union

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said the 27-member bloc was leaving the door open to action against Israel over its assault on the besieged and bombarded Gaza Strip if the humanitarian situation does not improve.

Kallas put forward 10 potential options on Tuesday after Israel was found to have breached a cooperation deal between the two sides on human rights grounds.

The measures range from suspending the entire accord or curbing trade ties to sanctioning Israeli ministers, imposing an arms embargo and halting visa-free travel.

Despite growing anger over the devastation in Gaza, EU states remain divided over how to tackle Israel, and there was no agreement on taking any of the moves at a Tuesday meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels.

“We will keep these options on the table and stand ready to act if Israel does not live up to its pledges,” Kallas told journalists. “The aim is not to punish Israel. The aim is to really improve the situation in Gaza.”

The meeting in Brussels came in the wake of the deal largely forged by Kallas and Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar. Saar met with EU leaders on Monday after agreeing last week to allow desperately needed food and fuel into the coastal enclave of 2.3 million people who have endured more than 21 months of Israel’s deadly assault amid a crippling blockade.

“The border crossings have been opened, we see more trucks going in, we see also operations of the electricity network, but it’s clearly not enough because the situation is still untenable,” Kallas said.

Details of the deal remain unclear, but EU officials have rejected any cooperation with the Israeli-backed GHF over ethical and safety concerns.

Calls to end ties with Israel

European nations like Ireland, the Netherlands and Spain have increasingly called for the EU’s ties with Israel to be reassessed in the wake of the war, which has killed more than 58,000 Palestinians – mostly women and children.

A report by the European Commission found “indications” that Israel’s actions in Gaza are violating human rights obligations in the agreement governing its ties with the EU, but the bloc is divided over how to respond.

Public pressure over Israel’s conduct in Gaza made the new humanitarian deal possible, Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp said, adding, “That force of the 27 EU member states is what I want to maintain now.”

Kallas will update EU member nations every two weeks on how much aid is actually getting through to Gaza, Irish Foreign Minister Thomas Byrne said.

“So far we haven’t really seen the implementation of it, maybe some very small actions, but there’s still slaughter going on, there’s still a denial of access to food and water as well,” he said. “We need to see action.”

Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares Bueno said details of the deal were still being discussed and the EU would monitor results to see if Israel is complying.

“It’s very clear that this agreement is not the end – we have to stop the war,” he said.

There have been regular protests across the continent, including a small one on Tuesday outside the European Council, where the ministers were discussing the aid plan.

Dozens of protesters in Brussels called for more aggressive actions to stop Israel’s offensive in the largely destroyed Gaza Strip, where famine looms and the healthcare system is on the brink of collapse.

“It was able to do this for Russia,” said Alexis Deswaef, vice president of the International Federation for Human Rights. “It must now agree on a package of sanctions for Israel to end the genocide and for humanitarian aid to enter Gaza.”

Human rights groups largely called the EU’s actions insufficient.

“This is more than political cowardice,” said Agnes Callamard, secretary general of Amnesty International. “Every time the EU fails to act, the risk of complicity in Israel’s actions grows. This sends an extremely dangerous message to perpetrators of atrocity crimes that they will not only go unpunished but be rewarded.”

‘Moving towards the unknown’

Israel and Hamas have been engaged in indirect talks for two weeks over a new ceasefire deal, but talks appear to be deadlocked.

Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said negotiations have not stopped but are still in the early stages, adding that Israeli and Hamas delegations are both in Doha.

Meanwhile, Israeli attacks across Gaza resumed on Tuesday, killing at least 30 people, including two women who were shot near an aid distribution point run by the controversial Israel- and US-backed GHF.

Gaza’s civil defence said on Tuesday that its “crews have transported at least 18 martyrs and dozens of wounded since dawn”, most of them following Israeli air strikes on the northern Gaza Strip, where Israeli forces have stepped up attacks in recent weeks.

On Tuesday, the army issued another forced evacuation threat for Palestinians living in 16 areas in northern Gaza.

Among them is Jabalia, a ravaged town where residents have been fleeing in fear and panic.

“People are using their cars and donkeys to evacuate the area, and all are moving towards the unknown; they don’t know where to go,” Al Jazeera’s Moath al-Kahlout said.

“They are also struggling with transportation as there is no fuel to move from here and other areas. So, the situation is very chaotic. Everyone living here is in a state of panic.”

One Israeli strike also hit a tent in Gaza City housing displaced Palestinians, killing six people, according to the civil defence agency.

In the southern area of Rafah, two women were killed by Israeli fire near an aid distribution point, the agency said, adding that 13 people were wounded in the incident.

The United Nations said that at least 875 have died trying to access aid in Gaza since late May, when the GHF began operating.

Meanwhile, health teams in Gaza for the UN aid agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) have warned that malnutrition rates are increasing, especially since the Israeli siege was tightened more than four months ago.

According to UNRWA Commissioner General Philippe Lazzarini, one in 10 children screened is malnourished.

In a statement, the group called malnutrition in the Strip “engineered and man-made”.

Those sanctioned engaged in vote-buying and bribery ahead of the country’s 2024 election, the EU says.

The European Union has imposed sanctions on seven individuals and three entities it said are responsible for efforts to destabilise Moldova’s democracy, including through vote-buying and political bribery linked to the country’s 2024 presidential election and referendum on EU accession.

In a statement on Tuesday, the European Council said those sanctioned were engaged in “actions aimed at destabilising, undermining or threatening the sovereignty and independence as well as democracy, the rule of law and stability of the Republic of Moldova.”

Among those targeted are figures closely associated with Ilan Shor, the exiled pro-Russian Moldovan businessman and political figure already under EU sanctions. Shor is accused of funding political operations from abroad and leading efforts to spread disinformation.

The council named Shor’s Victory political bloc as one of the three entities sanctioned. It accused the bloc of running orchestrated campaigns to buy votes and spreading misinformation during the EU referendum.

In October 2024, Moldovans voted ‘yes’ to constitutionally codifying their goal to join the EU by a razor-thin margin amid accusations of Russian meddling.

Another group, the Cultural Educational Centre of Moldova, was listed for facilitating interference in the elections. The third entity, A7, was cited for its links to Russian political influence operations.

Those listed will face asset freezes and travel bans across the EU, the council said.

This is the second time the EU has used its special sanctions system for Moldova, which was set up in 2023 at the request of the Moldovan government. It comes as the country faces growing threats linked to Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“The EU remains unwavering in its support for the Republic of Moldova and its peace, resilience, security, stability, and economic growth in the face of destabilising activities by external actors,” the council said, adding that destabilisation attempts would be met with firm measures.

With Tuesday’s announcement, a total of 23 individuals and five entities have been sanctioned under the Moldovan government. EU officials said the listings send a clear signal to actors attempting to undermine the country’s pro-European trajectory.

The move comes as Moldova, a former Soviet republic, continues to strengthen its ties with the EU. The country was granted candidate status in 2022 and began accession talks last year.

Fifa’s hailing of its Club World Cup has been labelled “nothing more than a fiction” by the president of leading players’ global union Fifpro.

In a scathing statement, Sergio Marchi appeared to compare the world governing body’s president Gianni Infantino to the Roman emperor Nero.

And he also claimed Fifa “chose to continue increasing its revenue at the expense of the players’ bodies and health”.

It comes after BBC Sport learned that Fifpro was not invited to a key meeting on player welfare that Infantino held on the eve of the Club World Cup final with representatives from other unions.

Last year, amid a backlash over the expansion of the Club World Cup, Fifpro filed a legal complaint against Fifa, claiming it had abused its role under European competition law by adding more pressure to the fixture schedule.

Fifa has denied the claims, and at the weekend Infantino called the tournament “the most successful club competition in the world”.

But tensions have now intensified, with Fifpro president Marchi insisting that while the Club World Cup “generated enthusiasm among numerous fans and allowed some of the world’s leading figures to be seen in a single tournament… this competition hides a dangerous disconnect with the true reality faced by the majority of footballers around the world”.

Marchi added: “What was presented as a global celebration of football was nothing more than a fiction created by Fifa, promoted by its president, without dialogue, sensitivity, and respect for those who sustain the game with their daily efforts.

“A grandiloquent staging inevitably reminiscent of the ‘bread and circuses’ of Nero’s Rome, entertainment for the masses while behind the scenes inequality, precariousness, and the lack of protection for the true protagonists deepen.”

Fifth Roman emperor Nero threw spectacular games and events which made him popular with ordinary people, but is better remembered for his brutality and cruelty.

Unite says it has suspended Angela Rayner from her membership of the union, amid a deepening row over the long-running bin strikes in Birmingham.

The deputy prime minister has been urging striking bin workers to accept a deal to end the dispute, which has seen mountains of rubbish pile up in the city.

The union said it would also re-examine its relationship with Labour after an emergency motion at its conference in Brighton.

Bin collection workers walked out in January, with an all-out strike going on since March. Unite is a major donor to the Labour Party, and has previously donated to Rayner herself.

No surprise, 2025 has been an eventful year so far in Hollywood.

In addition to the megahits and epic bombs at the box office, the entertainment industry has been roiled by chaotic forces.

The second Trump administration. The ongoing Blake Lively–Justin Baldoni legal saga. The federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, resulting in a mixed verdict in which the hip-hop mogul was acquitted of the most serious charges — racketeering and sex trafficking. And of course, the devastating wildfires that ravaged the Los Angeles area, particularly Pacific Palisades and Altadena, back in January.

But in terms of the actual business of movies, TV and streaming, there’s plenty of serious stuff to dig into that could shape the future of entertainment — from streaming’s continued ascent, to Disney and Universal’s lawsuit against Midjourney, to the race for state tax credits to save California’s beleaguered production economy.

Here’s our Wide Shot midyear review, by the numbers.

The box office has been on a roller-coaster ride since the COVID-19 pandemic, with the release schedule feeling the effects of the industry’s broader retrenchment. Although the 2023 strikes that thinned out the release schedule are in the rearview mirror, the uncertainty has very much continued.

After a brutal first quarter (ouch, “Snow White”), sales have rebounded thanks to hits including “Minecraft,” “Sinners” and “F1,” with grosses reaching $4.43 billion so far domestically, according to Comscore. That’s up 15% from the same period last year, but still down 26% from 2019. Attendance is up 6.5% from 2024 with about 350 million tickets sold, according to Steve Buck at EntTelligence.

The challenges remain the same.

Studios struggle to draw crowds with much other than the biggest blockbusters and whatever they can convince Gen Z is an “event” movie. And the films themselves are so expensive that even big numbers don’t guarantee that an action spectacle with a robust audience will break even during its theatrical run. Even horror movies aren’t really low-budget anymore (see “Final Destination: Bloodlines” and “28 Years Later”).

