An epic battle is unfolding on Wall Street, with a cast of characters clashing over the fate of GameStop&nbsp;skyrocketing for a fourth straight day, thanks in part to&nbsp;Elon&nbsp;Musk.

Tesla founder Elon Musk, who has waged his own battle with short sellers before seeing spectacular gains for the electric carmaker, appeared to encourage the movement by tweeting a link to the Reddit forum along with the cryptic comment&nbsp;"Gamestonk!!"&nbsp;

"Stonks" is a tongue-in-cheek term for stocks widely used on social media.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Gamestonk!! <a href="https://t.co/RZtkDzAewJ">https://t.co/RZtkDzAewJ</a>
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1354174279894642703?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 26, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Herds of amateur investors on Reddit have long been supporters of Tesla and other hyper-volatile stocks, and their influence appears to be growing.

'Short squeeze'

The WallStreetBets followers have been on a GameStop buying spree, which not only pushes up the shares but puts pressure on short sellers to make purchases to "cover" their bets to avoid steeper losses.

This is known on Wall Street as a "short squeeze" and can result in a dizzying rally by forcing short-sellers into becoming buyers.

As a result, GameStop surged 18 per cent on Monday, another 115 per cent Tuesday and had leapt 135 per cent Wednesday. That followed a stunning 50 per cent jump on Friday.

Short sellers, while reviled by some market players, are nonetheless seen as playing an important role in the markets by providing liquidity and driving down overpriced shares.&nbsp;

But at least one GameStop short-seller said he walked away from the stock after what he claimed was harassment and threats by an "angry mob."

As well as GameStop, BlackBerry, also favoured on Wallstreetbets, advanced 4.9&nbsp;per cent&nbsp;and is up 185&nbsp;per cent&nbsp;this year. An earlier tweet by&nbsp;Musk&nbsp;sent Etsy up almost 9% before it reversed its gains.

The surge in recent days - GameStop has increased more than seven-fold to $147.98 from $19 since January&nbsp;12 - has spurred concerns over bubbles in stocks that hedge funds and other speculative players had bet would fall in value.

Trading in GameStop stock was halted for volatility nine times on Monday and five times on Tuesday.

Why have GameStop shares been so volatile?

GameStop, a well-known retail chain whose business model of selling games on discs appears to have been overtaken by a move to the internet, has been the target of "short-sellers," often big hedge funds that bet on a decline by selling borrowed shares in the hope of repaying at a lower price.

But a group of amateur investors, organizing via the online platform Reddit, has fought the trend. A group calling itself WallStreetBets, with some three million members who exchange tips and boast about beating "the system," is credited with pushing up GameStop shares and roiling the Wall Street establishment.

Some analysts have described the situation as a "nerds vs Wall Street" battle.

Jaime Rogozinski, the founder of WallStreetBets, said the movement "is able to do what Occupy Wall Street was never able to do but on a completely different angle."

"Occupy Wall Street was fed up with this saying 'It's a game we can't play, you're forgetting the little guy.' Now the little guy figured out a different way around it," he said.

The WallStreetBets forum had restricted access to those outside its 3.6 million subscribers for a few hours Wednesday evening but was again visible to the public by 0115 GMT early Thursday.

Should regulators intervene?

The extreme volatility has raised concerns about manipulation, which could lead to an investigation by stock market regulators, and has even drawn attention from the White House.

"Our economic team including (Treasury) Secretary (Janet) Yellen and others are monitoring the situation," said White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki.

"It's a good reminder, though, that the stock market isn't the only measure of the health of our economy."

Late Wednesday, the Securities and Exchange Commission said it was monitoring the activity.

"We are aware of and actively monitoring the ongoing market volatility in the options and equities markets and... we are working with our fellow regulators to assess the situation and review the activities of regulated entities, financial intermediaries, and other market participants," an SEC statement said.

Jacob Frenkel, a former enforcement lawyer with the SEC, said the situation warrants regulatory review.

One option would be "a trading pause for 10 days to ensure that all investors would have access to accurate and timely information," Frenkel said.

Senator Elizabeth Warren also called for scrutiny.

