thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Mike Pompeo Denied Audience With Pope Francis

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Vatican denied US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s request for an audience with Pope Francis this week, saying the pope would not see Pompeo in the midst of the American presidential campaign.
“Yes, he asked,” Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin told The Associated Press as Pompeo is in Europe for a weeklong visit. “But the pope had already said clearly that political figures are not received in election periods. That is the reason.”
Advertisement
Pompeo will still meet with Parolin and other top Vatican officials during the visit, but the pope’s rebuff was seen by some as the latest example of a political rift between the United States and the Vatican. During a religious freedom conference this week, Pompeo issued a strong denouncement of a deal the Catholic Church signed two years ago with China related to the appointment of bishops, which it is considering extending.
Donald Trump has taken a hard line against China, as has Pompeo, in the leadup to the U.S. election in November. The secretary of state has also taken unusual efforts to use his political authority to promote religious freedom.
“Nowhere is religious freedom under assault more than in China,” Pompeo said at the event Wednesday. He later added that Beijing’s Community Party was working “day and night to snuff out the lamp of freedom, especially religious freedom, on a horrifying scale.”
Pompeo rejected claims that he was using his visit to the Vatican to drum up support for Trump ahead of the election, telling The New York Times the assertion was “just crazy.”
Advertisement
“We’ve been working on human rights in China the entire time I’ve been part of this administration,” he told the newspaper.
Reuters notes that Parolin and Foreign Minister Archbishop Paul Gallagher said they were “surprised” at Pompeo’s public statements, saying he had violated “one of the rules of diplomacy.”
“Normally when you’re preparing these visits between high-level officials, you negotiate the agenda for what you are going to talk about privately, confidentially,” Gallagher told the publication.
Pompeo wrote an article about the issue earlier this month, chastising the Vatican for signing the deal and saying Catholics were under assault in China. The AP notes the statements irked the Catholic Church and that the Vatican saw the effort as an attempt to win political points back in the U.S.
The @StateDept has been a strong voice for religious freedom in China and around the world and has taken steps to hold those who abuse the faithful responsible. We will continue to do so and stand with China's Catholics and religious believers. We call on the Vatican to join us. — Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) September 19, 2020
Advertisement
“Two years ago, the Holy See reached an agreement with the Chinese Communist Party, hoping to help China’s Catholics,” Pompeo wrote on Twitter. “Yet the CCP’s abuse of the faithful has only gotten worse. The Vatican endangers its moral authority, should it renew the deal.”
The Vatican has defended the deal with China. Parolin told Reuters that while it’s not perfect, it “is a matter that has nothing to do with American politics.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Trump Is 'The Largest Driver' Of Covid-19 Conspiracy Theories, Study Finds

HuffPost is part of Verizon Media .
We and our partners will store and/or access information on your device through @ @ @ @ @ similar technologies , to display personalised ads and content , for ad and content measurement @ @ @ @ @ development .
Your personal data that may be used • Information about your device and @ @ @ @ @ IP address • Browsing and search activity while using Verizon Media websites and apps Find @ @ @ @ @ use your information in our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy .
To enable Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ your personal data select ' I agree ' , or select 'Manage settings ' for @ @ @ @ @ your choices .
You can change your choices at any time by visiting Your Privacy @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
From using racist rhetoric to promoting dangerous “miracle cures,” President Donald Trump is by far the biggest spreader of Covid-19 false claims, according to a new analysis by researchers at Cornell University’s Alliance for Science, which identifies and combats misinformation and conspiracy theories about science.
The study, published by the university on Thursday, examined over 38 million English-language news articles about the coronavirus from Jan. 1 to May 26. Of those, just over a million contained misinformation or disinformation. Misinformation is any false information, regardless of whether the person sharing it intended to mislead, and disinformation is shared with the specific intent of misleading or deceiving.
Advertisement
Trump, the researchers concluded, is “likely the largest driver of the COVID-19 misinformation.” Nearly 38% of the articles mentioned the president, the study found, making him “by far the largest single component of the infodemic.”
In addition to direct mentions of Trump, there was significant overlap between news coverage of the president and news coverage of “miracle cures” because the president was often spreading the false information during White House briefings or to his millions of Twitter followers. Trump, for example, persistently touted the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as an effective coronavirus treatment, despite scientific research showing otherwise. He also ludicrously suggested that injecting disinfectant could wipe out the virus.
Other common categories of misinformation identified in the researchers’ analysis include racist conspiracy theories, such as those placing an outsized focus on the virus originating China and promoting racist tropes about people of Chinese descent.
Trump frequently refers to the pandemic using racist slurs and blames China in order to deflect from his own failed leadership. His rages have coincided with a wave of racism against Asian Americans this year.
Advertisement
Conspiracy theories often begin on social media and extremist websites. But the biggest danger arises when they’re repeated on influential platforms and blasted by those holding the biggest megaphones, the researchers said.
“It is especially notable that while misinformation and conspiracy theories promulgated by ostensibly grassroots sources, such as anti-vaccination groups, 5G opponents, and political extremists, do appear in our analysis in several of the topics, they contributed far less to the overall volume of misinformation than more powerful actors, in particular the U.S. President,” they wrote.
The researchers found that only 16.4% of the articles in the study specifically called out or corrected false information about the pandemic.
The study was being peer-reviewed for an academic journal, but the authors withdrew it because of the lengthy delay so they could share the findings immediately, according to The New York Times.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Priti Patel’s Wave Machine

Priti Patel’s Wave Machine

Priti Patel’s Wave Machine
Boris Johnson can’t remember his own coronavirus rules, Priti Patel considered deterring asylum seekers with a wave machine, and the EU is taking the UK to court - it’s been another one of those weeks. Joining Arj Singh and Rachel Wearmouth, Tory former special adviser Salma Shah and Labour ex-adviser Matthew McGregor try to pick their way through the headlines and consider why the PM is faring so badly, and whether government asylum plans could pose a threat to Labour.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Ministers Ignored Plea To Lock Down London Because It's A Labour City, Hints Sadiq Khan

ASSOCIATED PRESS
London mayor Sadiq Khan has suggested the government ignored his pleas for stricter coronavirus measures in the capital because of party politics.
Khan also said ministers lack the humility to change their approach to tackling the outbreak despite it clearly being unsuccessful.
Advertisement
When asked why the government had not placed London into lockdown despite his calls for stricter measures, Khan told HuffPost UK: “What the government needs to realise is we’re all on the same side; it’s not a Tory government versus a Labour mayor.
“It’s actually all of us on the same side fighting this virus and what I’m saying to the government is: ‘Let’s work together to take preemptive action to avoid the need for a national lockdown.’ I do not want that and it’s really important we do what we can to avoid it.
“I think the government has been slow throughout this pandemic. They were slow in February and March – and they tend to be slow now. It’s inexcusable.
Khan’s comments come as local leaders in the north of England hit out at the government over lockdown restrictions set to come in on Saturday.
Advertisement
Middlesbrough mayor Andy Preston has vowed to “defy the government” over the restrictions in his town, accusing ministers of “monstrous ignorance”. His stance was backed by Hartlepool Council leader Shane Moore.
Last week, Khan spoke with prime minister Boris Johnson to seek approval of new local lockdown measures in the capital.
That did not happen but London was placed on the government’s coronavirus local lockdown watchlist following a surge in cases – meaning stricter restrictions could be imposed if cases continue to rise.
“The government doesn’t appear to be nimble and quick at responding to this virus or have the humility to realise when they’ve got things wrong and change course,” Khan continued.
“I’ll continue to engage with the government and work with the government when I can. But the government needs to work with regional and local government across the country to make sure we get a grip on this virus.”
Advertisement
DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS via Getty Images
Khan wants to break rank and exercise the freedom to impose restrictions in the capital as he sees fit – including a review of the 10pm pub curfew.
He added: “What I’m saying to the government is we, the city, want to go as one. So I’m meeting councillors and Public Health England later on. We want to take preemptive action so, for example, so I think the 10pm curfew isn’t working.
“It’s counterproductive when I see the numbers of people outside bars, restaurants and nightclubs after 10pm – not only is the increase not being decelerated it actually could be getting worse.”
Khan was speaking on Thursday as an independent report he commissioned was published, revealing the stark inequalities that have led to a disproportionate impact of the virus.
Advertisement
It found that Black people are at almost twice the risk of dying from Covid-19 than White people and mortality rates from the virus are three times higher for men in lower-paid, manual roles.
As campaigners urge the government to ramp up measures to protect Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities who are being disproportionately affected by the virus, ministers stand accused of not caring about marginalised groups.
Khan said he understands the concerns.
“I think the government’s got to walk the walk. Sometimes they talk the talk,” he said. “The reality is Black people in our country tend to work more in manual jobs than office or managerial jobs so what we’ve seen over the last few months is even though the government were forewarned about the potential disproportionate impact of Covid-19, no action was taken.
“So I understand why Black Londoners and Black people across the country think the government doesn’t care about them.
“The reason why I published the report today is we now know we’re into a second wave. It’s possible to give the government the benefit of the doubt about not realising the disproportionate impact of Covid-19 in the first wave. This report being published today with recommendations that I’ve sent to the government means there can be no excuse if we see, over the next few weeks and months, a disproportionate impact on Black people.”
Advertisement
PA
Since the first wave, the ethnicities of hospital deaths are being recorded and occupational risk assessments are being undertaken so frontline workers with underlying health conditions are placed at risk in their line of duty.
But there’s a lot more that needs to be done.
“The issues that affect the structural racism that exists haven’t been addressed and the government seems to be hesitant to accept there’s a problem and if you can’t accept there’s a problem, you can’t take action,” the mayor said.
“My fear is amplified by the fact that we know we’ve entered a recession but also if we’re not careful this recession will be extremely deep and having lived through the 1980s where Black people suffered disproportionately with mass unemployment I worry about another generation being written off in the 2020s like they were in the 1980s.”
The report also revealed that the pandemic has negatively impacted disabled Londoners who reported increased difficulties performing practical tasks such as shopping for groceries, as well as accessing up-to-date health information about the virus.
Advertisement
Concerns were also raised around the lack of guidance available in accessible formats, including in the government’s daily press briefings which did not always feature British sign language interpreters.
Almost four in five (79 per cent) of LGBTQ+ people said their mental health had been negatively impacted by the lockdown, and many young LGBTQ+ people have reported feeling unsafe in their current housing conditions.
The study was conducted by researchers at the University of Manchester and co-authored with the University of Sussex and The Ubele Initiative, the London based social enterprise.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--This Meme Of 2020 As Told By Friends Could Not Be Any More Accurate