After years of shortened theatrical windows, audiences know they can wait to see a new movie at home, often after just a few weeks. That’s why theater owners at the industry convention CinemaCon called on studios to commit to a longer standard gap between a movie’s theatrical release and its availability for home viewing. Meanwhile, audiences face ever longer preshows, with ads now playing between the trailers at AMC. With so much debt, the chain sure needs the money.

The slate for the rest of the year is lumpy.

July is looking strong after “Jurassic World Rebirth’s” $147-million Fourth of July weekend opening, with Warner Bros. and DC’s “Superman” reboot, and Disney and Marvel’s “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” hoping to reinvigorate the superhero genre. Prerelease tracking for “Superman” is all over the place, but an opening of $125 million is a fair target. “Fantastic Four” is poised for a debut in the ballpark of $100 million. But August is lacking in obvious hits. Maybe Paramount’s “The Naked Gun” will bring pure comedy back — but we’ll see.

Paramount caved, reaching a $16-million deal to settle President Trump’s lawsuit over CBS News’ “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris. Trump declared victory over the “Fake News media,” while 1st Amendment advocates and journalists howled, fuming that the owner of one of TV’s most respected brands chose to buy peace rather than fight the case — widely considered frivolous — and stand up for press freedom.

There are still unanswered questions. In the aftermath of the deal, a source close to Trump‘s world said the president’s team is also anticipating millions of dollars in airtime for PSAs related to MAGA-friendly causes and antisemitism — an alleged side deal that Trump himself referenced after the fact. Paramount said its deal with the Trump team did not include PSAs.

In any event, Paramount’s leaders — not to mention its incoming owners at Skydance Media and RedBird — are eager to move on. David Ellison and Shari Redstone are now counting on the Federal Communications Commission to finally approve the $8-billion merger so they can get to work reshaping the storied entertainment firm.

Speaking of Paramount, one of the company’s biggest franchises is causing headaches for the new owners — and vice versa — as the company wrangles with the creators of “South Park” over the future of the long-running, foulmouthed cartoon.

Skydance balked at a proposed overall deal worth at least $2.5 billion for the “South Park” guys, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, sources have said. (Their current $900-million deal is still in place.) Separately, the two sides are trying to work out the streaming rights to the show. Paramount wants to run the episodes on Paramount+, but it also wants to share the rights (and the costs) with another streamer — perhaps the 300-plus episodes’ current home, HBO Max. The streaming rights are expected to fetch north of $200 million a year.

In Hollywood’s current era of downsizing, Skydance may have legitimate reasons to not want to overpay for a show entering its 27th season. But Parker and Stone still have leverage: Without “South Park,” the cupboard at Comedy Central is pretty bare.

Parker and Stone’s lawyers have gone to the mat, accusing David Ellison’s allies — namely former NBCUniversal boss and current RedBird executive Jeff Shell — of overstepping their authority in the negotiations. The “South Park” team expressed its displeasure in a way only the makers of Cartman and Kenny could. After Comedy Central announced a delay for the new season premiere, the show’s X profile tweeted a statement saying the Skydance deal was “a s—show and is f— up South Park.”

Hollywood got its long-sought lifeline from Sacramento, as Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law a beefed-up film and television tax credit program, allocating $750 million annually for productions in the state.

That’s more than double the previous program, which was capped at $330 million a year. Shortly afterward, the state legislature passed a law to increase the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for movies and TV series shot in the Greater Los Angeles area — and up to 40% for productions shot outside the region. It also expanded the types of productions that could qualify.

California currently provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. The plan does not cover above-the-line expenses, such as actor and director salaries, which remains a disadvantage as California tries to compete with other states and countries. New York and Texas are both ramping up their own incentive programs.

The Golden State’s production economy has been devastated by competition. Boosting the tax incentives is one lever the state can pull to lure shoots back. There’s also been a push to overhaul red tape at the local level in Los Angeles. Whatever good all this does, it’s sure to be more effective than Trump’s now-largely forgotten call for tariffs on movies produced abroad.

Streaming hit a major symbolic milestone earlier this year, as television usage for YouTube, Netflix and their brethren overtook broadcast and cable for the first time in May, according to Nielsen. Streaming services combined to attract 44.8% of all TV set viewing, representing the largest share to date for direct-to-consumer platforms. Viewership for linear networks was just behind at 44.2%.

Nielsen’s regular viewership report — the Gauge — is a useful snapshot of the state of television today. Combined with the rapid decline of cable and satellite bundle subscriptions, the drop-off in viewing explains much of what’s going on at the legacy media companies.

Firms including Disney and Paramount are still cutting hundreds of jobs to adjust to the new realities. Warner Bros. Discovery — which has been on a yearslong quest to reduce its heavy debt load — said it will split its operations in two, cleaving the studios and streaming business from its global networks. That decision followed NBCUniversal’s move to spin off its cable nets into a new company called Versant.

Those plans are gambles. Cable networks are in decline, but they’re profitable. For most media companies, streaming is growing but has only just gotten into the black after years of losing billions.

Honorable mentions:

$417.5 million: Alcon Entertainment, the production company known for “The Blind Side” and “Blade Runner 2049,” gained a prized asset by acquiring the film library of bankrupt Village Roadshow. The $417.5-million deal gives the firm Village’s stakes in movies including “Joker” and “Mad Max: Fury Road,” both released by Warner Bros. Village Roadshow declared bankruptcy amid a brutal legal battle with Warner Bros. over its release of “The Matrix Resurrections,” which went to streaming and theaters at the same time.

$400 million: “It Ends With Us” director Justin Baldoni’s lawsuits against actress Blake Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, the New York Times and others were tossed last month, with a judge ruling that the claims — including defamation, extortion and breach of contract — failed to pass legal muster. U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman granted motions to dismiss both a $400-million countersuit against Lively, Reynolds and others and a $250-million defamation claim against The Times.

$2 billion: The biggest movie of the year isn’t from Hollywood at all. It’s “Ne Zha 2,” an animated Chinese film that grossed more than $2 billion, the vast majority of which came from its home country. Despite trade wars and the dominance of local productions, though, U.S. movies can still do well in China. “Jurassic World Rebirth” opened with $41.6 million there.

$20 million: Walt Disney Co. and Universal are suing AI firm Midjourney for allegedly ripping off and copying their intellectual property with its image-generating technology. With 150 violations cited in the lawsuit, at a statutory $150,000 per infringing item, that’s a total of more than $20 million in potential damages.

$300 billion: The eye-popping valuation for privately held OpenAI, the San Francisco company behind ChatGPT and Sora.

$9.2 billion: The amount Disney ultimately paid for Comcast’s Hulu stake, valuing the service at $27.6 billion. After a mediation process, Disney paid less for the stake than Comcast wanted.

— Times staff writers Meg James, Samantha Masunaga, Wendy Lee, Stephen Battaglio, Stacy Perman and Josh Rottenberg contributed to this article.

Stuff we wrote

Finally …

Listen: For your morning run, Killswitch Engage’s “This Consequence.”

Watch: I finally started “Apple Cider Vinegar” over the weekend, and hoo boy, what a fascinating, infuriating story.

On June 16, the Ukrainian government started the process for opening bids for foreign companies to mine lithium deposits in the country. Among the interested investors is a consortium linked to Ronald S Lauder, who is believed to be close to United States President Donald Trump.

The bid is part of a minerals deal signed in April that is supposed to give the US access to Ukraine’s mineral wealth. The agreement was negotiated over months and was touted by Trump as “payback” for US military support for the Ukrainian military.

The final text, which the Ukrainian side has celebrated as “more favourable” compared with previous iterations, paves the way for US investment in the mining and energy sectors in Ukraine. Investment decisions will be made jointly by US and Ukrainian officials, profits will not be taxed and US companies will get preferential treatment in tenders and auctions.

Trump’s demand for access to Ukrainian mineral wealth was slammed by many as infringing on Ukrainian sovereignty and being exploitative at a time when the country is fighting a war and is highly dependent on US arms supplies. But that is hardly an aberration in the record of relations between Ukraine and the West. For more than a decade now, Kyiv has faced Western pressure to make decisions that are not necessarily in the interests of its people.

Interference in domestic affairs

Perhaps the most well-known accusations of Western influence peddling have to do with the son of former US President Joe Biden – Hunter Biden. He became a board member of the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma in May 2014, three months after Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian president of Ukraine, fled to Russia during nationwide protests.

At that time, Joe Biden was not only vice president in President Barack Obama’s administration but also its pointman on US-Ukrainian relations. Over five years, Hunter Biden earned up to $50,000 a month as a board member. The apparent conflict of interest in this case bothered even Ukraine’s European allies.

But Joe Biden’s interference went much further than that. As vice president, he openly threatened then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko with blocking $1bn in US aid if he did not dismiss the Ukrainian prosecutor general, whom Washington opposed.

When Biden became president, his administration – along with the European Union – put pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to give foreign “experts” a key role in the election of judges for Ukraine’s courts. As a result, three of the six members on the Ethics Council of the High Council of Justice, which vets judges, are now members of international organisations.

There was fierce opposition to this reform, even from within Zelenskyy’s own political party. Nevertheless, he felt compelled to proceed.

The Ukrainian government also adopted other unpopular laws under Western pressure. In 2020, the parliament passed a bill introduced by Zelenskyy that removed a ban on the sale of private farmland. Although polls consistently showed the majority of Ukrainians to be against such a move, pressure from the West forced the Ukrainian president’s hand.

Widespread protests against the move were muffled by COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. Subsequently, Ukraine’s agricultural sector became even more dominated by large, export-oriented multinational companies with deleterious consequences for the country’s food security.

Attempts to challenge these unpopular laws were undermined by attacks on courts. For example, the Kyiv District Administrative Court ruled that the judicial reform law violated Ukraine’s sovereignty and constitution, but this decision was invalidated when Zelenskyy dissolved the court after the US imposed sanctions on its head judge, Pavlo Vovk, over accusations of corruption.

The Constitutional Court, where there were also attempts to challenge some of these laws, also faced pressure. In 2020, Zelenskyy tried to fire all the court’s judges and annul their rulings but failed. Then in 2021, Oleksandr Tupytskyi, the chairman of the court, was sanctioned by the US, again over corruption accusations. This facilitated his removal shortly thereafter.

With Western interference in Ukrainian internal affairs made so apparent, public confidence in the sovereignty of the state was undermined. A 2021 poll showed that nearly 40 percent of Ukrainians did not believe their country was fully independent.