"For years, the same hedge funds, private equity firms, and&nbsp;wealthy investors dismayed by the GameStop trades have treated the stock market like their own personal casino&nbsp;while everyone else pays the price," she said in a statement.&nbsp;

"It's long past time for the SEC and other financial regulators to wake up and do their jobs."

An epic battle is unfolding on Wall Street, with a cast of characters clashing over the fate of GameStop skyrocketing for a fourth straight day, thanks in part to Elon Musk.

An epic battle is unfolding on Wall Street, with a cast of characters clashing over the fate of GameStop skyrocketing for a fourth straight day, thanks in part to Elon Musk. Tesla founder Elon Musk, who has waged his own battle with short sellers before seeing spectacular gains for the electric carmaker, appeared to encourage the movement by tweeting a link to the Reddit forum along with the cryptic comment "Gamestonk!!" "Stonks" is a tongue-in-cheek term for stocks widely used on social media. Gamestonk!! https://t.co/RZtkDzAewJ — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 26, 2021 × Herds of amateur investors on Reddit have long been supporters of Tesla and other hyper-volatile stocks, and their influence appears to be growing. 'Short squeeze' The WallStreetBets followers have been on a GameStop buying spree, which not only pushes up the shares but puts pressure on short sellers to make purchases to "cover" their bets to avoid steeper losses. This is known on Wall Street as a "short squeeze" and can result in a dizzying rally by forcing short-sellers into becoming buyers. As a result, GameStop surged 18 per cent on Monday, another 115 per cent Tuesday and had leapt 135 per cent Wednesday. That followed a stunning 50 per cent jump on Friday. Short sellers, while reviled by some market players, are nonetheless seen as playing an important role in the markets by providing liquidity and driving down overpriced shares. But at least one GameStop short-seller said he walked away from the stock after what he claimed was harassment and threats by an "angry mob." As well as GameStop, BlackBerry, also favoured on Wallstreetbets, advanced 4.9 per cent and is up 185 per cent this year. An earlier tweet by Musk sent Etsy up almost 9% before it reversed its gains. The surge in recent days - GameStop has increased more than seven-fold to $147.98 from $19 since January 12 - has spurred concerns over bubbles in stocks that hedge funds and other speculative players had bet would fall in value. Trading in GameStop stock was halted for volatility nine times on Monday and five times on Tuesday. Why have GameStop shares been so volatile? GameStop, a well-known retail chain whose business model of selling games on discs appears to have been overtaken by a move to the internet, has been the target of "short-sellers," often big hedge funds that bet on a decline by selling borrowed shares in the hope of repaying at a lower price. But a group of amateur investors, organizing via the online platform Reddit, has fought the trend. A group calling itself WallStreetBets, with some three million members who exchange tips and boast about beating "the system," is credited with pushing up GameStop shares and roiling the Wall Street establishment. Some analysts have described the situation as a "nerds vs Wall Street" battle. Jaime Rogozinski, the founder of WallStreetBets, said the movement "is able to do what Occupy Wall Street was never able to do but on a completely different angle." "Occupy Wall Street was fed up with this saying 'It's a game we can't play, you're forgetting the little guy.' Now the little guy figured out a different way around it," he said. The WallStreetBets forum had restricted access to those outside its 3.6 million subscribers for a few hours Wednesday evening but was again visible to the public by 0115 GMT early Thursday. Should regulators intervene? The extreme volatility has raised concerns about manipulation, which could lead to an investigation by stock market regulators, and has even drawn attention from the White House. "Our economic team including (Treasury) Secretary (Janet) Yellen and others are monitoring the situation," said White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki. "It's a good reminder, though, that the stock market isn't the only measure of the health of our economy." Late Wednesday, the Securities and Exchange Commission said it was monitoring the activity. "We are aware of and actively monitoring the ongoing market volatility in the options and equities markets and... we are working with our fellow regulators to assess the situation and review the activities of regulated entities, financial intermediaries, and other market participants," an SEC statement said. Jacob Frenkel, a former enforcement lawyer with the SEC, said the situation warrants regulatory review. One option would be "a trading pause for 10 days to ensure that all investors would have access to accurate and timely information," Frenkel said. Senator Elizabeth Warren also called for scrutiny. "For years, the same hedge funds, private equity firms, and wealthy investors dismayed by the GameStop trades have treated the stock market like their own personal casino while everyone else pays the price," she said in a statement. "It's long past time for the SEC and other financial regulators to wake up and do their jobs."

