another limitation of shallow media discourse.

As the Canary has previously reported, during the pre-release period, revelations emerged that several scenes had been filmed in occupied Western Sahara without the input or permission of the Sahrawi people. Despite Sahrawi communities expressing their hurt, condemning the theft of their land, and calling for a boycott, their concerns were drowned out. The far louder debate surrounding ‘casting’ continues to dominate the conversation.

Parts of "The Odyssey" were filmed in occupied Western Sahara, defying requests from the Sahawari people.

Advocates are now calling for a boycott of the film and what they say is its complicity with Morocco's occupation and cultural genocide. pic.twitter.com/DEGSItsdS8

— Democracy Now! (@democracynow) July 17, 2026

Notwithstanding progressive commentators positioning themselves as ‘defenders of representation’ against the right-wing, much of the attention remained trapped in a manufactured debate, leaving little space for the marginalised communities actually affected by Hollywood’s practices. Ultimately, profit over people remains the order of the day.

This demonstrates not only the limits of progressive Hollywood discourse, but how media attention is often directed towards shallow culture-war debates instead of meaningful political conversation.

Therefore, Christopher Nolan’s the Odyssey reveals the wider harm of these controversies — a media ecosystem that rewards profitable outrage. Rather than amplifying culture-war outrage, any counter-discourse must examine Hollywood’s deeper harms, its colonial history, and the voices it continues to overlook.

Featured image via the Odyssey movie / Instagram

By Olaitan Mos-Shogbamimu

Source link

Source link