Economic sovereignty

In step with interference in Ukraine’s governance, its economy has also faced foreign pressures. In 2016, US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt urged the country to become an “agricultural superpower”. And it appears that the country indeed has gone down that path, continuing the process of deindustrialisation.

From 2010 to 2019, industry’s share of Ukraine’s gross domestic product fell by 3.7 percentage points while that of agriculture rose by 3.4 percentage points.

This didn’t benefit Ukrainians. UNICEF found that nearly 20 percent of Ukrainians suffered from “moderate to severe food insecurity” from 2018 to 2020, a figure that rose to 28 percent by 2022. This is more than twice as high as the same figure for the EU.

This is because the expansion of agriculture has favoured export-oriented monocrops like sunflowers, corn and soya beans. Although Ukraine became the world’s biggest exporter of sunflower oil in 2019, a 2021 study found that the domination of agriculture by intensively farmed monoculture has put 40 percent of the country’s soil at risk of depletion.

The 2016 free trade agreement with the EU also encouraged low-cost exports. Due to the restrictive provisions of the agreement, Ukrainian business complained that domestic products were often unable to reach European markets while European producers flooded Ukraine. Ukraine had a 4-billion-euro ($4.7bn) trade deficit with the EU in 2021, exporting raw materials and importing processed goods and machinery.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s industrial output collapsed under the blows of closed export markets, Western competition and neoliberal economic policies at home. According to the Ministry of Economy, by 2019, automobile production had shrunk to 31 percent of its 2012 level, train wagon production to 29.7 percent, machine tool production to 68.2 percent, metallurgical production to 70.8 percent and agricultural machinery production to 68.4 percent.

In 2020, the government under the newly elected Zelenskyy tried to intervene. It proposed new legislation to protect Ukrainian industry, Bill 3739, which aimed to limit the amount of foreign goods purchased by Ukrainian state contracts. Member of parliament Dmytro Kiselevsky pointed to the fact that while only 5 to 8 percent of state contracts in the US and EU are fulfilled with imports, the same figures stood at 40 to 50 percent in Ukraine.

But Bill 3739 was immediately criticised by the EU, the US and pro-Western NGOs in Ukraine. This was despite the fact that Western countries have a range of methods to protect their markets and state purchases from foreigners. Ultimately, Bill 3739 was passed with significant amendments that provided exceptions for companies from the US and the EU.

The recent renewal of EU tariffs on Ukrainian agricultural exports, which had been lifted in 2022, is yet another confirmation that the West protects its own markets but wants unrestricted access to Ukraine’s, to the detriment of the Ukrainian economy. Ukrainian officials worry that this move would cut economic growth this year from the projected 2.7 percent to 0.9 percent and cost the country $3.5bn in lost revenues.

In light of all this, Trump’s mineral deal reflects continuity in Western policy on Ukraine rather than a rupture. What the US president did differently was show to the public how Western leaders bully the Ukrainian government to get what they want – something that usually happens behind closed doors.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

China and the European Union are marking 50 years of diplomatic relations this month. At the core of their partnership is trade.

They are the second and third biggest economies in the world after the United States.

The Chinese foreign minister is visiting EU headquarters this week as he seeks closer ties in what he has called a “volatile” world.

Under President Donald Trump, the US has increasingly turned to sweeping tariffs to get what it wants.

Although Beijing and Brussels are hoping to improve their economic ties, they have disagreements on a number of issues.

So what will that mean for global trade and the economic order?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Karel Lannoo – CEO, Centre for European Policy Studies

Victor Gao – vice president, Center for China and Globalisation

Raffaele Marchetti – director, Center for International and Strategic Studies at LUISS University in Rome

The $145-million global opening of Apple’s “F1 The Movie” came as a relief — both for the iPhone maker itself and theater operators hoping for an original hit during this sequel-dominated summer of blockbusters.

The expensive Brad Pitt action sports drama, directed by Joseph Kosinski (“Top Gun: Maverick”) and produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, was a high-stakes gamble by the Cupertino-based tech giant, which until now has enjoyed little success at cinemas.

In the U.S. and Canada, the film did better than expected, generating $57 million in ticket sales through Sunday, according to studio estimates. Analysts were projecting $40 million to $50 million, based on prerelease tracking. Warner Bros. Pictures, which is on a much-needed hot streak, distributed “F1” in partnership with Apple.

Because the movie cost at least $200 million to make (and perhaps far more, according to some reports) after tax breaks and before significant marketing costs, the picture is still far from profitable. But with strong reviews from audiences and critics — an “A” CinemaScore, 83% “fresh” on the Tomatometer and 97% approval from moviegoers on Rotten Tomatoes — the film should continue to perform well in the coming weeks.

It’ll face some serious competition, with Universal Pictures’ “Jurassic World: Rebirth” arriving in theaters Wednesday for the Fourth of July holiday weekend and Warner Bros.’ “Superman” from James Gunn coming shortly afterward.

Nonetheless, “F1” has the all-important Imax screens locked down until “Superman,” and that should be an advantage, given that the movie plays like both an old-school blockbuster and a thrill ride.

The question now: What does this mean for Apple’s film business and how the company approaches theatrical releases in the future?

Since Apple got into Hollywood six years ago with the launch of Apple TV+, the movie slate has struggled to come up with a big-screen success, despite huge spending on prestigious projects and big-name talent.

Its Sundance acquisition “CODA” won the 2022 best picture Oscar, albeit in a weird year, in a first for a streaming company.

But Martin Scorsese’s “Killers of the Flower Moon” and Ridley Scott’s “Napoleon” weren’t commercial hits. “Argylle” and “Fly Me to the Moon” flopped, and “Wolfs” was scaled back from its planned theatrical release. The Miles Teller–Anya Taylor-Joy feature “The Gorge” went straight to streaming.

Analysts and movie industry insiders have speculated that the performance of “F1” would heavily influence whether Apple dove further into blockbuster filmmaking or abandoned theaters altogether. Apple certainly treated it like a high-stakes release, having Chief Executive Tim Cook give an interview with Variety and promoting the film through various parts of the company, including its retail stores and its music, fitness, maps and podcast apps.

Apple lacks an in-house theatrical distribution arm and instead enlists traditional studios for those duties. Burbank-based Warner Bros. worked with Apple on the marketing side while also contributing financially to the campaign, according to people close to the studios.

As of now, it’s unclear what Apple’s ambitions are for the multiplex.

Spike Lee’s Denzel Washington-starring thriller “Highest 2 Lowest,” a reimagining of the 1963 Akira Kurosawa classic “High and Low,” is getting a miniature theatrical window from A24 ahead of its September streaming release on Apple TV+. Apple has already inked a deal for another upcoming Kosinski-Bruckheimer collaboration, about UFOs.

An Apple spokeswoman did not respond to a question about future movie plans.

Theater owners want to see more from Apple at a time when they’re often struggling with a lack of compelling material, especially for grown-ups. With “F1,” they saw a glimpse of hope.

“F1” is a racing movie with throwback vibes, which is no guarantee of success. But the F1 brand is strong, especially internationally, where the movie is doing particularly well ($88.4 million so far). The companies sold the movie as a sort of “Top Gun: Maverick” on wheels, an approach that resonated with audiences. People familiar with the data say the film is drawing in audiences who don’t typically go to theaters, which the theaters desperately need.

The box office performance bodes well for the title’s eventual streaming release on Apple TV+.

With the exception of Netflix, which remains set against doing a true traditional theatrical business, film studios say movies that open in theaters do better on streaming than if they’re simply dumped onto a crowded service. Amazon has again committed to theaters since acquiring MGM Studios after slinking away from the business model years ago.

On the other hand, theatrical releases are risky, especially for a company that cares about its reputation the way Apple does. Flops are embarrassing, even for a company that’s worth $3 trillion and can afford to subsidize a filmmaker’s vision.

In both movies and TV, Apple has been selective with its programming strategy.

It doesn’t have a vast library or a deluge of new releases to keep people interested the way Netflix does. Thus, its subscriber counts have lagged the bigger rivals with more voluminous offerings, according to analysts. (Apple doesn’t disclose subscriber numbers.)

Ask anyone in Hollywood why, exactly, Apple is in the movie business at all and you’ll get varied answers.

Of course, the company wants to grow Apple TV+, which Apple views as part of a larger play to boost its services business. Having a hit movie, in theory, should help with that. People who work with Apple will often argue that the company is more interested in the branding glow that comes with a great movie than whether any particular title makes money.

The company has developed a reputation for quality, especially with buzzy TV projects including Jon Hamm’s “Your Friends & Neighbors,” Seth Rogen’s “The Studio” and, more recently, “Stick” starring Owen Wilson.

“We studied it for years before we decided to do [Apple TV+],” Cook told Variety. “I know there’s a lot of different views out there about why we’re into it. We’re into it to tell great stories, and we want it to be a great business as well. That’s why we’re into it, just plain and simple.”

For Apple, the question of whether to commit to the blockbuster business is a billion-dollar component of a $3-trillion car.

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

California legislators voted Friday to more than double the amount allocated each year to the state’s film and television tax credit program, raising that cap to $750 million from $330 million.

The increase is a win for the studios, producers, unions and industry workers who have lobbied state legislators for months on the issue, Samantha Masunaga reported.

Gov. Gavin Newsom proposed the increase to help lure productions back to the state at a time when local film and TV employment is sparse.

But other states have not given up the arms race.

New York recently upped its film tax credit cap to $800 million. Texas is also ramping up its incentive program to compete with regional rivals.

Finally …

Watch: “Becoming Led Zeppelin.”

Listen: Dream Theater, “Night Terror.”

After weathering a pandemic, dual strikes and massive wildfires, Hollywood is finally getting a lifeline.

California legislators voted Friday to more than double the amount allocated each year to the state’s film and television tax credit program, raising that cap to $750 million from $330 million.

The increase is a win for the studios, producers, unions and industry workers who have lobbied state legislators for months on the issue.

Other states and countries have increasingly lured productions away from California with generous tax credits and incentive programs, leaving many in Hollywood without work for months. In interviews, town halls and legislative committee hearings, industry workers said that without state intervention, they feared Tinseltown would be hollowed out, similar to Detroit after the heyday of its auto industry.

“It’s now time to get people back to work and bring production home to California,” Directors Guild of America executive and Entertainment Union Coalition President Rebecca Rhine said in a statement. “We call on the studios to recommit to the communities and workers across the state that built this industry and built their companies.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom called to expand the annual tax credit program last year, saying at the time that “the world we invented is now competing against us.”