GameStop prompts surge in hyper-rally after Elon Musk's tweet

Our sleep patterns are affected by the pushes and the pulls of moon tides, as per the latest study published in Science Advances.

The findings of the study reflect that in the days leading up to the full moon, people go to bed later and sleep less. A lunar cycle takes 29.5 days to complete.

Changes in each participant’s sleep duration across the lunar cycle ranged from 20 to more than 90&nbsp;min and did not differ considerably between groups.

The&nbsp;participants of the study live&nbsp;in environments&nbsp;ranging from a rural setting with and without access to electricity in indigenous Toba/Qom communities in Argentina to a highly urbanised postindustrial setting in the United States.

Sun and moon data for the Ingeniero Juárez region through the dates of recording were obtained from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory HORIZONS Web-Interface

It is primarily moonlight available during the first hours of the night that is more likely to drive changes in the onset of sleep. In contrast, moonlight late in the night, when most individuals are typically asleep, should have little influence on sleep onset or duration.

While the sun is the most important source of light and synchronizer of circadian rhythms for almost all species, the moonlight also modulates nocturnal activity in organisms.

Moonlight is so bright to the human eye that it is entirely reasonable to imagine that, in the absence of other sources of light, this source of nocturnal light could have had a role in modulating human nocturnal activity and sleep.

Before the availability of artificial light, the moonlight was the only source of light sufficient to stimulate nighttime activity; still, evidence for the modulation of sleep timing by lunar phases is controversial.

The study shows that sleep starts later and is shorter on the nights before the full moon when moonlight is available during the hours following dusk.&nbsp;

Both the duration and the time of sleep onset showed a clear modulation throughout the moon cycle that was evident in the whole population, as well as in the individual communities.&nbsp;

The study predicts that&nbsp;in communities without access to electricity, moonlit nights would be associated with increased nocturnal activity and decreased sleep.

The amplitude of the lunar phase effect on sleep parameters appears to be stronger the more limited the access to electric light is.&nbsp;

Our sleep patterns are affected by the pushes and the pulls of moon tides, as per the latest study published in Science Advances. The findings of the study reflect that in the days leading up to the full moon, people go to bed later and sleep less.

Our sleep patterns are affected by the pushes and the pulls of moon tides, as per the latest study published in Science Advances. The findings of the study reflect that in the days leading up to the full moon, people go to bed later and sleep less. A lunar cycle takes 29.5 days to complete. Changes in each participant’s sleep duration across the lunar cycle ranged from 20 to more than 90 min and did not differ considerably between groups. The participants of the study live in environments ranging from a rural setting with and without access to electricity in indigenous Toba/Qom communities in Argentina to a highly urbanised postindustrial setting in the United States. Sun and moon data for the Ingeniero Juárez region through the dates of recording were obtained from NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory HORIZONS Web-Interface It is primarily moonlight available during the first hours of the night that is more likely to drive changes in the onset of sleep. In contrast, moonlight late in the night, when most individuals are typically asleep, should have little influence on sleep onset or duration. While the sun is the most important source of light and synchronizer of circadian rhythms for almost all species, the moonlight also modulates nocturnal activity in organisms. Moonlight is so bright to the human eye that it is entirely reasonable to imagine that, in the absence of other sources of light, this source of nocturnal light could have had a role in modulating human nocturnal activity and sleep. Before the availability of artificial light, the moonlight was the only source of light sufficient to stimulate nighttime activity; still, evidence for the modulation of sleep timing by lunar phases is controversial. The study shows that sleep starts later and is shorter on the nights before the full moon when moonlight is available during the hours following dusk. Both the duration and the time of sleep onset showed a clear modulation throughout the moon cycle that was evident in the whole population, as well as in the individual communities. The study predicts that in communities without access to electricity, moonlit nights would be associated with increased nocturnal activity and decreased sleep. The amplitude of the lunar phase effect on sleep parameters appears to be stronger the more limited the access to electric light is.