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Friends wasn’t exactly famed for its realistic representation of life in your mid 20s, but it turns out the characters can do pretty great job of summing up 2020.
They all feature in an incredible meme doing the rounds on social media, which tells the story of the year through various quotes from the hit sitcom.
Advertisement
From the lows of self isolation, to derailed plans and hygiene concerns, it definitely sums up what many of us have experienced throughout the pandemic...
In the words of Chandler Bing, could this BE any more accurate?
The meme was made earlier this year by @BehindTheF.R.I.E.N.D.S, on Instagram, but began circulating again after it was shared by David Beckham on the social media site.
The pandemic has also had a knock-on effect on the show itself, as earlier this year, Jennifer Aniston, Courteney Cox, Lisa Kudrow, Matt LeBlanc, David Schwimmer and Matthew Perry were meant to come together to film a TV special celebrating 25 years of Friends.
Advertisement
However, the retrospective has since been pushed back for a second time due to the pandemic.
In the meantime, there has been various revelations about the show in the press, including how another cast member nearly played Rachel Green.
Supporting star Jane Sibbett – who is better known as Ross’ ex-wife Carol – revealed she was originally in the frame for the role, but things did not work out as she was pregnant at the time.
Friends execs later revealed the truth about one of the character’s most iconic lines in the sitcom.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Why Chrissy Teigen Sharing Her Baby Loss Means So Much To Women Like Me

Toni Anne Barson via Getty Images
Content warning: this article contains description of miscarriage
I had been thinking about Chrissy Teigen a lot this week. She had been sharing much of her difficult pregnancy online, talking about how scary it was to bleed when you’re pregnant, how she was on bedrest, how she was going to do whatever it took to get her baby through. I felt invested – perhaps disproportionately so – in her pregnancy.
But then, despite the bed rest and the blood transfusions and everything else she tried, her baby, Jack, died. She announced the loss on Instagram with a series of black and white photographs which beautifully – agonisingly – documented the process of losing a pregnancy. Something I know all too well.
Advertisement
Last year, on holiday in Greece and just over nine weeks pregnant, I went to the bathroom and discovered that I was bleeding. It was a panic unlike any I’ve ever felt before. The kind of panic which comes from the inside of each and every one of your cells.
But then the blood stopped. Everyone assured me that spotting during pregnancy was normal. My nausea returned. My breasts were still agony. All the signs said that it was going to be okay.
A week later, like Chrissy, I saw a blood clot. I think in that moment I knew, but of course I still prayed. We took a taxi to the hospital, sitting in silence while I made futile promises to someone in the heavens, that if it was okay I would be better, do better, give up things I loved.
Advertisement
The next day the incredible team at the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson wing of UCLH told me, with the utmost kindness, that I had lost the baby. Several weeks of medication and then surgery ensued, and then eventually I comprehensively, chemically wasn’t pregnant anymore. I drank wine. The baby books went to the charity shop. I threw the list of names in the bin and deleted the shopping list from my iPhone. I raged at the targeted adverts on Facebook and Instagram. I sent blistering emails to shops who refused to allow me to return maternity dresses. And I talked about it. A lot.
“I wanted to shout about my miscarriage because I wanted to get the pain out of my body, by talking, and writing, and sharing.”
Historically, women haven’t been encouraged to talk about their miscarriages. There is a twelve week ‘rule’, which suggests you don’t tell anyone about your pregnancy until you’re three months gone, which is regarded as something of a ‘safe zone’.
The reason for the ‘rule’ is to spare you from having to announce a miscarriage. And while of course it is your choice whether you announce it at week one or week forty, the cultural expectation to keep your pregnancy a secret for three months, as if announcing a miscarriage is anything compared to the horrors of experiencing one, compounds this stigma further, and because the majority of pregnancy loss happens early, it creates a false impression that miscarriage is rare. It is not rare – according to pregnancy charity Tommy’s, one in four pregnancies ends in loss.
After my loss I needed to talk about it. So I tweeted. I went on the radio. I wrote about it. I talked about it at drinks with my girlfriends and at dinner with my husband. And while some of the people in my life seemed confused by my desire to be as public as humanly possible, it was the only way I knew how to grieve. I wanted to shout about my miscarriage because I wanted to get the pain out of my body, by talking, and writing, and sharing.
Advertisement
“As a society we are very bad at talking about death, and we are still embarrassed by anything gynaecological, so miscarriage represents a uniquely impossible conversation.”
I found that as soon as I mentioned my loss, other women would talk about theirs. I got emails and direct messages and phone calls from people who I hadn’t spoken to for years, and from complete strangers, telling me their stories, telling me that I wasn’t alone. In the world of pregnancy loss there is no one-upmanship, no hierarchy of grief. No matter how early or late your loss was – or whether it is your first, fifth or fifteenth – there’s a place for you and your pain, and there are women all over the world who will take your hand and tell you that it is going to be okay. There’s an expression you hear a lot in that pregnancy loss world: it’s the worst club, with the best members.
As a society we are very bad at talking about death, and we are still embarrassed by anything gynaecological, so miscarriage represents a uniquely impossible conversation for many people. But no woman should ever feel obliged to hide her loss, or unable to talk about it. And the more that brave, brilliant famous women like Chrissy Teigen speak out about their losses, especially with her unflinching honesty, the smaller that stigma will become.
I hope Chrissy knows how much it matters that she documented her pregnancy, and that she shared her loss with the world. She will have single-handedly have reduced the expectation for women to keep pregnancy loss as a shadowy secret and furthered the conversation about what it means to lose your baby. Perhaps that might be a tiny, tiny fragment of a silver lining to this darkest, heaviest of clouds.
Rebecca Reid is a journalist and author of Truth Hurts, Perfect Liars and The Power of Rude. Follow her on Twitter at @RebeccaCNReid
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Why Plan To House Asylum Seekers On Ferries Is Home Office's Dumbest Idea Yet