From there, state lawmakers looked to expand the provisions of the program. A separate bill going through the Legislature would broaden the types of productions eligible to apply, including animated films, shorts and series and certain large-scale competition shows. It would also increase the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for movies and TV series shot in the Greater Los Angeles area and up to 40% for productions shot outside the region.

That bill, AB 1138, was unanimously approved Thursday by the state Senate Revenue and Tax Committee. It will be up for final votes next week.

California provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. Production companies can apply the credit toward any tax liabilities they have in California.

The bump to 35% puts California more in line with incentives offered by other states, such as Georgia, which provides a 30% credit for productions.

Lawmakers and industry insiders have said the increased tax credit cap and the proposed criteria changes to the incentive program must both be approved to make California more competitive for filming. The bill was written by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles) and state Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica).

“After years of uncertainty, workers can once again set the stage, cue the lights, and roll the cameras — because California is keeping film and TV jobs anchored right here, where they belong,” Zbur said in a statement about the $750-million cap. “This is a historic investment in our creative economy, our working families, small businesses, and the communities that depend on this industry to thrive.”

Thousands to march in Hungary’s capital despite government ban, highlighting EU-wide resistance against anti-LGBTQ laws.

A record number of people are expected to attend a Pride march in the Hungarian capital, Budapest, defying a ban that marks an unprecedented regression of LGBTQ rights in the European Union.

The event on Saturday comes after Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s ruling coalition earlier this year amended laws and the constitution to ban the annual celebration. Orban’s government has consistently argued that the legislation defends traditional family values and protects children.

While the prime minister has been emboldened by the anti-diversity offensive of President Donald Trump in the United States, his own initiatives have drawn protests at home and condemnation from the EU and rights groups.

The nationalist leader on Friday said that while police would not “break up” the 30th edition of the Pride march, those who took part should be aware of “legal consequences”.

Despite the risk of a fine, more than 35,000 people are expected to gather at 2pm (12:00 GMT) near Budapest’s city hall, an hour before the march begins.

Ministers from several EU countries and dozens of European politicians are expected to attend in defiance of the ban, reminiscent of events in Moscow in 2006 and Istanbul in 2015.

“We’re not just standing up for ourselves … If this law isn’t overturned, Eastern Europe could face a wave of similar measures,” Pride organiser Viktoria Radvanyi said.

Earlier this week, EU chief Ursula von der Leyen called on the Hungarian authorities to reverse the ban.

Thirty-three countries have also spoken up in support of the march.

While parade organisers risk up to a year in prison, attendees can face fines up to 500 euros ($580). The latest legal changes empower the authorities to use facial recognition technology to identify those who take part.

Freshly installed cameras have appeared on lamp posts along the planned route of the march.

However, Budapest Mayor Gergely Karacsony has insisted that no attendee can face any reprisals as the march – co-organised by the city hall this time – is a municipal event and does not require police approval.

“The police have only one task tomorrow, and it is a serious one: to ensure the safety of Hungarian and European citizens attending the event,” Karacsony said during a briefing with visiting EU equalities commissioner Hadja Lahbib.

Far-right groups have announced multiple counterprotests along the planned route of the procession.

Justice Minister Bence Tuzson this week sent a letter to EU embassies cautioning diplomats and staff against participating because of the police ban.

Several EU countries have informed their citizens of the potential of fines through travel advisories.

Since Orban’s return to power in 2010, the country of 9.6 million people has been steadily rolling back LGBTQ rights.

Legal changes have, in effect, barred same-sex couples from adopting children, prevented transgender people from changing their name or gender in official documents, and a 2021 law forbade the “display and promotion” of homosexuality to under-18s.

In March, politicians passed a bill targeting the annual Pride march, amending the 2021 law to prohibit any gathering violating its provisions.

A month later, parliament also adopted a constitutional change to strengthen the legal foundations for the ban.

“Orban is employing a tried-and-tested recipe ahead of next year’s election by generating a conflict,” political analyst Daniel Mikecz told the news agency AFP. Orban was “polarising society”, he added.

Voter opinion polls suggest Orban’s Fidesz party has been losing ground to the opposition.

The first Pride march was held in 1970 in New York to mark the anniversary of the city’s Stonewall riots in June 1969, which created the gay rights movement.

The parent organization of the Los Angeles Fire Department’s labor union has doubled down on allegations that the union’s top official failed to properly document hundreds of thousands of dollars in credit card transactions.

The International Assn. of Fire Fighters, which oversees the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City, suspended President Freddy Escobar and two other union officials last month over “serious problems” with missing receipts identified in a wide-ranging audit going back to 2018.

Auditors reexamined their findings after Escobar showed up to UFLAC headquarters last month — news cameras in tow — with a thumb drive and stacks of photocopied receipts that he claimed would clear him.

In a letter last week reviewed by The Times, the IAFF’s auditors concluded that even with the new materials, Escobar failed to properly document more than $212,000 worth of credit card expenses. They said they were not provided full access to UFLAC’s internal expense system for their first report and said Escobar engaged in a “flurry of activity” to reconcile the transactions in recent months. In the months after auditors left UFLAC’s offices in December 2024, Escobar directed his staff by email to look for missing receipts, according to the letter.

“Escobar — with the assistance of UFLAC staff — worked feverishly to reconcile some of his past credit card expenditures,” IAFF General President Edward Kelly and General Secretary Treasurer Frank Líma said in a note this week to the local union’s members.

Of the 1,974 Escobar credit card transactions auditors recently reviewed, totaling $312,985, only 889, or $100,824 worth, were fully documented with receipts and a business purpose, the auditors’ letter said.

The initial audit reviewed 1,957 of those transactions, which amounted to $311,498, and found that only 428, or $45,635, were properly documented.

“Our conclusions set forth in our May 1, 2025 audit report remain the same,” the auditors wrote in the letter. “It appears that Escobar repeatedly failed to comply with his fiduciary duties and obligations, and proper controls were not in place for compliance with state and federal laws and regulations and UFLAC policies on expense reimbursements and expenditure of UFLAC funds due to lack of receipts and documentation of business purpose.”

Neither Escobar nor his attorney immediately provided comment.

The initial audit had also found that two other UFLAC officials — former Secretary Adam Walker and former Treasurer Domingo Albarran Jr. — together made more than $530,000 in credit card transactions with no receipts or partial documentation.

Auditors did not reexamine those findings in the new report.

Under UFLAC policy, receipts are required for all credit card expenditures, along with an explanation of the expense, including the names of those present and the business reason.

Vice Presidents Chuong Ho and Doug Coates also were suspended and accused of breaching their fiduciary duties in “failing to enforce UFLAC policy.”

After the audit, the IAFF appointed a conservator, John Bagala, to take over the union and “restore responsible financial stewardship and guarantee the fulfillment of UFLAC’s legitimate objectives.”

Bagala is a state representative for the IAFF and president of Marin Professional Firefighters, IAFF Local 1775, which represents firefighters in Marin County.

In a statement Thursday, IAFF spokesperson Ryan Heffernan said the conservatorship is focused on implementing safeguards to prevent future financial mismanagement.

“During this temporary conservatorship, the IAFF remains focused on meeting members’ critical needs and protecting their hard-earned dues money,” he said.

Spanish PM Pedro Sanchez warns the spending hike would undermine EU efforts to build its own security and defence base.

Spain has reportedly asked to opt out of NATO’s proposed defence spending target of 5 percent of GDP, risking disruption to a key agreement expected at next week’s alliance summit.

In a letter addressed to NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte on Thursday, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez urged the alliance to adopt a more flexible framework, according to media reports.

The letter, seen by the Reuters and Associated Press news agencies, called for either the target to remain optional or for Spain to be exempt entirely.

“Committing to a 5% target would not only be unreasonable, but also counterproductive,” Sanchez wrote, warning that it would undermine efforts by the European Union to build its own security and defence base. “As a sovereign Ally, we choose not to.”

Sanchez insisted Madrid does not intend to block the outcome of the upcoming summit. But any agreement on increased defence spending must be approved unanimously by all 32 NATO members, giving Spain leverage to delay or water down the deal.

Spain currently spends approximately 1.28 percent of its GDP on defence, the lowest among NATO members, according to alliance estimates. While Sanchez has pledged to accelerate the country’s path to NATO’s current 2 percent goal, he argues that going beyond that risks harming the welfare state and compromising Spain’s broader policy vision.

NATO’s push for higher spending follows calls by US President Donald Trump and others to share the burden more fairly across the alliance. Rutte has suggested a new formula that allocates 3.5 percent of GDP to core military spending and an additional 1.5 percent to broader security needs.

Pressure to increase defence spending

The United States, NATO’s largest military contributor and Ukraine’s main backer since Russia’s 2022 invasion, is estimated to have spent 3.38 percent of its GDP on defence in 2024. Trump has repeatedly claimed European allies are not pulling their weight, and has threatened to withhold support for those who fall short.

Sanchez, however, said rushing to meet a 5 percent target would force EU states to buy military equipment from outside the bloc, damaging the continent’s attempts to bolster self-sufficiency in defence.

The proposal also faces resistance from Spain’s political left. The left-leaning Sumar party, part of Sanchez’s coalition, opposes the move, while Podemos, not in government but often a key parliamentary ally, has also rejected it.

“If the government needs parliamentary support to approve spending, it will have a very difficult time in the current situation,” said Josa Miguel Calvillo, a professor of international relations at the Complutense University of Madrid, speaking to Reuters.

Italy has also raised concerns, reportedly seeking to shift the proposed deadline for the new target from 2032 to 2035 and drop the requirement to increase spending by 0.2 percent annually.

One senior European official told Reuters that Spain’s rejection complicates talks but said discussions are ongoing. “It doesn’t look good, indeed, but we are not over yet. Spain has demonstrated to be a steadfast ally so far.”

It was only a matter of time before the major Hollywood studios started taking the fight to the artificial intelligence industry over its alleged abuse of intellectual property.

Now, it’s on.

Last week, Walt Disney Co. and Universal Pictures sued AI firm Midjourney in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, accusing the popular image generator of blatantly copying and profiting from copyrighted images of characters from franchises such as “Star Wars,” “Minions,” “Cars,” Marvel, “The Simpsons” and “Shrek.”

The complaint cited numerous examples, illustrated with dozens of striking photos, of San Francisco-based Midjourney’s technology being used to generate virtually indistinguishable copies of Darth Vader, Iron Man, Bart, Woody and Elsa, sometimes in frames quite similar to scenes from the actual movies and TV shows.