Phases of moon dictate our sleep patterns: Study

January 28 in history: Discovery of Singapore, patent of Lego brick and more

When the former US President&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;got infected by the deadly coronavirus, he claimed to have tried experimental Regeneron's synthetic antibody treatment, which reportedly worked as a magical cure against the virus.

Now, the company has said that it&nbsp;remains effective against the British and South African variants of the novel coronavirus, the US biotechnology company announced Wednesday.

The US&nbsp;Food and Drug Administration last month issued emergency use authorisation for the antibody therapy for use in mild to moderate COVID-19 patients who are not currently hospitalised.

REGEN-COV,&nbsp;featuring potent neutralising antibodies called imdevimab and casirivimab,&nbsp;remained effective against both variants, the company said in a statement, although casirivimab's potency against the South African variant was "reduced."

The drugmaker said in September the cocktail reduced viral levels and improved symptoms in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Study participants included those who produced an effective immune response on their own (seropositive), and those whose immune response was not yet adequate (seronegative).

Seronegative patients treated with the antibody cocktail had a lower risk of death or needing mechanical ventilation, the company said.

Scientists from New York's Columbia University arrived at the same conclusion, and their study has been submitted for peer review.

The study's "pre-publication," however, presents more worrying results concerning another synthetic antibody, bamlanivimab: It is "inactive" against the South African variant, according to researchers.

This antibody is used in the treatment developed by pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly, which has also been approved for emergency use in the US.

Bamlanivimab will likely also be ineffective against the new Brazilian variant, since it presents mutations similar to the South African variant, scientists said.

Regeneron expects its antibody treatment will be effective against the Brazilian variant. Studies are underway to confirm this.

"These data show the continued ability of REGEN-COV to neutralise emerging strains, further validating our multi-antibody cocktail approach to infectious diseases," said George Yancopoulos, Regeneron's president and chief scientific officer.

"With two complementary antibodies in one therapeutic, even if one has reduced potency, the risk of the cocktail losing efficacy is significantly diminished.

"We have hundreds of additional potent, neutralising antibodies in our labs that could form new combinations that might be useful against future variants," he added.

Like all viruses, SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19, mutates constantly as it reproduces.

But the mutation observed in the South African variant is particularly worrying to scientists due to its ability to bypass the remedies developed so far.

The US had confirmed 308 cases of the British variant as of January 26 and one case of the Brazilian variant, Rochelle Walensky, the new head of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Wednesday.

No cases of the South African variant have yet to be confirmed in the US.

When the former US President Donald Trump got infected by the deadly coronavirus, he claimed to have tried experimental Regeneron's synthetic antibody treatment, which reportedly worked as a magical cure against the virus.

When the former US President Donald Trump got infected by the deadly coronavirus, he claimed to have tried experimental Regeneron's synthetic antibody treatment, which reportedly worked as a magical cure against the virus. Now, the company has said that it remains effective against the British and South African variants of the novel coronavirus, the US biotechnology company announced Wednesday. The US Food and Drug Administration last month issued emergency use authorisation for the antibody therapy for use in mild to moderate COVID-19 patients who are not currently hospitalised. REGEN-COV, featuring potent neutralising antibodies called imdevimab and casirivimab, remained effective against both variants, the company said in a statement, although casirivimab's potency against the South African variant was "reduced." The drugmaker said in September the cocktail reduced viral levels and improved symptoms in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Study participants included those who produced an effective immune response on their own (seropositive), and those whose immune response was not yet adequate (seronegative). Seronegative patients treated with the antibody cocktail had a lower risk of death or needing mechanical ventilation, the company said. Scientists from New York's Columbia University arrived at the same conclusion, and their study has been submitted for peer review. The study's "pre-publication," however, presents more worrying results concerning another synthetic antibody, bamlanivimab: It is "inactive" against the South African variant, according to researchers. This antibody is used in the treatment developed by pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly, which has also been approved for emergency use in the US. Bamlanivimab will likely also be ineffective against the new Brazilian variant, since it presents mutations similar to the South African variant, scientists said. Regeneron expects its antibody treatment will be effective against the Brazilian variant. Studies are underway to confirm this. "These data show the continued ability of REGEN-COV to neutralise emerging strains, further validating our multi-antibody cocktail approach to infectious diseases," said George Yancopoulos, Regeneron's president and chief scientific officer. "With two complementary antibodies in one therapeutic, even if one has reduced potency, the risk of the cocktail losing efficacy is significantly diminished. "We have hundreds of additional potent, neutralising antibodies in our labs that could form new combinations that might be useful against future variants," he added. Like all viruses, SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19, mutates constantly as it reproduces. But the mutation observed in the South African variant is particularly worrying to scientists due to its ability to bypass the remedies developed so far. The US had confirmed 308 cases of the British variant as of January 26 and one case of the Brazilian variant, Rochelle Walensky, the new head of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Wednesday. No cases of the South African variant have yet to be confirmed in the US.