The UK has seen a significant increase in the number of asylum seekers arriving into the UK via small boat crossings – with at least 7,000 in 2020.
With the sudden drop in road freight due to Covid-19 making it harder for people to travel in lorries, the UK’s refugee resettlement scheme paused indefinitely due to the pandemic, and the growing presence of people smugglers in northern France, many of those desperate to travel to the UK have been left with no other choice but to make the dangerous journey by boat.
Urged on by a number of anti-refugee campaigners, including Nigel Farage and far-right activists who have filmed themselves turning up to hotels housing asylum seekers, the UK government has vowed to take action – including bringing the military into the Channel.
In recent days, several papers have reported that Home Office officials are considering adopting the “offshore” model used by the Australian government – housing them on ferries.
That’s in addition to various other increasingly outlandish proposals to process applications on Ascension Island or Papua New Guinea.
But to change the current system – already fraught with problems and the subject of allegations of abuse – could have huge human, financial and environmental implications.
The human cost
It’s important to recognise that asylum seekers, living under what has often been portrayed as a “soft” British system, are already suffering.
In the aftermath of the Glasgow hotel attack in July, in which Sudanese asylum seeker Badreddin Abedlla Adam stabbed six people before being shot dead by police, concerns about the conditions in temporary accommodation for asylum seekers came to the fore.
Positive Action In Housing (PAIH) referred to the situation in Glasgow, where around 5,000 asylum seekers are currently housed, as a “humanitarian crisis”, with the Mears Group – subcontracted by the government – accused of “warehousing for profit”.
In September Glasgow MPs called for an inquiry into the deaths of three asylum seekers in the city, including that of Mercy Baguma, originally from Uganda, who was found dead close to her malnourished baby son.
The UK is the only western European country without a statutory detention limit, which means that people can be placed in detention centres – often with the immediate threat of deportation – for any length of time.
People detained inside removal centres have widely described prison-like conditions, and, according to the Association of Visitors to Immigration Detainees (AVID) in 2018, 20% of people were held for more than two months.
To understand the impact an offshore system could have on asylum seekers – many of whom have already experienced immense trauma both in their home country and during their journey to the UK – we need to look at Australia.
Despite being deemed unlawful under international law, and the subject of years of human rights campaigning, Australia has been sending asylum seekers who arrive by boat to Nauru and Papua New Guinea since 2001.
According to the Refugee Council of Australia, 13 people have died – both through neglect and suicide – at offshore centres, and the mental health of those held in detention is worse than that of people in refugee camps.
More than 4,000 people – including children – have been sent to offshore facilities since the scheme resumed in 2012.
Organisations working to support asylum seekers in Nauru have previously reported self-harm or suicide attempts amongst children as young as eight detained on the island. Some 30 children in 2018 were thought to have traumatic withdrawal syndrome – a progressive and potentially life-threatening condition causing sufferers to gradually withdraw to the extent that they refuse food and drink and eventually become unresponsive.
In 2015 thousands of people took to the streets to protest against the Australian government’s use of the centres, after it emerged that a 23-year-old Somali woman held in offshore detention had been allegedly raped and transported to the mainland to have an abortion. Australia’s Refugee Council has described evidence of sexual abuse in offshore centres as “overwhelming”, and a damning report by the country’s lawmakers described conditions on Nauru as “not adequate, appropriate or safe”.
Andy Hewett, head of advocacy at the UK’s Refugee Council, said the organisation is “very alarmed” that the Home Office could pursue an offshore a system of offshore detention.
He added: “The Australian experiment has shown that this approach leads to catastrophic outcomes, including high levels of self-harm and mental illness.
“People seeking asylum have a right to claim asylum in the UK, and living in our communities gives them the best opportunity to adapt to life in the UK.
“Pursuing offshore detention would seriously damage the UK’s proud history of protecting refugees.”
The financial cost
Detention centres already come at a huge cost to the taxpayer – with the annual cost of detention for the year ending March 2019 totalling £89m, a daily cost of around £95 for each detainee.
In January 2019, the Home Office entered into seven 10-year contracts with private companies – Clearsprings, Ready Homes, Serco and Mears – to provide “accommodation, transportation and support services to eligible asylum applicants”.
According to the department’s most recent published accounts, all of these contracts have been operational since September 2019, and are worth £4.2bn.
A look at the Home Office’s total expenditure on asylum costs in 2019-2020 shows some £470m was spent over the course of the year.
While these figures may seem high, the expenditure is dwarfed by that of Australia. According to figures collated by the Refugee Council of Australia, processing asylum seekers offshore in Nauru and Papua New Guinea came at an annual cost of more than $1bn (£560m) in 2018-2019.
With the UK’s plans to process asylum seekers on offshore ferries currently little more than reported discussions between Home Office ministers, there’s no indication of how much such a strategy could cost taxpayers.
According to The Times, a disused 40-year-old ferry could be bought from Italy for £6m, housing 1,400 people in 141 cabins, while a disused cruise ship, currently moored in Barbados, could cost £116m, accommodating 2,417 people in 1,000 cabins. These costs do not include the huge task of converting such a ship.
While asylum seekers are usually transported by coach to temporary accommodation at present, offshore holding centres would present a new – not to mention costly – logistical problem, and the Home Office would presumably be forced to recruit a significant number of new staff to run its operations.
There’s little information available online regarding how much officers working in detention centres earn, but careers organisation Prospects states that Border Force assistant officers are paid £20,475 to £21,358 a year, increasing to between £23,330 and £26,831 a year with the role of officer. In order to recruit staff who are, presumably, willing to live on board what amounts to a floating detention centre, it is likely those salaries would have to be increased significantly.
Factoring in the other complications of opening a facility like a holding ship, such as food and supplies having to be delivered by boat or air rather than by road, it is likely to cost the government far more to process asylum seekers offshore than the current system does.
The cost to the taxpayer is a favoured argument of those against permitting asylum seekers to come to the UK, but an offshore arrangement is unlikely to solve that problem – and in all probability would magnify it.
The environmental cost
While not the first complication that comes to mind, there is also the issue of ferries being a huge polluter.
According to Transport & Environment, Europe’s largest clean transport campaigning group, cruise ships – which could potentially accommodate thousands of asylum seekers – have a huge impact on the climate, air quality and natural habitats.
The vast majority of cruise ships burn heavy fuel oil (HFO), which is the dirtiest fossil fuel available, and most ships are fitted with diesel particulate filters that are standard for vehicles such as truck. HFO contains 35,000ppm sulphur, which is 3,500 times more polluting than road diesel.
It isn’t clear where the Home Office proposed the ships be moored, but cruise ships passing close to coastal communities contribute significantly to worsened air quality in those areas.
On a smaller scale, it was found that even London ferries produced the same emissions as those generated by hundreds of buses and trucks, The Independent reported in 2018.
The government is set to host the UN’s annual Climate Change Conference, referred to as COP26, in November 2021, and Boris Johnson has already set about urging other countries to go carbon neutral by 2050 – positioning the UK as a green example to lead other nations by.
Ethical and financial implications aside, holding potentially thousands of asylum seekers on board disused ships – which are likely to be older vessels and therefore probably not fitted with green technology – could generate a much larger carbon footprint than continuing with the current system.
Bringing journeys back and forth from the ships, for asylum seekers, staff, and supplied, into the equation, the pursuit of an offshore system would likely directly contradict the government’s climate ambitions.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--10 Ways You Can Encourage Pretend Play And Teach Kindness And Acceptance

© Barbie
When I was little, I used to stay up late, talking to my Barbies, giving them names, personalities – and giving my dolls made up problems I’d relish trying to solve. What I was really doing, according to scientists at Cardiff University? Practicing empathy.
That’s because doll-play, say the experts, teaches children much more than how to choose cool costumes or decorate a Dreamhouse (though these things are creative, too). In fact, playing with dolls can help children practice the vital life skills of social information processing and relating to other people – and so lead kids on to greater emotional, social and academic success.
Advertisement
Rachel Adedeji chats to Victoria Richards and Dr Michele Borba on The Power of Empathy. Also listen on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.
Dr Sarah Gerson, of Cardiff University’s Centre for Human Developmental Science – who led the world’s first scientific study into doll-play with Mattel, makers of Barbie – said that ‘pretend play’ can have significant positive effects, even if the child is playing alone.
“Our child development research group found evidence that even when playing with dolls alone, children’s brains are active in similar ways as to when they interact with other people,” she said. “Playing with dolls can help children rehearse social interactions and allow them to develop empathy and social skills which are important for future success in our social world. This, we hope, should bring some comfort to parents concerned about their children’s social and academic development.”
Advertisement
© Barbie
I’ve seen this with my own kids – my son is only four, but will sit for hours, role-playing different dilemmas with his superhero dolls. My daughter is eight, and loves dressing up her dolls as pilots, as princesses – even wizards. The pair of them regularly gather their toys together to play ‘doctors and nurses’ or ‘teachers and pupils’, and sometimes I get dragged in, too – and end up having to play waitress to a whole host of plastic people, taking orders and delivering lunch. But I don’t mind – because it’s exactly these kinds of games that scientists now know helps children learn about the world.
“We looked at a part of the brain that’s used when people think about and interact with others,” said Dr Gerson. “We found that this brain area is similarly active when kids play with dolls by themselves and when they play with a playmate.”
What’s more, the results of the study – which tested 42 boys and girls, aged between four and eight, as they played with a range of Barbie dolls – were the same regardless of gender, or which country they were from.
How can parents encourage pretend play?
So, if pretend play is so vital to our children’s future social interactions – after all, empathy and social understanding are considered critical leadership skills, emphasised by business and medical schools alike – how can parents best encourage it?
Advertisement
According to educational psychologist Dr Michele Borba, empathy plays a key role in predicting kids’ wellbeing, happiness and relationship satisfaction, as well as academic success. It also promotes kindness and can counter issues such as racism, aggression and bullying. She called the results of the doll-play study “extraordinary”, and said that empathy is like a muscle: the more children practice it, the stronger it gets. And she gave HuffPost UK Parents 10 key tips for cultivating empathy in your child.
1. Encourage free play with dolls (and listen in)
“Doll play offers a unique window into children’ lives,” Dr Borba said. “Tune in and you may discover your child’s interests, worries and dislikes.”
2. Talk about feelings
Children must be able to read emotions, before they can empathise. Extend your child’s ‘feelings vocabulary’ by naming feelings. Girls tend to hear ‘feelings words’ more than boys, so ensue you talk about emotions with your sons.
© Barbie
3. Broaden their horizons
It’s important to expose your child to kids from a range of different backgrounds. One way of doing this is by providing dolls with different skin tones and disabilities. Look for what they have in common with others, not how they differ.
Advertisement
4. Flashcards
A simple way of broadening a child’s emotional vocabulary is through flashcards. Teaching children to ‘read’ feelings in a key step towards cultivating empathy and kindness. Make flashcards with ‘happy’, ‘sad’, ‘afraid’ and ‘excited’ words on them. Use the cards to play a family game where someone ‘acts out’ the emotion and kids guess what it is.
5. Use the ‘Two Kind Rule’
Encourage children to say or do two kind things to each other, every day – and make sure you point out kindness whenever you see it. The more kids practice kindness and we as parents acknowledge and celebrate it, the more their empathy will grow.
6. Take care of each other
Children learn to empathise by taking care of one another. Allow a child to feed the family pet, call an elderly relative or bake cookies – you could even ask them to use dolls to role-play being a doctor, nurse or vet. The more they practice kindness during play, the likelier children will be to use kindness in real life.
7. Praise with nouns
An experiment with kids aged three to six showed they respond more positively to being asked if they want to be a ‘helper’ (noun) than being asked if they will ‘help’ (verb). If you want your child to see themselves as a caring person, use nouns!
8. Start a kindness box
Cut a slit in an old shoebox and turn it into a ‘post box’ – then ask kids to look out for kind acts, to write them down, and ‘post’ them.
Advertisement
9. Role-play dilemmas
Use gentle prompts to ask your child how to ‘help’ a doll ‘in crisis’. Asking the right questions helps you discover what’s going on in your child’s mind. Try questions such as, ‘Daisy can’t find her guitar. How can Barbie help?’
10. Use props
Dr Borba also recommends using dolls, stuffed animals, puppies and babies to teach kids how to be empathetic. Give children responsibilities to take care of others. You can ‘model’ holding your baby, or show a child how to stroke a nervous dog. The more children practice kindness, the more likely they will be to internalise the value.
You can listen to more expert advice from Dr Michele Borba in the Power Of Empathy podcast on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Playing With Dolls Can Teach Your Child Valuable Social And Development Skills