The lawsuit says Midjourney employed such images to promote its subscription service and encourage the use of its image generator. The companies are seeking unspecified monetary compensation, as well as a court order to stop Midjourney from further infringement, including by using studio-owned material to train its upcoming video tool.

“Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism,” Disney and Universal’s lawyers wrote in the 110-page complaint. “Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing.”

The stakes of this battle are high, according to the studios. The AI company’s misuse of Disney and Universal’s intellectual property “threatens to upend the bedrock incentives of U.S. copyright law that drive American leadership in movies, television, and other creative arts,” the court document said.

Midjourney has not responded to requests for comment.

AI companies have typically argued that they are protected by “fair use” doctrine, which allows for the limited reproduction of material without permission from the copyright holder.

Midjourney founder David Holz in 2022 told Forbes that the company did not seek permission from copyright holders, saying “there isn’t really a way to get a hundred million images and know where they’re coming from.”

This battle is a long time coming.

Artists — including screenwriters, animators, illustrators and other entertainment industry workers — have been raising the alarm for years about the threat of AI, not just to their actual jobs but to the work they create. AI models are trained on anything and everything that’s publicly available on the internet, which includes copyrighted material owned by studios or the artists themselves, they argue.

The Writers Guild of America last year called on the big entertainment companies to take legal action against tech giants and startups in order to put a stop to such “theft.” But this is the first time any of the major film studios have gone after an AI company for copyright infringement. They may not be the last.

The studios are following the lead of the New York Times and other publishers, who sued OpenAI and its backer Microsoft over alleged plagiarism. The major music labels have also taken AI firms to court over the use of copyrighted music. Studios are in an awkward position because they’re weighing the possibility of licensing their content to AI firms or using the technology for their own purposes.

Reid Southen, a Michigan-based film concept artist whose research on AI was cited at length in the lawsuit, said he hopes Disney and Universal’s complaint encourages others to take a similar stance.

“Hopefully, I think other studios are looking at what’s going on with Disney and Universal now, and considering, ‘Hey, what about our properties?’” said Southen, who has worked on studio films including “The Matrix Resurrections,” “The Hunger Games” and “Blue Beetle.” “If Universal and Disney think they have a strong enough case to pursue this, I would hope other studios would take note of that and maybe pursue it as well.”

Southen became part of the story in December 2023, after the release of Midjourney v6 started making waves online. He saw someone use the tech to generate an image of Joaquin Phoenix as the Joker, and he started messing around with it himself to see what kinds of copyrighted material he could prompt it to rip off. He posted the results on social media, which led AI researcher Gary Marcus to reach out.

Marcus and Southen published an in-depth article for IEEE Spectrum in January 2024, making the case that Midjourney and other well-funded AI firms were training their models on copyrighted work without their permission or compensation and spitting out images nearly identical to the studios’ own material.

That article illustrated how simple prompts could produce nearly exact replicas of famous film and TV characters.

The prompts didn’t necessarily need to ask for a particular character by name.

The researchers were able to coax uncanny images from AI with prompts as basic as “animated toys” (resulting in pictures of “Toy Story” characters) and “videogame plumber” (which turned up versions of Mario from “Super Mario”). According to Marcus and Southen, all it took was the phrase “popular movie screencap” to evoke a picture similar to an actual frame from “Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice” or “The Dark Knight.”

“It shows that they are very clearly trained on hundreds, if not thousands, of movies and YouTube videos and screen caps and all this stuff, because I was able to find matching screen caps and images, not just from trailers, but from deep in movies themselves,” Southen said.

The Midjourney examples were the most egregious, Southen said, but the company was not the only offender. For instance, OpenAI’s image generation technology DALL-E was also capable of producing “plagiaristic” images of copyrighted characters without prompting them specifically by name, Southen said, echoing the findings of his and Marcus’ IEEE Spectrum article.

OpenAI did not respond to a request for comment. The Disney and Universal lawsuit did not name OpenAI, which is also responsible for the video generator Sora that is trying to take the film business by storm.

Many chatbots and text-to-image tools have guardrails around intellectual property, but they clearly have limitations. Ask ChatGPT to create an image of Kermit the Frog, and it will flatly reject the request. However, for example, I was recently able to request a picture of a Muppet-like female pig character, and the result was not unlike Miss Piggy, though I wouldn’t quite say it was a one-for-one copy.

Southen argues that this is a sign of a serious flaw in large language model training — the fact that they’ve already been fed on so much publicly available data. “Sometimes it’s not giving you something that’s spot-on, but it’s giving you enough that you know that it knows what it’s doing,” he said. “Like, you know where it’s pulling from.”

In public comments, studio executives have made it clear that they’re not against AI as a whole. “We are bullish on the promise of AI technology and optimistic about how it can be used responsibly as a tool to further human creativity,” said Horacio Gutierrez, Disney’s chief legal and compliance officer, in a statement on the lawsuit.

As media industry expert Peter Csathy put it in a recent newsletter, there’s a right way and a wrong way to do AI.

But even doing it the right way will be disruptive. Use of AI for storyboarding and pre-visualization could save millions of dollars, which translates to more job losses in the entertainment industry. Lionsgate and AMC Networks have announced deals to use AI to streamline operations and processes.

For artists like Southen, that’s a troubling reality. He said he has seen his annual income shrink in half since generative AI technology came on the scene.

“You can point at things like the strikes and other stuff going on, but the story is the same for most of the people that I know — that their income since all this stuff came has been dramatically impacted,” he said. “Work that was otherwise very steady for me for a long time is just nowhere to be found anymore.”

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

Streaming just notched a significant milestone.

The technology’s share of total television usage overtook the combined viewership of broadcast and cable for the first time, according to Nielsen.

Streaming represented 44.8% of TV viewership in May 2025, the data firm said, marking a record, while broadcast clocked in at 20.1% and cable garnered 24.1% for a combined 44.2% going to linear viewing.

Nielsen cautioned that rankings may fluctuate because broadcast networks still command a tremendous share of eyeballs, particularly when NFL football airs.

Finally …

I caught some stellar acts at the Hollywood’s Bowl’s Blue Note Jazz Festival on Saturday. Shout-out to saxophonist Lakecia Benjamin and bassist Derrick Hodge. Here’s Benjamin’s Tiny Desk Concert performance for NPR.

Meredith Hayden, a New York-based social media influencer and cookbook author, didn’t start out wanting to create comforting content.

But that’s exactly what resonated with audiences.

She went viral a few years ago by posting about her “day in the life” as a private chef in the Hamptons. Now she has a large following on YouTube for her Wishbone Kitchen brand and her “Dinner With Friends” video series, where she shows herself setting up relaxing dinner parties, making French-style hot chocolate and re-creating a cozy coffee shop at home.

You might see her online wearing pajamas or in bed with her dog while talking to the camera. She doesn’t edit out the parts where she messes up the recipe, saying her fans appreciate the flubs. Hayden, who recently completed a tour for “The Wishbone Kitchen Cookbook,” said she isn’t necessarily going for a vibe, at least not intentionally, despite the clear Ina Garten influence.

“This is really just how I live my life,” Hayden, 29, said by phone. “I am glad it comes across as comforting, because I’m definitely someone who gravitates more towards ‘comfort content’ myself.”

“I’m not planning on watching ‘Severance,’” she added, saying she gravitates toward more wholesome, grounded content, such as home makeover shows of the non-competitive variety.

That personal preference aligns with a broader trend among young adult viewers, according to recent data from United Talent Agency, the Beverly Hills representation firm. The company’s data and insights group, UTA IQ, compiled stats suggesting that many younger consumers are leaning toward material that soothes the nerves and acts as a warm blanket, rather than ratcheting up the anxiety.

“Comfort content” is like popping a Lorazepam (though not in the excessive dose Parker Posey’s character takes in “The White Lotus”) or CBD gummy at the end of the day. The trend is playing out across TV, streaming, literature and social media, said UTA IQ executive Abby Bailey.

She sees it in the rise of #CleanTok videos (totaling 49 billion views last year), in which people do mundane household chores, as well as robust streaming viewership of nostalgic low-intensity sitcoms including “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” and the successful February debut of a new CBS soap opera, “Beyond the Gates.”

“Somber themes, intellectual depth, cultural satires — those have always defined prestige entertainment, and it’s left many to discount the value and the viewership of this more lighthearted, comforting programming,” Bailey told The Times. “But as audiences are prioritizing their well-being and taking brain-breaks from the weight of the world, the definition of what’s capital ‘I’ important in entertainment is shifting.”

The changing attitudes are particularly noticeable in the young adult entertainment space, which several years ago was dominated by postapocalyptic teen dramas such as “The Hunger Games” and the “Divergent” series.

More than half (58%) of U.S. adults ages 18 to 30 say TV shows and movies depicting young adults have become too dark and heavy, according to UTA IQ’s April poll of more than 1,000 people. More than 70% said they want to see lighter and more joyful TV shows with young people.

That’s not to say that the upcoming season of the dark and sexually explicit “Euphoria” won’t be successful or that the next “Hunger Games” film won’t work at the box office. That type of content still has its place, even as tastes evolve. But studios and streamers appear to be noticing the audience’s shifting habits.

Examples are popping up in the young adult space on streaming services, including Tubi’s 2024 sports romance movie “Sidelined: The QB & Me,” which is getting a sequel. The Netflix teen drama “My Life With the Walter Boys” was recently renewed for a third season, ahead of its Season 2 premiere.

There are plenty of other opportunities now for young people to take mental breaks on the couch, from the rise of “cozy gaming” to the crossover appeal of “healing fiction,” a genre of whimsical books from Japan and Korea that have taken off elsewhere. Olympic diver Tom Daley, who went viral when he was photographed knitting between his events in Tokyo, created a competition show called “Game of Wool” that will debut on Channel 4 in the U.K.

Some millennial parents have turned to gentler, less overstimulating TV shows from decades ago — think “Arthur” and “Clifford the Big Red Dog” — to co-view with their young children.

Comfort content is certainly nothing new. The term brings to mind the idyllic autumnal walkways of Stars Hollow, the fictional small town from “Gilmore Girls,” as well as just about anything on the Hallmark Channel, which has enough of a following to justify its own $8-a-month subscription streaming service.

But there may be a reason the category is finding renewed purchase in trying times. Bailey hears that theme from consumers who just aren’t in the mood for any more nail-biters. “Time and time again, I get people saying, ‘I just can’t bring myself to watch anything serious,’” Bailey said. “‘Like, all I want to do is watch Bravo.’”

Stuff we wrote

Studio splitsville

As expected, Warner Bros. Discovery will split into two companies, separating its streaming and studios businesses from the struggling television networks business, the New York-based media giant said Monday.