Donald Trump's coronavirus 'cure' effective on UK, South African variants

US President Joe Biden on Wednesday&nbsp;sent a clear warning to China&nbsp;against any expansionist intentions in East and Southeast Asia.

Signalling Washington's rejection of Beijing's disputed territorial claims, Biden and&nbsp;his top security officials have underscored support for allies Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

On Wednesday Biden and Suga discussed regional security issues, including China and North Korea, the White House said, adding that the leaders affirmed the necessity of complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and the early resolution of the abductions issue.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-and-suga-vow-to-strengthen-us-japan-alliance-359772" hreflang="en">Biden and Suga vow to strengthen US-Japan alliance</a>

That stance was echoed by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who told Japanese counterpart Nobuo Kishi on Saturday that the contested islands were covered by the US-Japan Security Treaty.

Austin affirmed that the United States "remains opposed to any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in the East China Sea," according to a Pentagon statement on the call.

Meanwhile, three days into the Biden administration, State Department spokesman Ned Price warned China about menacing Taiwan after it repeatedly sent more than a dozen military fighters and bombers through the island's air defence zone.

"We will stand with friends and allies to advance our shared prosperity security and values in the Indo-Pacific region -- and that includes deepening our ties with Democratic Taiwan," Price said in a statement.

"Our commitment to Taiwan is rock-solid."

Those comments and others sought to emphasize that the new Biden administration will not deviate from the firm security stance towards China that it inherited from ex-president Donald Trump.

'A free and open Indo-Pacific'

Washington has long sided with allies such as South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia in rejecting disputed Chinese territorial claims in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.

But the Trump administration raised the tone of that rejection when then-secretary of state Mike Pompeo declared last July that most of Beijing's maritime claims in the South China Sea were "completely unlawful."

In his first overseas contacts after taking office, Austin included not only Japan but also counterparts in Australia, South Korea and India.

Over the past three years, Washington has expanded defense cooperation with India, which sees China posing a military threat both on its northern border and in the seas to the south.

In a call with Indian defense minister Rajnath Singh on Wednesday, Austin observed that the two countries' defense partnership "is built upon shared values and a common interest in ensuring the Indo-Pacific region remains free and open," said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby.

A similar China-directed refrain echoed through Austin's call with Australian defense minister Linda Reynolds on Tuesday.

Austin "emphasized the importance of maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific, founded on existing international law and norms in a region free of malign behavior," Kirby said.

To underscore the unchanged US stance in Asia, on January 24, the fourth day of the new Biden administration, the US aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt embarked on a so-called "freedom of navigation" mission in the South China Sea, sailing in or close to waters that China claims to underscore Washington's rejection of those claims.

In addition, even as his initial focus for the US Defense Department is battling the coronavirus, Austin is expected to make Asia his first destination on an international trip.