© Barbie
Having fun with dolls – it’s more than just child’s play. Your little one might spend hours dressing them up, sorting them into groups, acting out teacher-pupil or parent-child relationships – or even arranging them into a hung parliament on the bedroom floor, like my daughter did as a way to understand my explanation of the intricacies of the 2017 General Election (in her version, Theresa May was the Gruffalo).
My daughter is eight, now; and shows no signs of growing out of dolls. In fact, her affection for them has only become stronger – she’s just recently bought a new coat for her favourite, Annie. It’s sweet, but what if there is a lot more sophistication to doll-play than we believe? What if, in enacting realistic situations using plastic people, kids are actually fine-tuning their social skills – and learning how to feel compassion and empathy for the real-life people around them?
Advertisement
Rachel Adedeji chats to Victoria Richards and Dr Michele Borba on The Power of Empathy. Also listen on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.
It can be tempting to dismiss play like this; to assume doll play is just for fun. When it comes to presents, many parents naturally lean towards educational tablets, puzzles or STEM games, particularly after six months of disrupted schooling in the wake of the global pandemic.
But according to researchers at Cardiff University, who conducted the world’s first neuroscience study of doll play – in conjunction with Mattel, makers of Barbie – dolls can aid with the development of key skills: they help children understand how other people think and interact with each other.
Advertisement
The team of psychologists used neuroimaging technology to monitor the brain activity of 42 boys and girls, aged between four and eight, as they played with a range of Barbie dolls. The results were astounding.
© Barbie
“We found evidence that even when playing with dolls alone, children’s brains are active in similar ways to when they interact with other people,” said Dr Sarah Gerson, of Cardiff University’s Centre for Human Developmental Science.
She explained that the areas of the brain which are responsible for empathy and social information processing – areas which help us to collaborate, cooperate and resolve conflicts – ‘lit up’ when kids played with dolls, even when playing on their own - and more than when they were playing on an electronic tablet.
Benefits of dolls play
Doll-play can also help children recognise who to trust, and practice asking questions when we need help with something, or want to learn more. “Dolls encourage children to create their own little imaginary worlds, as opposed to problem solving or building games,” Dr Gerson said.
Advertisement
“They encourage children to think about other people and how they might interact with each other. The fact that we saw the brain area that is associated with social information processing to be active in our study shows that playing with dolls is helping them rehearse some of the social skills they will need in later life.”
Empathy a ‘key social skill’
A global survey commissioned by Barbie highlighted the importance of the findings – of 15,000 parents across 22 different countries, a staggering 91% said empathy was a “key social skill” they’d like their child to develop. However, just 24% were aware that simple doll-play could aid development of this highly-desired key skill.
© Barbie
The research is the first to show scientifically that playing with dolls can offer major benefits in preparing children for the future through nurturing social skills like empathy – something child development experts say is “vital” for emotional, academic and social success.
As a mother-of-two, this has changed the way I think about my kids playing with dolls. The next time my little girl wants to take her favourite doll Annie to the park, along with a change of clothes. Rather than moaning about the extra baggage, I’m all for it.
Advertisement
You can listen to experts discuss dolls play and child development in the Power Of Empathy podcast on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--South Park Coronavirus Special Comes Right Out And Says It

LOADING ERROR LOADING
South Park delivered an unexpectedly pointed message at the end of its hour-long pandemic special on Wednesday night ― and it was a message directly urging viewers to vote.
The episode was full of the show’s trademark off-colour humour, with jokes about everything from bestiality to police brutality. It also took on social distancing:
Advertisement
There were Zoom meetings and mask debates:
Put on your Chin Diaper and get ready for the west coast premiere of the #PandemicSpecial! pic.twitter.com/pjmeOVNPKI — South Park (@SouthPark) October 1, 2020
But the big moment came during the show’s final minutes, when a character made a direct plea to vote. That character was President Donald Trump, or rather, Mr. Garrison, who has essentially morphed into Trump since 2015.
Garrison/Trump explained how the pandemic was good for his reelection chances. So, when a scientist said he was on the cusp of having a breakthrough, the president whipped out a flamethrower and roasted him on the spot.
Advertisement
“Don’t forget to get out and vote, everybody!” he said straight to viewers. “Big election coming up!”
The message was much more blunt than the show’s previous forays into presidential politics, which have tended to lean heavily toward nihilism.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Sacha Baron Cohen Has Trump And Coronavirus In His Sights In First Look At Borat Sequel

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Brace yourselves, Borat is back – and it seems Sacha Baron Cohen’s new film has Donald Trump and coronavirus firmly in its sights.
Sacha’s comedy character – fictional Kazakh journalist Borat Sagdiyev – is set to appear in a new sequel to the hit 2006 film, debuting on Amazon Prime later this month.
Advertisement
Fans have been given a taster of what to expect from the new film with the release of two previews – the first of which was unveiled on new Twitter and Instagram accounts parodying the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Sacha Baron Cohen as Borat Amazon Prime
In the clip, Borat is heard talking up Trump’s election campaign, praising his competency and ability as US president, while a montage of news footage contradicting his statements plays.
“Because of Trump, 350 million Americans still alive,” Borat says of Trump’s handling of the pandemic, adding: “Vote for Premier Trump or you will be crushed.”
Advertisement
The clip was shared with the caption: “Congratulation to great friend of the Kazakh people @realDonaldTrump for winning debate today! Impressive and amazing result for a strong premier who always put America and Kazakhstan first!”
Congratulation to great friend of the Kazakh people @realDonaldTrump for winning debate today! Impressive and amazing result for a strong premier who always put America and Kazakhstan first! pic.twitter.com/qLljQ8b5UU — Republic of Kazakhstan 🇰🇿 (@KazakhstanGovt) September 30, 2020
In another Amazon Prime trailer, Borat shows off his own unique approach to the pandemic, and is seen trying to kill the coronavirus with a frying pan.
Earlier this week, Amazon confirmed it had acquired worldwide streaming rights to the film, which was reportedly made during lockdown.
Advertisement
Sacha Baron Cohen originated the character of Borat on his series Da Ali G Show.
The first Borat film, directed by Larry Charles, grossed $262 million worldwide and was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay at the Oscars.
Sacha has targeted Trump many times during his screen career, with the US president being one of the unwitting targets of Da Ali G show in a 2003.
The episode saw Sacha ’s character try to pitch him a product called ice cream gloves, but Trump walked out when he realised it was a prank.
Trump also branded Sacha “a moron who should have been pummeled” after a red carpet stunt at the Oscars in 2012.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Middlesbrough Mayor Vows To ‘Defy’ Matt Hancock’s New Lockdown Measures

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The mayor of Middlesbrough has vowed to “defy the government” over the latest coronavirus lockdown restrictions in his town, accusing ministers of “monstrous ignorance”.
On Thursday health secretary Matt Hancock announced that people living in Liverpool, Warrington, Hartlepool and Middlesbrough will be banned from mixing with those they do not live with “all settings” apart from outdoor public spaces.
Advertisement
The new restrictions will come into force on Saturday morning at one minute past midnight, Downing Street has said.
But the Middlesbrough mayor Andy Preston said tighter lockdown measures “didn’t make any sense” and would “kill viable jobs and damage mental health”.
In a video message posted on Twitter: he said: “I have to tell you that I think this measure has been introduced based on factual inaccuracies and a monstrous and frightening lack of communication and ignorance.
“I don’t accept this statement at all. I don’t accept the measures. We need to talk to government. They need to understand our local knowledge, expertise and ability to get things done and preserve jobs and well-being.
Advertisement
“We’re really disappointed. As things stand, we defy the government and we do not accept these measures.
“We need to get Covid under control and we need to work with people to find a way of preserving jobs and mental health.”
Govt Restrictions Are Unacceptable
We tried to communicate with govt but they didn’t listen
They’re imposing restrictions that’ll kill viable jobs & damage mental health
I do not accept the government’s intended restrictions - they’re based on ignorance
Updates to follow pic.twitter.com/ZqtE1ES8gm — Andy Preston Mayor (@Tees_Issues) October 1, 2020
Preston also posted a message on his Facebook page, writing: “Today’s announcement doesn’t make any sense for Middlesbrough.
“We have tried hard to communicate with govt and get them to listen – but they didn’t engage.
“We proposed measures that would do what govt seeks but would also protect viable jobs and preserve mental health.
Advertisement
“They are now imposing restrictions that will kill viable jobs and damage mental health.
“Right now I do not accept the government’s intended restrictions because they are based on ignorance.”
Speaking to HuffPost UK, the Middlesbrough mayor warned the new restrictions would lead to “depression” and “despair”.
“Right now this is merely a government plan,” he said. “I will follow the law and urge everyone to do the same.
“I want [the government] to go away and come up with a better plan that’s strong on Covid but also compassionate and intelligent.
“Their plan will limit the virus’s ability to spread and it will also lead to depression, despair and possibly suicides. Their plan will cause the end of viable jobs and businesses – this is unnecessary. We can have a safe and welcoming hospitality industry.”
Advertisement
The latest restrictions were announced after Middlesbrough and Hartlepool Councils confirmed they had requested the government to ban people from visiting other households.
Hartlepool Council leader Shane Moore said he agreed “completely” with Preston’s statements and described the new measures as “draconian”.
Speaking to Sky News, he said: “I agree with Andy completely. They are completely unnecessary.
“We’re incredibly frustrated because we entered into these talks with the government on the understanding that if we engage proactively, we would be able to help shape the restrictions that come into place.
“We felt that it was very important for the local economy and businesses and jobs that people were able to continue to go out and socialise in Covid-secure restaurants, cafes and pubs.
“That is the measure we don’t support today. We think it’s draconian and it could have been so much better.”
Advertisement
He continued: “Last night I went to bed with a clear instruction from the secretary of state that no restrictions would be put in place on Hartlepool and Middlesbrough until he had written confirmation that we were happy with the proposals.
“So this morning, Hartlepool and Middlesbrough councils were working together to formulate our response to the secretary of state when we received a press release that the restrictions were in place and at this point Matt Hancock was already in the House announcing them.”
Figures released on Wednesday showed there were 35 new cases of Covid-19 in Hartlepool and 37 cases in Hartlepool.
Hancock told the Commons on Thursday: “We recommend against all social-mixing between people in different households.
“We will bring in regulations, as we have in the north-east, to prevent in law social mixing between people in different households in all settings except outdoor public spaces like parks and outdoor hospitality.
Advertisement
“We also recommend that people should not attend professional or amateur sporting events as spectators in the areas that are affected.”
He added: “We recommend that people only visit care homes in exceptional circumstances and there will be guidance against all but essential travel. Essential travel, of course, includes going to work or school.”
Middlesbrough council later said on Twitter that it had “no prior knowledge” of the announcement.
The government has announced new Covid restrictions for Middlesbrough. The council had no prior knowledge of the announcement and is currently working to get you clear and up-to-date guidance. #Thread ⬇ pic.twitter.com/0cXWcoUlW1 — MiddlesbroughCouncil (@MbroCouncil) October 1, 2020
Middlesbrough MP Andy McDonald, taking a different tone from the mayor, described the latest restrictions as “sadly inevitable” but “necessary” in order to tackle the spread of the virus.
He said: “The further restrictions for Middlesbrough and Hartlepool announced today are sadly inevitable. I’ve said before that no one welcomes further restrictions, but we on Teesside sit next to seven neighbouring north-east local authorities where tighter restrictions have been imposed for some time now because of worryingly high rates of Covid-19.
Advertisement
“Middlesbrough rates are consistently above 100 cases per 100,000 – albeit a welcome but slight reduction in the last 24 hours – and sadly the tighter restrictions around household mixing are necessary as the data is telling us that people mixing across households is the root of the increases we’ve been seeing.
“Of course, I am worried about how long these restrictions might go on for. But the sooner we take action to suppress the virus in our area, the better chance we have of seeing the rates drop and consequently an earlier relaxation of the restrictions.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Here's What Another Trump Victory Would Mean For The World