The Streaming & Studios company will consist of the film and TV studios as well as HBO and HBO Max. The Global Networks company (which is taking on much of the debt) will have CNN, Discovery and other channels.

The divorce is aimed to be completed by mid-2026. Afterward, Warner Bros. Discovery Chief Executive David Zaslav will be CEO of the streaming and studios group, while Chief Financial Officer Gunnar Wiedenfels will run the networks.

The firm previously foreshadowed this move by restructuring its operations along similar lines.

Warner Bros. Discovery thus joins Comcast’s NBCUniversal, which is sweeping basic cable networks, including MSNBC and USA, into a new separate entity called Versant. It’s widely speculated that Paramount Global — if and when the Skydance deal happens — will also eventually unload declining legacy networks.

The breakups reflect an ongoing reality — linear television is in big trouble. The struggles of the cable bundle have continued to weigh on studio finances, with customers moving rapidly to on-demand services.

Indeed, if anyone thought the entertainment business’ bloodletting was over after last year’s series of layoffs, Walt Disney Co. and Warner Bros. Discovery disabused them of that notion in recent days.

Disney slashed several hundred employees on June 2. An actual number was not disclosed, but the cuts are significant, coming after Bob Iger embarked on a plan to reduce staff by 8,000 two years ago following his return as chief executive.

The latest layoffs hit film and television marketing teams, television publicity, casting and development as well as corporate financial operations. The cuts happen to land as the company is celebrating huge box office results from “Lilo & Stitch.”

The new downsizing comes amid Disney’s efforts to pare down its production pipeline after binge-spending during the streaming wars. The reduction corresponds to Disney’s efforts to focus on quality over quantity while also cutting costs.

A couple days after Disney’s layoffs, Warner Bros. Discovery cut staff from its cable television channels business. Those Warner Bros. Discovery reductions were smaller in scale (eliminating fewer than 100 roles), but the message to the industry couldn’t be clearer. Comcast’s NBCUniversal has also undergone layoffs.

The question is: What comes next? Many expect the cast-off Warner and NBCUniversal networks to merge at some point, with Paramount channels perhaps joining them one day.

Finally …

Listen: Turnstile’s new album “Never Enough” is out. Also, The Beths have a new tune. Sabrina Carpenter’s latest has already been declared the “song of the summer.”

Video game performers and producers have reached a tentative contract agreement, reaching terms that could end a long strike over artificial intelligence.

The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the game companies came to a resolution on Monday, more than two years after their previous agreement covering interactive media expired.

The deal is subject to review and approval by the SAG-AFTRA National Board and ratification by the membership in the coming weeks, the union said. Specific terms of the deal were not immediately available.

Terms of a strike suspension agreement are expected to be finalized with employers soon, the union said. Until then, though, SAG-AFTRA members will remain on strike.

SAG-AFTRA members must vote on whether to ratify the new contract, which covers roughly 2,600 performers doing voice-acting, performance- and motion-capture work in the video game industry.

Since fall 2022, video game performers have been fighting for a new contract containing AI protections, wage increases to keep up with inflation, more rest periods and medical attention for hazardous jobs.

Game actors went on strike in late July after contract talks broke down over AI. Throughout the walkout, performers demanded a deal that would require video game producers to obtain informed consent before replicating their voices, likenesses or movements with AI.

During the first few months of the strike, SAG-AFTRA reached numerous side deals with individual game companies that agreed to follow the union’s AI rules in exchange for a strike pardon. By Nov. 18, the labor organization announced that it had made AI pacts with the developers of 130 different video games.

“The sheer volume of companies that have signed SAG-AFTRA agreements demonstrates how reasonable those protections are,” Sarah Elmaleh, chair of the union’s video game negotiating committee, said in a statement in September.

While some companies earned the union’s approval, others felt its wrath.

Halfway through October, SAG-AFTRA added the popular computer game “League of Legends” to its list of struck titles in an effort to punish audio company Formosa Interactive for allegedly violating terms of the walkout. SAG-AFTRA also filed an unfair labor practice charge against Formosa, which provides voice-over services to “League of Legends,” according to the union.

Formosa denied SAG-AFTRA’s allegations.

The biggest sticking point for actors under the umbrella of AI involved on-camera performers, whose job is often to disappear into the characters they are bringing to life. They expressed concerns that the companies’ AI proposal would leave them defenseless against the technology.

The game companies argued that their AI proposal already contained robust protections that would require employers to seek prior consent and pay actors fairly when cloning their performances.

“All performers need AI protections,” said Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, national executive director and chief negotiator of SAG-AFTRA, in an interview with The Times months ago.

“Everyone’s at risk, and it’s not OK to carve out a set of performers and leave them out of AI protections.”

This work stoppage marked SAG-AFTRA’s second video game strike in less than a decade and second overall strike in roughly a year.

While the walkout persisted, video game performers weren’t allowed to provide any services — such as acting, singing, stunts, motion capture, background and stand-in work — to struck games. Union actors were also barred from promoting any struck projects via social media, interviews, conventions, festivals, award shows, podcast appearances and other platforms.

AI was also a major sticking point during the film and TV actors’ strike of 2023. That walkout culminated in a contract mandating that producers obtain consent from and compensate performers when using their digital replica.

Unions in California are different from those in other places.

More than any state in our troubled country, their ranks are filled with people of color and immigrants. While unions have always been tied closely with the struggles of civil rights, that has become even more pronounced in the years since George Floyd was killed by a police officer in Minneapolis.

In the subsequent national soul-searching, unions were forced to do a bit of their own. But where that conversation has largely broken down for general society under the pressure of President Trump’s right-wing rage, it took hold inside of unions to a much greater degree — leading to more leadership from people of color, sometimes younger leadership and definitely an understanding from the rank and file that these are organizations that fight far beyond the workplace.

Which is why the arrest of David Huerta, president of SEIU-USWW and SEIU California, by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Friday is going to have a major impact on the coming months as deportations continue.

“They have woke us up,” Tia Orr told me Saturday morning. She’s the executive director of the 700,000-strong Service Employees International Union California, of which Huerta is a part, and the first African American and Latina to lead the organization.

“And I think they’ve woke people up across the nation, certainly in California, and people are ready to get to action,” she added. “I haven’t seen that in a long time. I don’t know that I’ve seen something like that before, and so yes, it is going to result in action that I believe is going to be historical.”

While unions have voiced their disapproval of mass deportations since the MAGA threat first manifested, their might has not gone full force against them, taking instead a bit of a wait-and-see approach.

Well, folks, we’ve seen. We’ve seen the unidentified masked men rounding up immigrants across the country and shipping them into life sentences at torturous foreign prisons; we’ve watched a 9-year-old Southern California boy separated from his father and detained for deportation; and Friday, across Los Angeles, we saw an anonymous military-style force of federal agents sweep up our neighbors, family members and friends in what seemed to be a haphazard and deliberately cruel way.

And for those of you who have watched the video of Huerta’s arrest, we’ve seen a middle-aged Latino man in a plaid button-down be roughly pushed by authorities in riot gear until he falls backward, and seems to strike his head on the curb. Huerta was, according to a television interview with Mayor Karen Bass, pepper-sprayed as well. Then he was taken to the hospital for treatment, then into custody, where he remains until a Monday arraignment.

U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli wrote on social media that “Federal agents were executing a lawful judicial warrant at a LA worksite this morning when David Huerta deliberately obstructed their access by blocking their vehicle. He was arrested for interfering with federal officers … Let me be clear: I don’t care who you are—if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted. No one has the right to assault, obstruct, or interfere with federal authorities carrying out their duties.”

I have covered protests, violent and nonviolent, for more than two decades. In one of the first such events I covered, I watched an iconic union leader, Bill Camp, sit down in the middle of the road in a Santa suit and refuse to move. Police arrested him. But they managed to do it without violence, and without Camp’s resistance. This is how unions do good trouble — without fear, without violence.

Huerta understands the rules and power of peaceful protest better than most. The union he is president of — SEIU United Service Workers West — started the Justice for Janitors campaign in 1990, a bottom-up movement that in Los Angeles was mostly powered by the immigrant Latina women who cleaned commercial office space for wages as low as $7 an hour.

After weeks of protests, police attacked those Latina workers in June of that year in what became known as the “Battle of Century City.” Two dozen workers were injured but the union did not back down. Eventually, it won the contracts it was seeking, and equally as important, it won public support.

Huerta joined USWW a few years after that incident, growing the Justice for Janitors campaign. The union was and has always been one powered by immigrant workers who saw that collective power was their best power, and Huerta has led decades of building that truth into a practical force. He is, says Orr, an organizer who knows how to bring people together.

To say he is a beloved and respected leader in both the union and California in general is an understatement. You can still find his bio on the White House website, since he was honored as a “Champion of Change,” by President Obama. Within hours of his arrest, political leaders across the state were voicing support.

“David Huerta is a respected leader, a patriot, and an advocate for working people. No one should ever be harmed for witnessing government action,” Gov. Gavin Newsom posted online.

Perhaps more importantly, AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler, speaking for her 15 million members, issued a statement.

Huerta “was doing what he has always done, and what we do in unions: putting solidarity into practice and defending our fellow workers,” she said. “The labor movement stands with David and we will continue to demand justice for our union brother until he is released.”

Similar statements came from the Teamsters and other unions. Solidarity isn’t a buzzword to unions. It’s the bedrock of their power. In arresting Huerta, that solidarity has been supercharged. Already, union members from across the state are making plans to gather Monday for Huerta’s arraignment in downtown Los Angeles.

Meanwhile, Stephen Miller, the Santa Monica native and architect of Trump’s deportation plans, has said the raids we are seeing now are just the beginning, and that he would like to see thousands of arrests every day, because our immigrant communities are filled with “every kind of criminal thug that you can imagine on planet earth.”

But in arresting Huerta, the battleground has been redrawn in ways we don’t fully yet appreciate. No doubt, Miller will have his way and the raids will not only continue, but increase.

But also, the unions are not going to back down.

“Right now, just in the last 14 hours, labor unions are joining together from far and wide, communities are reaching out in ways I’ve never seen,” Orr told me. “Something is different.”

Rosa Parks was just a woman on a bus, she pointed out, until she was something more. George Floyd was just another Black man stopped by police. Until he was something more.

Huerta is the something more of these immigration raids — not because he’s a union boss, but because he’s a union organizer with ties to both people in power and people in fear.

The coming months will show what happens when those two groups decide, together, that backing down is not an option.

EU affirms its unwavering support for the ICC, denouncing US sanctions as a threat to judicial independence and justice.