US President Joe Biden on Wednesday sent a clear warning to China against any expansionist intentions in East and Southeast Asia. Signalling Washington's rejection of Beijing's disputed territorial claims, Biden and his top security officials have underscored support for allies Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

US President Joe Biden on Wednesday sent a clear warning to China against any expansionist intentions in East and Southeast Asia. Signalling Washington's rejection of Beijing's disputed territorial claims, Biden and his top security officials have underscored support for allies Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. On Wednesday Biden and Suga discussed regional security issues, including China and North Korea, the White House said, adding that the leaders affirmed the necessity of complete denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and the early resolution of the abductions issue. Also read: Biden and Suga vow to strengthen US-Japan alliance That stance was echoed by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who told Japanese counterpart Nobuo Kishi on Saturday that the contested islands were covered by the US-Japan Security Treaty. Austin affirmed that the United States "remains opposed to any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in the East China Sea," according to a Pentagon statement on the call. Meanwhile, three days into the Biden administration, State Department spokesman Ned Price warned China about menacing Taiwan after it repeatedly sent more than a dozen military fighters and bombers through the island's air defence zone. "We will stand with friends and allies to advance our shared prosperity security and values in the Indo-Pacific region -- and that includes deepening our ties with Democratic Taiwan," Price said in a statement. "Our commitment to Taiwan is rock-solid." Those comments and others sought to emphasize that the new Biden administration will not deviate from the firm security stance towards China that it inherited from ex-president Donald Trump. 'A free and open Indo-Pacific' Washington has long sided with allies such as South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, the Philippines and Malaysia in rejecting disputed Chinese territorial claims in the East China Sea and the South China Sea. But the Trump administration raised the tone of that rejection when then-secretary of state Mike Pompeo declared last July that most of Beijing's maritime claims in the South China Sea were "completely unlawful." In his first overseas contacts after taking office, Austin included not only Japan but also counterparts in Australia, South Korea and India. Over the past three years, Washington has expanded defense cooperation with India, which sees China posing a military threat both on its northern border and in the seas to the south. In a call with Indian defense minister Rajnath Singh on Wednesday, Austin observed that the two countries' defense partnership "is built upon shared values and a common interest in ensuring the Indo-Pacific region remains free and open," said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby. A similar China-directed refrain echoed through Austin's call with Australian defense minister Linda Reynolds on Tuesday. Austin "emphasized the importance of maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific, founded on existing international law and norms in a region free of malign behavior," Kirby said. To underscore the unchanged US stance in Asia, on January 24, the fourth day of the new Biden administration, the US aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt embarked on a so-called "freedom of navigation" mission in the South China Sea, sailing in or close to waters that China claims to underscore Washington's rejection of those claims. In addition, even as his initial focus for the US Defense Department is battling the coronavirus, Austin is expected to make Asia his first destination on an international trip.

US President Joe Biden warns China over expansionism in Asia

In a major escalation, Google threatened Friday to make its search engine unavailable in Australia if the government approved legislation that would force tech companies to pay for journalism shared on their platforms.

Facebook, which appeared with Google at an Australian Senate hearing, reaffirmed a threat of its own, vowing to block users in Australia from posting or sharing links to news if the bill passed.

In both cases, the dire warnings — which one senator called blackmail — revealed the apparent willingness of Facebook and Google to hide or erase reliable sources of information for millions of people at a time when social media platforms are under fire for helping misinformation spread worldwide.

The companies argue that they already help the media industry by sending it traffic and that the bill would open them up to “unmanageable levels of financial and operational risk.” The response by Google, which controls 95% of all queries in Australia in addition to owning YouTube, has grown particularly aggressive: The company recently buried major Australian news sites in search results in what it called an “experiment.”

But the precedent of paying for journalism does not, in itself, seem to be the issue.

A few hours before Google threatened to take away its search engine in Australia, the company agreed to pay news publications in France under an agreement that is likely to lead to more deals across Europe.

The battle in Australia centers on power: who gets to decide the payments, what prompts a charge for the tech companies and when do they have to reveal changes in their algorithms.

Australia’s assertive challenge to the online giants has placed it in the vanguard of a movement to bolster a traditional news media ecosystem that America’s trillion-dollar tech companies threaten with extinction. For Google and Facebook, their intense pushback has become a focal point of their global efforts to limit regulation, as governments around the world look to rein them in.

Here’s a summary of the fight:

Rapid vs. Prolonged Negotiations

Under Australia’s proposed legislation, if media companies and platforms like Google cannot agree on a price for news content, an independent arbitration body will resolve the dispute. That could amount to a first in the world.