Every four years, millions of people around the world watch America choose its president, knowing a decision in which they have no say could reshape their lives. In 2020, observers abroad see a choice that isn’t about a conservative turn or a liberal shift, but whether the world’s most powerful country can maintain the democratic standards it’s long promoted.
Advertisement
A victory for Donald Trump would be a blow to the principle that leaders should commit to peaceful transitions of power. It would give a stamp of legitimacy to his methods aimed at entrenching his rule, like rushing to appoint a friendly Supreme Court justice pre-election before ballots may face judicial challenges, working to make it harder to vote and rejecting nearly all scrutiny by lawmakers or the public. And a Trump reelection would vindicate authoritarian tactics like his dismissal of opposition to him as un-American and “criminal,” and his months-long effort to depict the US voting system as too broken to produce a trustworthy result, which some intelligence officials call a greater threat to the upcoming vote than foreign interference.
On Tuesday, Trump used the biggest moment of the campaign so far – the first presidential debate – to tell the violent right-wing group the Proud Boys to “stand down and stand by,” as he declined to condemn them or white supremacists who have expressed support for him.
🇺🇸 Running Mate is a US election podcast – just for Brits. Now available everywhere.
For Trump to triumph over Democratic nominee Joe Biden would be an alarming sign that US democratic institutions are badly damaged and likely to crumble further. And that would reverberate internationally. With the world’s most influential country clearly in democratic decline, authoritarianism and political figures dismissive of the rule of law will take advantage.
“Despite all the hypocrisy… all its faults and all its problems with racism, [America] is seen as a very vibrant democracy which is discussing its problems very openly,” said Oliver Stuenkel, a professor at the Getúlio Vargas Foundation in São Paulo. “Even people who are very critical of US foreign policy recognise that these things are very important for the global fight for human rights and for democracy.”
Advertisement
Brazil serves as an example. Trump’s shock 2016 win boosted Jair Bolsonaro to that nation’s presidency two years later, Stuenkel said. Should Trump succeed in 2020 using undemocratic means, Bolsonaro could behave similarly in his own reelection bid in 2022 – without fear of American condemnation.
Possibilities like that are what makes America’s election “so much more consequential than I think most US voters appreciate,” Stuenkel added.
India Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump share authoritarian instincts -- and both could be emboldened by a Trump reelection. The two are seen here in Ahmedabad, India, earlier this year. Francis Mascarenhas / Reuters
In India, where Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his allies have echoed Trump by whipping up fear of Muslims and bashing independent media outlets, Trump’s attacks on the rule of law suggest even more troubling developments could lie ahead in both countries, said Harsh Mander, a rights activist who runs the Centre for Equity Studies in New Delhi. Fear of international criticism, particularly from the US, is one of the few constraints on Modi’s power. Trump would be unlikely to offer that because of his “ideological brotherhood” with the prime minister, Mander said.
“The danger to the United States and to the world of a leader like Donald Trump is something we are conscious of around the world,” Mander added, describing American institutions as “enormously shaky.”
Advertisement
Trump’s disdain for American allies and values and his transactional, flippant and often brutal approach to global affairs have already damaged the US’s historic claim to global leadership. His disastrous response to the coronavirus pandemic has further weakened the image of the US to all-time lows in some countries.
Now even Europeans, America’s closest partners on the world stage, have “huge concern” over the state of US democracy, according to Nathalie Tocci, the director of the Instituto Affari Internazionali think tank in Rome and an adviser to the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell.
“Democracy is not just elections,” Tocci said. “The real stuff that democracies are made of are the rights and the laws and the institutions. The extent to which that is being harmed and that is being degraded is probably the most dangerous element of all.”
Dark Days Ahead
Trump speaks during a campaign rally at the Duluth International Airport. Stephen Maturen via Getty Images
After campaign season ends, the immediate aftermath of the election will likely spur even more anxiety internationally. The widely expected scenario – a popular vote loss by Trump, legal battles over ballot-counting and days, if not weeks, of uncertainty over who won the Electoral College – will suggest a divided, drifting nation rather than a confident, mature republic.
Advertisement
“America is the champion of the liberal order, of checks and balances, and at a time in which… autocracy is trying to gain momentum, the very fact that there are doubts in the US election, such as a contested result and the use of the Supreme Court to find out who will be the president, is of great concern,” said Paolo Magri, the executive vice president of the Italian Institute for International Political Studies in Milan.
Should Trump secure a second term, he and the Republican Party would be emboldened to further solidify their grip on power. That’s a familiar pattern elsewhere. Since winning re-election last year, India’s Modi has revoked the quasi-independence of the disputed state of Kashmir, broken worldwide records for internet shutdowns to deter protesters, rendered almost two million people stateless, pushed new citizenship restrictions that discriminate against Muslims and cracked down on watchdogs like Amnesty International.
“The United States in a second term with Donald Trump might actually see what is happening to us in our second term [with Modi] where all institutions of democracy seem to be being destroyed,” Mander said.
Successful power grabs by Trump would also inspire his ideological fellow travellers. Chamila Liyanage, a researcher at the Britain-based Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right, said a Trump win would empower populist right-wing figures in Europe, from elected officials to extreme anti-immigrant groups and advocates for conspiracy theories like QAnon, which are spreading rapidly on the continent. And more mainstream European politicians may be persuaded that emphasising nativism and ultra-conservative positions on matters like abortion rights is politically smart, Magri said.
Advertisement
Combined with pandemic-related turmoil, election disputes could be a gift for extremists, according to Liyanage.
“The radical right always wanted a crisis to discredit democracies,” she said in an email.
“While their loyalty to Trump can vary, they accept his reckless attack on liberal democratic ideals,” she added, referring to organisations in the European radical right ecosystem. “These grassroots groups are more dangerous than President Trump himself.”
The Biden Effect
Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, Trump's rival in the election. ROBERTO SCHMIDT via Getty Images
There’s an alternate scenario that global observers hope for. Should Biden win a clear mandate and Trump leave office relatively calmly, America could show that representative government can survive even serious challenges.
“It does send a signal that populism and challenges to democracy and to the integrity of democratic institutions are short-lived… It would be a signal to Bolsonaro and to other authoritarian-minded populists, not just in Latin America but around the world,” said Orlando Pérez, the dean of the school of liberal arts and sciences at the University of North Texas at Dallas.
A Biden administration would likely roll out policies that bolster faith in the US and re-engage with the international community, like offering temporary protected status to people fleeing the crisis in Venezuela, Pérez said, and addressing concerns about whether a coronavirus vaccine would be distributed to poorer countries.
Advertisement
That’s not to say a Biden win would be a panacea for democracy’s ills.
“An American president is elected to have America first… so I do not have any specific illusions that a Biden presidency will solve the problems of the world or will specifically help Europe and Italy,” Magri said. “Having said that, I believe that Trump was in a sense a threat to Europe’s unity… It’s good to have someone who’s not betting on the disintegration of Europe.”
Trump cheered Britain’s withdrawal from the EU and has boosted European nationalists who dislike continent-wide cooperation and shared principles about democratic norms.
Activists abroad are keen to learn lessons from Trump’s opponents if the president’s reelection bid is thwarted.
In Brazil, interest in the US election has spread beyond those who traditionally follow the process, such as elite policy-makers. Bolsonaro’s critics are tracking how Democrats react to Trump’s efforts to shape the news cycle. They also are watching whether the party can unite factions like Biden fans and supporters of more left-leaning figures like senator Bernie Sanders, Stuenkel said.
Rodrigo Duterte, the president of the Philippines, is another leader who has celebrated violence and targeted journalists. His rise and Trump’s in 2016 were “a wake-up call to our people for action, solidarity, community and movement-building to unite, to protect and defend democracy,” Naomi Fontanos, the executive director of the Philippine transgender rights group GANDA, said in an email.
Advertisement
For her, the attempts in the US to confront its racist past over the summer had already raised the prospect of a “national renewal towards greater justice,” she said. “My hope is that the American people will overcome… There has been so much divisiveness in society in the time of Trump and Duterte, but we shouldn’t lose hope for better days and must not treat each other as the enemy. This is what authoritarian leaders or tyrants do: They pit the people against each other.”
The Deeper Rot
Protesters groups burn an effigy of Duterte, Trump and Chinese president Xi Jinping. MARIA TAN via Getty Images
The work of making America a stronger democracy can’t be completed in 2020. And foreigners with the benefit of distance see big problems to address beyond Trump.
The broader Republican campaign to limit voting access and question government institutions and regulation predates the president. That makes this election a “tipping point” and not a shock to Tocci, the analyst and EU adviser.
“We’re taking one step further on the path that the Republican Party has been on that essentially means abdicating democracy. It’s the straw that breaks the camel’s back,” she said.
Advertisement
A recent report from the progressive group Take Back The Court described how even after a Biden win, a strong conservative majority on the Supreme Court could reject Democratic-led attempts to counter voter purges and the practice of drawing legislative districts along partisan lines, a major factor in the increasing extremism of elected officials.
It’s also unclear how far Trump’s opponents would go to tackle how US foreign policy contributes to destructive trends at home like xenophobia, disdain for human rights standards and executive overreach.
Under President Barack Obama, the US expanded its defence ties to the Philippines – a relationship Trump and Duterte consolidated even as the Philippine leader led a “war on drugs” that killed more than 10,000 people, Fontanos noted. Additionally, Obama crafted the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an expansive trade deal that activists in her country and its neighbours saw as “anti-environment, anti-poor and anti-worker” – and that she believes Biden would revive. (Biden championed the agreement during the Obama administration but now says he would not join it as it stands and would renegotiate it.)
“What we need is for leaders in the Philippines and the US to realise how something like the [deal allowing military exercises in the Philippines] enables continued American imperialism,” Fontantos said.
And defeating Trump doesn’t mean defeating all the forces interested in a more authoritarian direction for global politics.
Advertisement
“If Joe Biden wins, the radical right narrative would be emboldened to claim that the leftist Democrats… and the globalists seized power,” said Layanage, the researcher on European right-wing extremism. “Given how far and wide these strange belief systems have already circulated… Biden’s win will present him with wider challenges as a leader of a beleaguered democracy.”
In places where coronavirus concerns have already been used as a cover for more autocratic measures to control people, like parts of Latin America, the path to greater freedom extends well beyond the US election.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Meghan And Harry: Britain Must End Structural Racism