The European Union “deeply regrets” the United States sanctions placed on four judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC), European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has said.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday announced sanctions on four judges whom the US accuses of taking “illegitimate and baseless actions” against the US and its allies.

Responding to the announcement on Friday, von der Leyen said the Hague-based court had the “full support” of the EU.

“The ICC holds perpetrators of the world’s gravest crimes to account & gives victims a voice,” von der Leyen said on X on Friday. “It must be free to act without pressure.”

United Nations Human Rights Chief Volker Turk said he was “profoundly disturbed” by the US decision.

“Attacks against judges for performance of their judicial functions, at national or international levels, run directly counter to respect for the rule of law and the equal protection of the law – values for which the US has long stood,” Turk said.

“Such attacks are deeply corrosive of good governance and the due administration of justice,” he added, calling for the sanctions to be withdrawn.

Antonio Costa, president of the European Council, which represents national governments of the 27 EU member states, also called the court “a cornerstone of international justice” and said its independence and integrity must be protected.

The Commission fully supports the @IntlCrimCourt & its officials.

The ICC holds perpetrators of the world’s gravest crimes to account & gives victims a voice.

It must be free to act without pressure.

We will always stand for global justice & the respect of international law.

— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) June 6, 2025

The US State Department said the sanctions were issued after the court made decisions to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a separate decision in 2020 to open an investigation into alleged war crimes by US troops in Afghanistan.

The four sanctioned judges include Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda, Luz del Carmen Ibanez Carranza of Peru, Reine Alapini-Gansou of Benin and Beti Hohler of Slovenia.

EU member Slovenia said it “rejects pressure on judicial institutions” and urged the EU to use its blocking statute.

“Due to the inclusion of a citizen of an EU member state on the sanctions list, Slovenia will propose the immediate activation of the blocking act,” Slovenia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a post on X.

The mechanism lets the EU ban European companies from complying with US sanctions that Brussels deems unlawful. The power has been used in the past to prevent Washington from banning European trade with Cuba and Iran.

Slovenia regrets the announced sanctions by the US🇺🇸 government against 4 judges of the @IntlCrimCourt , including a judge from #Slovenia. SI🇸🇮 rejects pressure on judicial institutions and influence on judicial operations, and courts must act in the interests of law and justice.… pic.twitter.com/xhwBj8XeMz

— MFEA Slovenia (@MZEZ_RS) June 5, 2025

The US sanctions mean the judges are added to a list of specially designated sanctioned individuals. Any US assets they have will be blocked and they are put on an automated screening service used not only by US banks but by many banks worldwide, making it very difficult for sanctioned people to hold or open bank accounts or transfer money.

This is not the first time the US has issued restrictions against an ICC official since Trump returned to office for a second term on January 20.

Shortly after taking office, Trump issued a broad executive order threatening anyone who participates in ICC investigations with sanctions. Critics warned that such sweeping language could pervert the course of justice, for example, by dissuading witnesses from coming forward with evidence.

But Trump argued that the 2024 arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant necessitated such measures.

He also claimed that the US and Israel were “thriving democracies” that “strictly adhere to the laws of war” and that the ICC’s investigations threatened military members with “harassment, abuse and possible arrest”.

The United States was once Ukraine’s most important ally – supplying arms, funding and political cover as Kyiv fought for its sovereignty. But today, Washington is losing interest. President Donald Trump, more at home on the golf course than in a war room, is pulling away from a conflict he no longer seems to care to understand.

Trump has not hidden his disdain. He has echoed Kremlin narratives, questioned NATO’s relevance and reduced Ukraine’s defence to a punchline. Even his recent comment that Russian President Vladimir Putin has “gone absolutely crazy” does little to undo years of indulgence and indifference.

He has not become a credible peace broker or a consistent supporter of Ukraine. His words now carry little weight – and Kyiv is paying the price.

Just last week, Ukraine launched what it called Operation Spiderweb, a coordinated series of drone strikes deep inside Russian territory. Dozens of aircraft were destroyed at airfields, and key military infrastructure was disrupted. The White House swiftly denied any US involvement. Trump responded by again threatening to “walk away” from the war.

Shortly afterwards, a second round of peace talks in Istanbul collapsed. The only agreement reached was a sombre one: the exchange of the remains of 6,000 fallen soldiers. That may help bring closure to grieving families – but it has done nothing to alter the course of the war.

Trump’s belated proposal – relayed by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt – that he supports direct talks between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Putin sounded more like political theatre than diplomacy. The moment had already passed.

It is Trump – not Zelenskyy – who now lacks leverage. And with the US pulling back from its traditional security leadership, the burden is shifting decisively to Europe.

Despite the brutality of Russia’s invasion in 2022, American officials have frequently treated Kyiv as the side to pressure and Moscow as the side to appease. European leaders pushed back – but mostly with words. They posted pledges of “unwavering support” yet hesitated to take full ownership of Europe’s defence.

Now, as US military aid slows and Trump continues to distance himself from the war, Europe faces a historic reckoning.

For the first time in nearly 80 years, the continent stands alone. The future of NATO – the alliance created after World War II to ensure collective defence – is in question. Ukraine’s ability to resist Russian aggression increasingly depends on European guarantees.

Can Europe meet the moment? Can a loose coalition of willing nations evolve into a durable security bloc? And can it do so without the US?

As of early 2025, Ukraine was meeting roughly 40 percent of its own military needs, according to the Centre for Security and Cooperation in Kyiv. Europe provided 30 percent and the US the remaining 30 percent. To sustain the fight, Europe must now do more – quickly.

The alternative would be disastrous. The Kiel Institute for the World Economy has estimated that if Russia were to occupy Ukraine, it could cost Germany alone 10 to 20 times more than maintaining current levels of support – due to refugee flows, energy instability, economic disruptions and defence risks.

One of Ukraine’s most urgent needs is ammunition – particularly artillery shells. Until recently, the US was the main supplier. As American deliveries decline, Ukraine is burning through its reserves. Europe is now scrambling to fill the gap.

The problem is scale. Europe’s arms industry has long been underdeveloped. It is only now beginning to respond. According to European Union Commissioner for Defence and Space Andrius Kubilius, the bloc aims to produce 2 million artillery shells annually by the end of 2025. This would just meet Ukraine’s minimum battlefield requirements.

A particularly ambitious initiative is a Czech-led plan to procure and deliver up to 1.8 million shells to Ukraine by the end of next year. Confirmed by Czech President Petr Pavel in May and backed by Canada, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark and other countries, the effort is one of the few on track to make a meaningful impact – if it arrives on time.

Germany has also moved beyond donations. In late May, Defence Minister Boris Pistorius signed an agreement with his Ukrainian counterpart, Rustem Umerov, to cofinance the production of long-range weapons inside Ukraine, tapping into local industrial and engineering capacity.

The United Kingdom remains one of Kyiv’s most dependable allies. On Wednesday, London announced a new 350-million-pound ($476m) drone package – part of a broader 4.5-billion-pound ($6.1bn) support pledge. It includes 100,000 drones by 2026, a substantial increase on previous commitments.

But war is not waged with weapons alone. Financial and economic power matter too.

Trump recently told Fox News that US taxpayer money was being “pissed away” in Ukraine. The remark was not only crude – it was also misleading.

Since 2022, the US has provided about $128bn in aid to Ukraine, including $66.5bn in military assistance. Meanwhile, the EU and its member states have contributed about 135 billion euros ($155bn), including 50 billion euros ($57bn) in military support, 67 billion euros ($77bn) in financial and humanitarian aid, and 17 billion euros ($19.5bn) for refugee programmes. The UK has added another 12.8 billion pounds ($17.4 billion).

These are not gifts. They are strategic investments – meant to prevent far higher costs if Russia succeeds in its imperial project.

Europe has also led on sanctions. Since 2014 – and with renewed urgency since 2022 – it has imposed 17 successive rounds of measures targeting Russia’s economy. None has ended the war, but each has taken a toll.

On May 20, one day after a reportedly warm call between Trump and Putin, the EU and UK unveiled their most sweeping sanctions package yet. It included nearly 200 vessels from Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, used to smuggle oil and circumvent global price caps.

Some estimates, including AI-assisted modelling, suggest the sanctions could cost Russia $10bn to $20bn per year if loopholes are closed and enforcement holds. Even partial implementation would disrupt Moscow’s wartime revenue.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas was clear: “The longer Russia wages war, the tougher our response.” Europe is beginning to back that promise with action.

From drones to shells, sanctions to weapons production, the continent is finally moving from statements to strategy – slowly but steadily building the foundations of Ukrainian resilience and Russian defeat.

But this momentum cannot stall. This is no longer just Ukraine’s war.

The US has stepped aside. Europe is no longer the backup plan. It is the last line of defence. If it fails, so does Ukraine – and with it, the idea of a secure, sovereign Europe.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

The PG rating has made a major comeback in Hollywood.

It’s strange to remember now, but during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic — when studios were sending many of their family-friendly movies straight to streaming services — there were serious conversations in the movie business about whether youngsters and their parents would ever return to theaters in full force.

Streaming was just too convenient and affordable, compared with a Saturday outing of two parents and 2 1/2 kids, the logic went.

But in recent years, the family audience has proved to be a bulwark for the theatrical movie business.

Disney’s live-action “Lilo & Stitch” topped the domestic box office again over the weekend with $63 million in ticket sales, for a total of $280 million so far. It beat the latest “Mission: Impossible” and the new “Karate Kid: Legends,” both rated PG-13. As of Sunday, “Lilo & Stitch” had crossed $610 million globally.

Warner Bros. and Legendary’s “A Minecraft Movie,” also rated PG, has amassed $423 million in the U.S. and Canada, the best of the year so far. Adding international grosses, its global tally is $947 million.

Nine PG-rated movies have been released in more than 2,000 locations this year, up from six during the same period in 2024, according to industry estimates. Those movies have accounted for 41% of ticketing revenue in the U.S. and Canada this year, compared with 21% a year ago. (The Pixar megahit “Inside Out 2” was released in mid-June of 2024.)

Family films are a boon to studios and theaters at a time when other categories — such as comic book films and one-off dramas and comedies — have been less reliable than they were in the past.

And there’s more to come, including Universal’s “How to Train Your Dragon” remake, Pixar’s “Elio” and DreamWorks Animation’s “The Bad Guys 2.”

Importantly, many of these movies are coming one after the other, which is essential if the industry hopes to re-create the moviegoing habit for current and future generations, especially as social media, YouTube and video games claim more of young people’s attention.

