In your briefing today:

📣 Donald Trump may release details of a preliminary deal to end the war with Iran before Friday, his vice president JD Vance said. The deal, which Trump says has already been signed, has been met with a cool reception by US political leaders, and any reopening of the Strait of Hormuz could take weeks or even months to benefit the global economy.

📣 The story behind the firebombing of a house and car once linked to Keir Starmer is extraordinary and appears to lead back to Russia. Two Ukrainian-born men were convicted of conspiring to commit arson over a string of attacks targeting the PM.

In the background, and not caught, was a Russian-speaking figure called “El Money”, which a BBC investigation found could be run by Evgeny Lyukshin, a 23-year-old Russian diplomat. (Telegraph)

📣 Iran’s head coach says his team was ordered to leave the US and return to its training base in Mexico immediately after their disappointing 2-2 draw with New Zealand, rather than stay - as had been planned - in a Los Angeles hotel to begin their recovery.

“We are really troubled by that” said coach Amir Ghalenoei. “We don’t know why they are returning us, to be honest,” Ghalenoei said. “I think our team is perhaps the most oppressed in the World Cup.”

Iran has already been denied the support of a number of staff members, including officials, support staff and media officials, all of whom were refused US visas. (AP)

Claude can be your analyst, editor, and strategist.
But most professionals are using it to fix grammar.

These 200+ Claude prompts take it from grammar tool to your most powerful AI work assistant.

Sign up for Superhuman AI and get:

Claim your free prompts

📣 Kemi Badenoch says a Tory win in Thursday’s Aberdeen South byelection would give the oil and gas industry the “kiss of life”. (Scotsman)

📣 The Peter Murrell scandal continues to get murkier: he bought himself luxury cultery with SNP funds even on the day the party gave him £20,000 in part repayment of a “bizarre” loan. (Times)

📣 The Edinburgh Festival Fringe has a new permanent home, with the organisation moving into the former school in central Edinburgh today. (STV)

📣 Keir Starmer will unveil new sanctions against Russia and hundreds of millions of pounds in support for Ukraine at the G7 summit in France today. (Guardian)

📣 Officials missed a string of chances to save a baby who was abused and murdered by the teacher who adopted him. The evidence has emerged after Jamie Varley was found guilty of murder, and his boyfriend John McGowan-Fazakerley of sexual assault, cruelty and allowing the baby’s death. (Mail)

📣 Singer Bonnie Tyler is out of a coma but still “very unwell” in intensive care after emergency surgery. (BBC)

⚽️ The minnows made the headlines at the World Cup yesterday, with less-fancied nations frustrating their powerhouse opponents.

⚽️ Tonight’s fixtures:

🗣️ The social media ban being proposed by UK is one of the country’s biggest regulatory interventions in the technology world in years, and one that’s notable on a global scale: a move that will, in one swipe, markedly change how the next generation of children grow up.

Today’s 16-year-olds are as addicted to their phones as the rest of us: life is conducted on Snapchat and TikTok, and vast amounts of entertainment are consumed on YouTube. Should the legislation go through, all that will stop.

🗣️ What’s being banned? Children under 16 will be banned from using the major social media platforms, including Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube and X. They’ll also not be able to use livestreaming services such as Twitch, or communicate with strangers on gaming sites. Still to be announced, next month, are plans to impose overnight curfews and breaks from “doomscrolling” for those under 18. All this goes further than regulation in Australia, which imposed its own social media ban last year. But some sites will not be banned: platforms such as Discord, Roblox, YouTube Kids and WhatsApp will not be blocked.

🗣️ Why is the ban coming about? There’s been a lot of publicity about what kids can see online: videos about suicide and self-harm, extreme dieting, dangerous “sport”, as well as adult content. The worst sorts of content have proliferated, as influencers spot the opportunity to manipulate users and carve out ever-more extreme - and profitable - niches.

Parents are keen. As the Mirror points out today, 90% of parents who responded to an official consultation said they wanted a ban. “Tech giants had their chance and failed,” Keir Starmer said yesterday. “We’re stepping in to protect children, back parents and set a new normal for future generations.”

🗣️ What are the social media companies saying? They’re upset. A spokesperson for Meta told the Guardian: “Bans risk isolating teens from online communities and information, and driving them to unregulated alternatives that lack built-in protections and parental controls.” That message was echoed by YouTube and Snapchat.

There’s also the question of how the White House will react. UK Government officials say they have spent weeks trying to reassure the Trump administration the restrictions are not aimed specifically at US tech companies.

🗣️ Some social media campaigners aren’t happy either. Curiously enough, some say the proposed ban is a “missed opportunity” that - just as the social media companies themselves say - risks forcing children into darker, unregulated corners of the digital world. Ian Russell, whose 14-year-old daughter Molly Russell took her own life after accessing harmful online content, seeks a more sophisticated set of sanctions on the algorithms created by the social media companies. (Independent)

🗣️ What are other countries doing? According to Bloomberg, a number of other countries have measures in place - or in the pipeline. (Bloomberg)

🗣️ Is there a broader significance to this? Yes. First, this move to regulate is a further big shift from the laissez-faire model of regulation that has, broadly, characterised the development of digital content and services over the last 30 years. After the Online Safety Act of 2023 imposed age restrictions on adult content it appears this government is happy to regulate the virtual world as it would the physical one.

More battles may follow: campaigners on AI and its uses, and others who have lobbied hard on alleged copyright and intellectual property abuses by AI companies, may take heart that this government appears ready to frustrate the interests of powerful tech giants.

Sent this by a friend?