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Prince Harry and Meghan have called for an end to structural racism in the UK, in an exclusive interview with the Evening Standard.
Harry told how he had become made more aware of the struggles people from Black, Asian and ethnic minority (BAME) communities face since meeting Meghan. “I wasn’t aware of so many of the issues and so many of the problems within the UK and also globally as well,” he said. “I thought I did, but I didn’t.”
Advertisement
While it’s not about “pointing the finger” or blame, he added, there is a need for “learning” how we can do better.
“I think it is a really exciting time in British culture and British history, and in world culture,” he said. “This is a real moment that we should be grasping and actually celebrating. Because no one else has managed to do this before us.”
During the interview, the Duchess of Sussex was asked about her views on the Black Lives Matter protests, following the death of George Floyd. “When there is just peaceful protest and when there is the intention of just wanting community and just wanting the recognition of equality, then that is a beautiful thing,” she said.
“It has been challenging for a lot of people, certainly, having to make this reckoning of historical significance that has got people to the place that they are. That is uncomfortable for people. We recognise that. It is uncomfortable for us.”
Advertisement
In a joint article for the Evening Standard, the couple write: “As long as structural racism exists, there will be generations of young people of colour who do not start their lives with the same equality of opportunity as their white peers. And for as long as that continues, untapped potential will never get to be realised.
“Therefore, now is the best time for us to be able to use our platform, and you use your platform as well, so we can actually start a conversation and introduce people to the Black community that are making a massive difference within their own communities and across the UK as a whole as well.”
The couple also spoke about family life, adding that their son Archie is “so good”. “We are very lucky with our little one,” she said. “He is just so busy, he is all over the place. He keeps us on our toes. We are just so lucky.”
To mark the beginning of Black History Month, the pair appeared on a Zoom call from their home in California and revealed their list of Black History Month “next gen trailblazers”.
People recognised for their contribution to British society included Vogue editor Edward Enninful, boxing champion Nicola Adams, and author Bernardine Evaristo.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Nicky Campbell To Share Details Of Bipolar Disorder Diagnosis In New Memoir

Nicky Campbell has shared that he has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
The Long Lost Family presenter is set to open up about his “late diagnosis” in a new memoir, which is titled One Of The Family.
The book will also see Nicky detail how he suffered an emotional breakdown.
Nicky Campbell Dave J Hogan via Getty Images
Speaking to The Mirror, he said: “So many people have been brave enough to tell their stories on Long Lost Family. I think it’s my turn.”
Advertisement
The book, which will be released in February, will focus on many aspects of Nicky’s life, from his adoption and his mental health, to his special pet dog.
His book publisher Rowena Webb added: “Nicky’s courage and honesty in writing his story makes this a very special book. And it wouldn’t have happened without a very special dog called Maxwell.
“It’s a book for life. And I can’t wait for others to read it too.“
Nicky fronts Long Lost Family with Davina McCall ITV
Nicky was adopted by his parents, Sheila and Frank Campbell, in April 1961, when he was just a few days old.
Advertisement
His biological mother travelled from Ireland to the UK to give birth to him, and the Radio 5 Live presenter was able to track her and his biological father down when he was in his 20s.
Nicky previously told the Mirror of his reunion: “It was a surreal moment for me. I met my birth mother in Dublin in 1990 and, for the first time, I saw a face that looked like mine. But I felt no emotional connection with her, no spiritual connection even.
“There was nothing. If anything, I felt quite sorry for her. She’d had two children within 18 months, by two different men; she led a complicated, rather tragic life. But I’m so thankful to have met her and felt honoured to help carry her coffin when she died in 2008.”
Useful websites and helplines
Mind, open Monday to Friday, 9am-6pm on 0300 123 3393.
Samaritans offers a listening service which is open 24 hours a day, on 116 123 (UK and ROI - this number is FREE to call and will not appear on your phone bill).
CALM (the Campaign Against Living Miserably) offer a helpline open 5pm-midnight, 365 days a year, on 0800 58 58 58, and a webchat service.
Advertisement
The Mix is a free support service for people under 25. Call 0808 808 4994 or email help@themix.org.uk


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Naga Munchetty Tries (And Fails) To Keep A Straight Face After An Unfortunate Choice Of Words From C

Naga Munchetty Tries (And Fails) To Keep A Straight Face After An Unfortunate Choice Of Words From Carol Kirkwood

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Listen, we know it’s not sophisticated or high-brow, but with things as grim as they are right now, we’ll take the laughs wherever we can get them, even if that includes a bit of an early-morning innuendo.
And while it’s usually the ITV daytime crowd that lose their way when it comes to a double entendre, on Thursday morning the BBC Breakfast team proved they’re not immune to it either.
Advertisement
During the show, presenter Naga Munchetty was seen struggling to keep her composure after a seemingly innocent comment from weather presenter Carol Kirkwood.
As Carol warned of high winds over the weekend, she told Naga: “You won’t be playing much tennis!”
Carol had quite the "balls up" during her segment BBC
Seemingly not catching what her co-presenter had just said, Naga asked her to repeat herself, to which Carol responded: “Not much [tennis]... their balls will be blowing everywhere.”
“Tennis balls,” Carol quickly added in a smaller voice, but it seemed the damage was already done, and as Charlie Stayt attempted to get things back on track, this was Naga’s reaction:
Advertisement
Oh dear BBC
This isn’t the first time Carol has suffered an unfortunate slip of the tongue in recent memory, though.
Back in August, she was reporting live from a park in London, when she declared: “Look at it, the sun is beating down, we’ve seen a lot of doggers.”
Quickly realising her mistake, she abruptly added: “Not doggers, of course. Lots of dog walkers and joggers around here during the course of this morning.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--NHS Test And Trace Contact Tracing Rate Drops Again As Covid Cases Surge