“One of the things that I think the industry has struggled with over the last number of years is just having a regular cadence of movies in the theater,” said Michael O’Leary, head of the trade group Cinema United (formerly the National Assn. of Theatre Owners). “If you’re a young person, and there’s a six-month gap between movies, there’s a lot of things going on, and your attention wanes.”

The focus on PG-rated content stands in contrast with a few years ago, when the PG-13 rating was widely seen as the way to include a broad, “four-quadrant” audience: men, women, old and young. A PG rating tagged a new release as more of a kids movie. PG-13, the label for Marvel and DC movies, had more of a cool factor for teens and young adults.

O’Leary has a theory for why things have shifted, and it has to do with the media consumption habits of today’s very young, known as Generation Alpha, or those who came after Gen Z.

Kids now are more than just digitally native.

They’re aware of new movies and TV shows coming out, in part because of exposure to social media at an earlier age compared with past generations of children. Parents will naturally be more comfortable taking their 7- and 8-year-olds to something like “Minecraft,” because they’re less likely to be presented with objectionable content.

The Motion Picture Assn.’s rating system, though sometimes fraught and misunderstood, is meant as a guide for parents.

“Younger people are inundated with more and more content at an earlier age, and they’ve become, in some ways, more discriminating connoisseurs of what they want to see,” O’Leary said.

Surely there are some parents who take their kids to the movies less often now after the pandemic with the proliferation of at-home entertainment options. But overall, family movies are leading the industry. If the pandemic proved anything, it’s that if you’re a parent, you really can’t spend all your time in the house.

Gen Z — now anywhere from 13 to 28 years old — is clearly doing its part. According to a recent NRG survey, 37% of Gen Zers say they go to the movies more than six times a year, up from 29% who agreed with that statement in February 2023.

Adults, too, might be interested in seeing more PG content in theaters, particularly in the American heartland.

Angel Studios’ animated Jesus film “The King of Kings” performed well (though somewhat ironically, most of Angel’s live action movies are PG-13).

The post-pandemic recovery of the family audience hit a big milestone in 2023 with Illumination’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” which grossed more than $1.36 billion worldwide. That was followed by the success of 2024 sequels such as “Inside Out 2,” “Moana 2,” “Despicable Me 4” and “Mufasa: The Lion King,” which all benefited from multigenerational appeal.

The blockbuster Broadway adaptation “Wicked” was also rated PG, which helped make it a family moviegoing event.

Now, the category is again on a hot streak. Industry analyst David A. Gross declared in a recent edition of his FranchiseRe newsletter, “the production pipeline is full and any loss of audience to streaming during the pandemic is over.”

What hasn’t come back as strongly? Most notably, superhero pictures — one of the pillars of moviegoing for the last couple decades. Before the pandemic, the industry averaged seven superhero movies a year, and those would drive billions of dollars in global revenue, Gross said. Lately, the genre has been significantly thinner and far less consistent.

R-rated horror movies are thriving (look at “Sinners” and “Final Destination Bloodlines”), but other adult-oriented movies are hit and miss.

Increasingly, when studios want to draw a mass audience, that means going younger.

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

What’s the magic number that will allow Paramount’s $8-billion merger with Skydance to go through?

The Wall Street Journal reported that Paramount was willing to part with $15 million to settle President Trump’s lawsuit against the company over edits to its pre-election “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris.

No surprise, that’s apparently not enough. Trump’s team wants more, the Journal reported. The president wants $25 million and an apology from CBS News, a source told the paper.

Trump’s critics, journalists and 1st Amendment experts say the lawsuit is basically a shakedown. Some anti-Trump lawmakers say a settlement by Paramount could amount to an illegal bribe.

Paramount is awaiting merger approval from the FCC, which is tasked with reviewing the transfer of broadcast licenses. Sources have told my colleague Meg James that the FCC approval process has been bogged down.

The company stresses that it sees the legal dispute and the FCC review as separate issues. No one believes Trump sees them that way.

On Monday, Paramount said it would add three new board members.

Finally …

There’s been an unreal amount of good TV on lately. I’ve been catching up on Nathan Fielder’s “The Rehearsal,” and often can’t believe what I’m seeing.

Also, Marc Maron is ending his podcast after 16 years. I’ve linked to various episodes in this newsletter. Here’s one I’m looking forward to catching up with.

Staycee Dains was about a month into her job overseeing the Los Angeles city animal shelters when an employee openly defied her.

Dains asked the employee to clean a kennel. Instead, the employee picked up a hose and sprayed a dog in the face, Dains said.

Dains thought the employee should be fired, but she said the city’s personnel department recommended five days of leave.

Mayor Karen Bass hired Dains in June 2023 after promising to make L.A. “a national model for animal welfare” by turning around its troubled shelters, where dogs may live in overcrowded and dirty kennels and volunteers have complained that animals sometimes don’t get food and water.

But in an interview with The Times, Dains said she felt powerless to solve entrenched problems that included severe understaffing and employees who mistreated or neglected animals.

She said she was repeatedly told by the personnel department, which functions like a human resources department at a private company, that she couldn’t fire problem employees. She also clashed with one of the unions that represents shelter employees.

At one point, Dains even reached out to L.A. County prosecutors for help.

Meanwhile, as the overcrowding worsened, more dogs and cats were euthanized in city shelters under her watch than in the preceding years.

“We need to tell the unfiltered, unvarnished truth about what is happening in the shelters,” Dains said.

In August, after a little more than a year as Animal Services general manager, Dains went on paid leave. A few days later, a top Bass advisor told Dains that her last day would be Nov. 30 and that she was free to resign before then.

Zach Seidl, a Bass spokesperson, pushed back on Dains’ accusations.

“Many of these characterizations are misleading and some are just plain inaccurate,” he said in an email.

Dains, in a series of interviews, said the city does not provide enough funding to meet the basic needs of the animals in its six shelters.

During Bass’ first year in office, amid critical reporting by The Times and others about conditions in the shelters, the mayor offered an 18% budget increase — far less than the 56% the Animal Services department had requested. The following fiscal year, her budget proposal slightly lowered the department’s funding.

Last week, in passing a budget that closed a nearly $1-billion shortfall, the City Council spared Animal Services from major cuts.

Dains, who previously held top shelter jobs in San José and Long Beach, said her employees were desensitized to the suffering of the animals after witnessing it day after day. The understaffing was so bad that three people were responsible for 500 dogs: cleaning kennels, setting up adoptions and working with the medical team, she said.

“I couldn’t sleep knowing that animals were just in those hellholes suffering,” said Dains, who now works at a shelter system in Sacramento. “It was awful.”

Dains, who made about $273,000 a year in L.A., said she witnessed some of her employees “terrorizing” dogs by banging on their kennels, or spraying them with water to move them back. She told the employees to stop the behavior, but some said they had been trained to treat the dogs that way, she said.

To ensure that animals were fed and their enclosures cleaned, Dains suggested starting a schedule that tracked when each task was done. But a union representative worried that the information could be used to punish employees, Dains said.

Ultimately, Dains said, she dropped the proposal because of the opposition from the union, Laborers’ International Union of North America Local 300. A representative from the union declined to comment.

Dain said that personal entanglements and gossip among employees sometimes made it hard to hold them accountable.

Some supervisors had had sexual relationships with their subordinates, which led them to overlook the employees’ poor work performance, according to Dains. Others used the “dirt” they had on co-workers to protest when confronted about their own behavior, she said.

Dains said she suspected that some employees were sleeping during night shifts instead of cleaning cages or doing paperwork. She showed The Times a photo of dog beds arranged on the floor of a staff room like a “nest.”

She said she also witnessed employees watching videos on their phones, rather than working. Others ignored people who walked into the shelter looking to adopt a pet, she said. Some employees told her that colleagues failed to give food or water to cats and dogs.

At the same time, Dains said, other employees went “above and beyond constantly” to make up for those who didn’t pull their weight.

“There’s a significant portion of staff that just aren’t doing their jobs,” she said. “I saw this constantly.”

Dains put some of the blame on supervisors, who were “not requiring them to perform.”

When she tried to discipline supervisors, she faced pushback, she said.

After she put a supervisor on leave who was accused of bullying people, Laborers’ International Union of North America Local 300 filed a grievance against her, Dains said.

A spokesperson for the personnel department declined to comment.

At the same time, Dains acknowledged that she should have been tougher on some of the assistant general managers who reported directly to her. But she said she wanted to maintain working relationships with them.

It is a “tricky thing to do to start writing up executive-level managers that you are trying to work with,” she said.

A shelter employee, who requested anonymity because he didn’t have permission to talk to the media, agreed with Dains’ assessment.

“There’s no accountability, there’s no repercussions,” he said. “And the staff who do work have to work twice as hard.”

A report last year by Best Friends Animal Society, which highlighted the poor conditions in the shelters and suggested possible solutions, criticized Dains as the “biggest barrier” to improvement.

The shelters lacked written protocols, and the euthanasia policy “changed five times in the last year” without communication about the changes, the report said.

According to a Times analysis, the number of dogs euthanized at city shelters from January through September last year increased 72% compared with the same period the previous year. The number of dogs entering the shelters increased each year since 2022, but the number put to death far outpaced the population gain.

In the crowded conditions, animals started behaving poorly and suffered “mental and emotional breakdown,” according to the Best Friends report. That made them less likely to be adopted and more likely to be euthanized.

Dains, in her interview with The Times, defended her euthanasia decisions, arguing that it wasn’t safe for the animals, staff, volunteers or the public to “warehouse” dogs in kennels for months or years.

She said that there was no euthanasia policy when she arrived and that the department was creating one during her tenure.

Bass was Dains’ boss, but Dains’ main contact was Jacqueline Hamilton, deputy mayor of neighborhood services. Dains said she spoke often with Hamilton and told her about the personnel problems and other issues. But Hamilton didn’t offer any meaningful help and didn’t want her to publicize the poor conditions at the shelters, Dains said.

“I am not getting any movement or traction,” Dains told The Times, describing her work experience.

Seidl, the Bass spokesperson, said Dains “was given support to succeed, including assistance in communicating the status of the department to the public and decision makers.”

Dains said that shortly after she became general manager, she asked Deputy Dist. Atty. Kimberly Abourezk, who worked on animal cruelty cases, to send a letter to the mayor about poor conditions at the shelters.

Venusse D. Dunn, a spokesperson for the district attorney’s office, said Abourezk didn’t send the letter because she visited city animal shelters and didn’t find evidence of any crimes.

The office “is not in a position to tell another agency how to operate their facility,” Dunn said.

Annette Ramirez, a longtime Animal Services staffer, is now interim general manager. The “severe overcrowding crisis,” as the department described it in news release this month, continues.