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Boris Johnson’s test-and-trace service has seen another fall in its contact-tracing rate as the number of people testing positive soared across England.
The figures for the week of September 17 to September 23 showed that just 71.6% of “close contacts” of Covid cases were reached by the system.
Advertisement
For the 14th week running, the figure is below the 80% figure that the government’s scientific advisers have said is needed to make the entire policy viable.
In line with the September surge in cases, NHS Test and Trace reported 31,373 people testing positive for the first time – a 61% week-on-week increase and four times as high as the number at the end of August.
But the service’s performance has gone backwards on the percentage of people it reached, dropping to 71.3% from 80.8% the week before.
And on the key proportion of the “close contacts” of those fed into the system – defined as someone who was less than two metres from someone with Covid for more than 15 minutes – just 71.6% were reached, down from 76.3% the previous week.
Advertisement
The news came as it emerged that Deloitte, a private firm used by NHS Test and Trace, was trying to sell its services to local councils.
Testing turnaround times did improve, although they remain well short of the 100% target set by the PM for the end of June.
In the week to September 23, 38.1% of in-person tests – from local test sites, mobile testing units and regional test sites – were received within 24 hours compared to 28.2% in the previous week.
That still means that only four in 10 of such tests get results within the timeframe set by Johnson.
For all routes combined, 16.9% of tests from all test sites were received within 24 hours of a test being taken compared to the record low of 10.3% in the previous week.
Figures for home testing kits continue to be low, with just 2.9% of people in England receiving their result within 24 hours, up slightly from 1.8% in the previous week.
Advertisement
The stark difference in public sector and private sector contact tracing rates was once again highlighted.
Baroness Dido Harding, executive chair of NHS Test and Trace, in Westminster, London. PA
For cases handled by local health protection teams, 97.6% of contacts were reached and asked to self-isolate, whereas the figure was 64.3% for cases handled either online or by private sector outsourced call centres.
Government insiders say that the low contact trace figures are explained partly by the shift from hospital and care home cases – termed “complex cases” – towards community transmission, where it is more difficult to identify and trace people.
The latest figures don’t take into account the launch of the NHS Covid-19 App, which aims to improve contact rates among people who don’t know each other.
Advertisement
Ministers prefer to use a different definition for contact tracing than Sage (the scientific advisory group for emergencies), highlighting those cases “where communication details were available”. On this measure, 83.7% were reached and asked to self-isolate up to September 23.
Shadow health minister Justin Madders said: “For the proportion of people being contacted to drop by nearly 10% in a week is appalling and really should not be happening at this point.
“Whilst some areas have improved, we are still a million miles away from the promise made by Boris Johnston back in June that the majority of people would have their test results back within 24 hours.
“And on the day it is revealed Deloitte, who are contracted by the Government to run test and trace, are trying to sell their contact tracing services to local councils, it is clearer than ever that their time would be better spent improving the huge issues in the existing system.”
However, health secretary Matt Hancock defended Deloitte, saying they “have done an incredible job in helping us to put together the contact tracing and the backward contact tracing that we have”. “Of course they should offer their services to local councils too,” he said.
Advertisement
29,037 people were transferred to the contact tracing system between
September 17 and September 23, a notable increase of 37% compared to the previous week.
The Department of Health and Social Care said the number of people transferred has been “notably increasing” since the beginning of August with over six times as many people being transferred in the most recent week compared to the beginning of August.
NHS Test and Trace boss Dido Harding revealed this week that former Sainsbury’s supermarket chief executive Mike Coupe is to take over as director of testing at the service from late October.
Sarah-Jane Marsh, an NHS official who apologised for delays to the public earlier this month, will step aside to make way for Coupe.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--All The Mad Places The Home Office Reportedly Wants To Send Asylum Seekers

Since Downing Street refused to deny suggestions that the government is looking at plans to ship asylum seekers to offshore locations to process their claims, the newspapers have been chock-full with leaks about what officials have been proposing.
With plans ranging from floating asylum centres in old ferries to sending migrants more than 8,500 miles away to have their cases heard, some of the proposals seem more likely than others.
Advertisement
On Thursday, the prime minister’s officials spokesman said the government was “developing plans to reform our policies around illegal migration and asylum to ensure that we are able to provide protection to those who need it while preventing abuse of the system and the criminality associated with it”.
That includes looking at what other countries do, he said. But there was an “awful lot of speculation” in reports about what was under consideration.
Asked whether Scottish islands could be turned into asylum processing centres, the spokesman said there were “lots of ideas reported today” and “there are a significant number of them that I really don’t recognise”.
Meanwhile, Matthew Rycroft – the most senior civil servant in the Home Office – claimed the civil service had purely been answering ministers’ questions about how other countries deal with migration.
Advertisement
“We have been leaving no stone unturned in doing that,” he said. “We’ve been looking at what a whole host of other countries do in order to bring innovation into our own system. [But] no decisions have been taken.
“No final proposals have been put to ministers or to anyone else.”
He added: “This is in the realm of the brainstorming stage of a future policy and, I think as ministers have said in the House, everything is on the table, and so it should be at this stage of the policy-making process.”
Rycroft refused to say which offshore proposals had been discussed.
With that in mind, here are five proposals officials have reportedly floated that have been leaked to newspapers in recent days.
Creating floating asylum centres off the coast
A generic photo of a ferry arriving at Calais. DEBOVE SOPHIE via Getty Images
According to the The Times, one of the many plans being considered by Downing Street is to process the cases of people seeking asylum in the UK on disused ferries off the coast of the UK.
Advertisement
The government is considering buying retired ferries and converting them into floating asylum processing centres, the paper reported.
It said that the Home Office had also held discussions about taking asylum seekers to decommissioned oil platforms in the North Sea – but that ministers had dismissed the suggestion as a “no-go”.
Pushing migrant boats back to French waters with boat pumps
Asylum processing centres on ferries is apparently not the only plan involving boats that have been floated by officials.
In a “blue-sky thinking” session about how to deal with the increasing number of people illegally crossing the Channel in dangerous conditions, the option of using boats with pumps to create waves that would force migrant boats back to French waters was discussed, the Financial Times revealed.
While this was eventually considered too dangerous, with concerns raised that it could capsize boats carrying hundreds of vulnerable migrants, the possibility of linking small boats together to form a barrier to stop people being able to come ashore was also spoken about.
Advertisement
Sending asylum seekers to Ascension Island – a volcanic island 4,000 miles away
Wind turbines on Ascension Island in South Atlantic Ocean with Wideawake Airfield in background StHelena via Getty Images
Before Wednesday, you may never have heard of Ascension Island.
But the Financial Times’ astounding scoop that Patel asked officials to explore building an asylum processing centre on the remote volcanic island – which is more than 4,000 miles away from the UK – means the name is probably imprinted on your brain now.
According to the newspaper, Home Office officials were told to look into the feasibility of transferring asylum seekers arriving in the UK to a centre on the British overseas territory in the South Atlantic.
It is understood that Patel eventually scrapped the idea, which refugee charities slammed as “immoral and inhumane”.
On Thursday, the Home Office’s top civil servant refused to confirm to MPs whether the idea was considered as a “serious suggestion”.
Advertisement
Matthew Roycroft told parliament’s Public Accounts Committee: “The civil service is here to give ministers impartial, fearless, honest, expert, independent advice and that is what we do. And the system works when we do that in private.”
Stephen Hale, chief executive of Refugee Action, said it was “deeply troubling” that Patel even considered such a plan.
“Our asylum system is descending into chaos,” he said. “The government must stop its unconscionable race to the bottom and work sensibly towards creating a fair and effective asylum system based on humanity, compassion and the rule of law.”
Building asylum detention centres in Moldova, Morocco and Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea is more than 8,500 miles away from the UK Google Maps
According to The Guardian, it’s not just Ascension Island that has been considered as a possible location to send asylum seekers.
Advertisement
The newspaper reported it had seen documents suggesting the government has been working on “detailed plans” calculating how feasible it would be to build asylum detention camps in Moldova, Morocco and Papua New Guinea.
Like Ascension Island, all three of these locations are thousands of miles away from the UK.
Moldova is just under 2,000 miles away, Morocco is around 2,220 miles from the UK, and Papua New Guinea, which is off the coast of Australia, is more than 8,500 miles away.
The documents reportedly outline how the government would relocate asylum seekers to these places after they had already arrived in the UK.
But Tory backbencher Adam Holloway said that, while it was “completely right” for the Home Office to look at ways of deterring asylum seekers from coming to the UK, any solution should be “civilised”.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, he said: “Talk of oil rigs and Moldova and Papua New Guinea, to me, is somewhat bizarre.
Advertisement
“The Home Office is completely right to look at other options so there is some sort of deterrent, but not the Australian model where you have poor welfare standards and everything else.
“We’ve got to find a civilised version of that.”
‘Migrant hostels’ on the Isle of Wight, Isle of Man or the Shetland Islands
St. Catherines Lighthouse, Isle of Wight Jon Ritchie via Getty Images
There could be asylum processing centres closer to home, according to the Daily Mail.
A government source told the newspaper that officials were looking into the possibility of “offshoring” migrants in centre in the Shetlands, the Isle of Wight and the Isle of Man.
“There are also lots of little islands up by Scotland,” the source said.
“This is all fairly down the track and it’s not going to be an overnight thing. It will also require changes to legislation. And if we were going to build anything at any of these places we would have to ensure there are appropriate services and provisions for asylum seekers who are sent there.”
They can rest assured that any proposal to treat human beings like cattle in a holding pen will be met with the strongest possible opposition from me. https://t.co/qhfxQMSRxG — Nicola Sturgeon (@NicolaSturgeon) October 1, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Jane McDonald Is Not Quitting Her Cruising Show After All, So Maybe Things Are Looking Up

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Well, after eight months of what we can only describe as complete chaos and disorder, we’ve finally been gifted an actual glimmer of hope.
Advertisement
It’s our joy to report that Jane… has only gone and changed her mind.
Jane McDonald on This Morning in March Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
Channel 5 boss Ben Frow told The Telegraph that while Jane made the decision to “step back to pursue other projects”, she’s now had a change of heart.
Or, as he put it: “The pandemic has put a spanner in those works and she is returning to the channel.”
In fact, Ben also noted that he’s just “signed off on the first of her new cruises”, adding: “Where there’s an opportunity to cruise, we’ll cruise.”
Advertisement
Quite how Cruising With Jane McDonald will work in a pandemic is beyond us, but frankly, even if it’s just an hour of Jane floating down the Thames in a dinghy, we’ll still be tuning in.
Cruising With Jane McDonald debuted in 2017, and has since gone on to become one of Channel 5’s most popular shows, even earning the network its first ever Bafta.
Jane with her Bafta Jeff Spicer via Getty Images
Explaining her decision to leave earlier this year, Jane said: “It has been a privilege to call this a ‘job’. After so many years filming abroad I am looking forward to some much needed time in the UK and to focus on my music and tours and exciting new projects.
“Thank you Channel 5 for some great trips and many fabulous memories.”
In a separate blog post, Jane clarified that she was “stepping away from her shows on Channel 5”, suggesting her talk show Jane And Friends would also be coming to an end.
Advertisement
It was previously announced by Channel 5 that Susan Calman would be taking over from Jane as captain of Channel 5’s Cruising… series.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--Game Of Thrones Author George R. R. Martin Reveals His Least Favourite Scene Of The Series

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As the debate about the final season of Game Of Thrones continues to rumble on among fans even more than a year later, author George R. R. Martin has revealed his least favourite part of the show – and it’s not even from the finale.
The writer, who penned the original Game Of Thrones novels, revealed one particular moment from the very first season that he is not a fan of.
Advertisement
The scene in question sees King Robert Baratheon going hunting, where George apparently felt there was a distinct lack of extras.
George R. R. Martin Liam McBurney - PA Images via Getty Images
Speaking as part of a new behind-the-scenes book by James Hibberd, Fire Cannot Kill a Dragon, George said: “Where we really fell down in terms of budget was my least favourite scene in the entire show, in all eight seasons: King Robert goes hunting. Four guys walking on foot through the woods carrying spears and Robert is giving Renly shit.
“In the books, Robert goes off hunting, we get word that he was gored by a boar, and they bring him back and he dies. So I never did [a hunting scene]. But I knew what a royal hunting party was like.
Advertisement
“There would have been a hundred guys. There would have been pavilions. There would have been huntsmen. There would have been dogs. There would have been horns blowing – that’s how a king goes hunting!” George said. “He wouldn’t have just been walking through the woods with three of his friends holding spears hoping to meet a boar.
“But at that point, we couldn’t afford horses or dogs or pavilions.”
It was recently reported that casting for the Game Of Thrones prequel series, House Of The Dragon had begun.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-10-01--How To Talk To People Who Constantly Interrupt (And Why They Do It)

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As Pres. Trump repeatedly interrupts Joe Biden, Biden says, "Will you shut up, man?"
"That was really a productive segment, wasn't it?" Biden says sarcastically. "Keep yappin', man." https://t.co/5Bl4Ob3O2t #Debates2020 pic.twitter.com/XvNahLC1Rm — ABC News (@ABC) September 30, 2020
“Would you shut up, man?” Biden asked Trump after the president repeatedly interrupted Biden’s response to a question about expanding the number of justices on the Supreme Court.
Advertisement
Wallace asked the president at least 25 times to stop interrupting and obey the debate rules. Eventually, though, Wallace effectively paused the debate and begged the candidates to stop interrupting each other. (Clearly, his shouts of “Gentlemen, please!” in the midst of the melee were pointless.)
“The country would be better served if we allowed both people to speak with fewer interruptions,” Wallace said before directly asking Trump to keep things civil. “I’m appealing to you, sir, to do it.”
The rapid-fire interruptions throughout the night even got etiquette experts talking.
“Look, I know the realm of politics isn’t known for its politeness, but the incessant interruptions by the president ― both of the moderator and of his opponent ― was a disturbing spectacle to witness,” said Thomas P. Farley, an etiquette expert and host of the podcast “What Manners Most.”
“I think the president’s steadfast refusal to await his turn or to resist voicing a complaint was probably a turn-off for any viewer who had tuned in eager for a substantive debate over the very real issues facing the United States,” Farley told HuffPost.
Advertisement
“People interrupt either as a classic bullying technique, combined here with Trump with low-impulse control, or an inability to cognitively follow the other person’s train of thought, thereby using interruption to mask this lack of comprehension.” - Jodi R.R. Smith, owner of an etiquette consulting firm
Jodi R.R. Smith, owner of an etiquette consulting firm, couldn’t help gaming out how Biden’s camp should handle the next debate to keep things more civil.
“If I was asked to advise the Biden team, I would recommend a [pre-debate meeting] with the moderator that has specific ‘if-then’ arrangements,” she mused. “If he interrupts during my responses, then his microphone will be turned off.” If he interrupts repeatedly, the other person should be given additional time to respond, starting when the opponent is silent, she said.
We asked etiquette experts like Smith and Farley ― and one family psychologist, for good measure ― to share how to talk to a chronic interrupter without losing your mind.
If you know you’re dealing with a repeat interrupter, plan for the worst.
Whether you’re dealing with an angry client, your partner, a snooty friend of a friend or your know-it-all college-aged son, if you’ve gotten into it with the person before, you know what to expect: more impossible conversation and lots of interruptions.
Advertisement
With your experiences in mind, stage as much as possible in advance and prepare yourself, said Diane Gottsman, an etiquette expert and owner of The Protocol School of Texas.
“Going into the conversation, find a neutral place to talk, speak for short bursts rather than monopolising the conversation and avoid an aggressive tone of voice,” she said. “Be open to listening to their point of view and watch your body language so you don’t send the message that you are closed to hearing their message.”
Recognise why they’re interrupting so often and don’t fall into the same trap.
Consider this the “know thy enemy” pointer: Generally speaking, motives for interrupting can be classified into two categories, Smith said.
“People interrupt either as a classic bullying technique, combined here with Trump with low-impulse control, or an inability to cognitively follow the other person’s train of thought, thereby using interruption to mask this lack of comprehension,” she said.
We all want to be of a calm, steady mind and express our thoughts and feelings coherently, but sometimes the excitement involved in the conversation gets the best of us. That’s when interruptions happen, said Ryan Kelly, a psychologist in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Advertisement
“Someone who is interrupting you is likely coming from an emotional state, whether it be through something harmless like excitement (e.g., someone with ADHD finishing your sentences) or something harmful like disrespect or emotional reactivity (e.g., pride, anger),” he said.
What’s important for you in these moments is “to not allow their interruptions to force you into an emotional mind, too,” he said.
Olivier Douliery/Pool/Getty Images
Think about being effective versus being right.
What should you do in the heat of the moment if you’re being interrupted? Take a deep breath, relax your shoulders and think about being effective versus being right.
According to Kelly, there’s a big difference: Of course you think your perspective is right, but if you’re having a healthy debate with a friend or family member with differing views, the goal is to hear each other’s side. That’s an effective dialogue.
Advertisement
If the other person continues to interrupt or make snide comments under their breath, try to reason with them.
The psychologist recommended saying something along the lines of: “I can tell you’re very passionate about this topic, and I very much appreciate that. And I’m really enjoying exchanging opinions and trying to understand yours, but when you interrupt like you’ve been doing ― which I don’t think you’re doing to be disrespectful, by the way ― I can’t address your points or express my points, which I personally need to have a conversation like this.”
You’re not perfect, so while you’re at it, admit that you’ve probably made some annoying interruptions along the way, too ― and that you want the other person to call you out if you do again.
Ideally, you set these baseline ground rules before you get into the thick of an argument, but if not, there’s nothing wrong with establishing them in the middle of a testy conversation, Kelly said.
Use your hands when you need to.
Sadly, like Wallace, you don’t have a mic cut function, either, but you can use your hands to act as a sort of pause button, Gottsman said.
Advertisement
That doesn’t mean you coil your hands into a confrontational, tightfisted gesture, though.
“Instead, if you can’t get the other person’s attention any other way, put your hand up and palm out with fingers showing the number five,” Gottsman said. “Then calmly say, ‘Let me finish.’ Pause, look at them, and if they continue to speak, look away. Sometimes you just need to disengage until they’ve stopped talking.”
Scott Olson via Getty Images It was smart of Biden to use humor to try to diffuse the situation, etiquette experts say.
Stay calm and use humour to diffuse the situation.
Though Biden had his outbursts (“Would you shut up, man?” among them), for the most part, he stayed relatively calm when Trump tried to get a rise out of him. As Michael Barbaro on The New York Times “The Daily” podcast pointed out, at times Biden closed his eyes, almost like he was meditating (and certainly like he’d been trained by someone not to lose his cool).
Calmness is obviously an effective strategy for heated, interruption-heavy conversations, Farley said. So is humour.
“If you’re dealing with an interrupter, smile, laugh and don’t get defensive during the interruptions,” the etiquette expert said. “If the other person sees that you are not going to play this game but rather that you are finding the constant protestations amusing ― whether that’s true or not ― you may actually succeed in shutting down the interruptions altogether.”
Advertisement
If you’re looking for an example, Farley thinks Biden wielded humour effectively, too.
“He offered softly uttered interjections and light sarcasm,” he said. “For instance, after the Supreme Court judge back-and-forth, he said, ‘That was really a productive segment, wasn’t it?’ It showed he could have a sense of humour despite the chaos being wrought on the other side of the stage.”
Remember: It’s also okay to walk away from an emotionally overreactive person.
Biden (or Trump) probably wouldn’t have scored any points (or undecided voters) if he had simply walked off the stage, but there’s no reason you can’t leave a conversation when someone is steamrolling you.
“There is no reason even the most patient and considerate among us should ever feel stuck in a situation where someone in our midst is disrespecting us and interrupting us to the point of badgering,” he said.
“If any civilian ever encountered the kind of behaviour we saw at the debate,” Farley said, his advice would be this: “Do not dignify the other person with even one more moment of your presence.”
Look the person directly in the eye, Farley said, and simply say, “It’s a been a pleasure,” and confidently exit the scene.