The agreement in France lets Google negotiate with publishers using criteria the company has established, such as the contribution to general discussion, publication volume and audience size. Disputes would most likely go to court, where they could be bogged down for years, delaying payment.

Australia’s bill would streamline the process and strengthen the weaker side — the media.

As Rod Sims, chairman of Australia’s consumer protection regulator, explained: “The aim of the code is to address the uneven bargaining position between Australian news media businesses and the big digital platforms who have clear market power.”

The tech companies say it would create an incentive for media companies to jack up prices, sending cases to an arbiter who will determine final payment. They point to a government report estimating that 75% of the negotiations could end up with arbitrators.

Critics argue that Google and Facebook are simply trying to maintain their position as the ones who get to determine what news is worth.

“It’s about the external process being imposed on them by legislation, rather than by them just being able to dole out deals as they see fit,” said Peter Lewis, director of the Center for Responsible Technology at the Australia Institute, an independent research group. “It shifts the balance of power from their hands to a third party, and that’s what they can’t countenance.”

Links vs. Previews

The fight centers in part on a debate over the nature of search results and on the question of whether tech companies should pay for every article that Australians see on their platforms.

In a submission to Australia’s Senate inquiry about the proposal, Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, wrote that “the code risks breaching a fundamental principle of the web by requiring payment for linking between certain content online.”

“The ability to link freely,” he added, “meaning without limitations regarding the content of the linked site and without monetary fees, is fundamental to how the web operates.”

Melanie Silva, managing director of Google Australia and New Zealand, made the same argument Friday in the Senate and in a video posted to Twitter, where she asked people to imagine recommending a few cafes to a friend — and then getting a bill from the cafes for sharing that information.

“When you put a price on linking to certain information, you break the way search engines work,” she said. “And you no longer have a free and open web.”

Google and Facebook (along with Twitter and others), however, do not simply link. They frame the work in previews, with headlines, summaries and photos, and then curate and serve up the content while sprinkling in advertisements.

Tama Leaver, a professor of internet studies at Curtin University in Perth, noted in a recent essay that this added value lessens the likelihood of someone clicking into the article, hurting media companies while improving the tech companies’ bottom line.

“It is often in that reframing that advertisements appear, and this is where these platforms make money,” he wrote. He added that the code could be adjusted to charge the companies only when they create previews, not just links.

But Sims, the main architect of the code, said Friday in the Senate that Google and Berners-Lee were simply wrong on the details.

“The code does not require Google and Facebook to pay for linking news content,” he said. “Indeed, discussions we are aware of have focused on paying upfront lump sum amounts, not per click.”

More broadly, lawmakers and public policy experts have argued that the companies do not just share information like a friend. They harvest details about their users in order to make what they share profitable.

As Lewis at the Australia Institute put it, they don’t just give you information about where to get coffee — they follow you to the cafe, watch what you order and where you go next, then sell that knowledge to companies that want to market you something else.

Sen. Rex Patrick accused Google of pretending to be concerned about “technical precedence.” In fact, he said, it’s all about “commercial precedence” — money.

Google Australia collected roughly $3.3 billion from Australian advertisers in 2019 and paid about $77 million in taxes, with a reported profit of about $637 million.

Secret Algorithms vs. Transparency

One potentially groundbreaking element of the proposed legislation involves the secret sauce of Facebook, Google and subsidiaries like YouTube: the algorithms that determine what people see when they search or scroll through the platforms.

Early drafts of the bill would have required that tech companies give their news media partners 28 days’ notice before making any changes that would affect how users interact with their content.

Google and Facebook said that would be impossible because their algorithms are always changing in ways that can be difficult to measure for a subset like news, so in the latest draft, lawmakers limited the scope.

If the bill passes in one form or another, which seems likely, the digital platforms will have to give the media 14 days’ notice of deliberate algorithm changes that significantly affect their businesses. Even that, some critics argue, is not enough for Big Tech.

“I think Google and Facebook are seriously worried that other countries will join in Australia’s effort,” said Johan Lidberg, a professor of media at Monash University in Melbourne. “This could eventually cause substantial revenue losses globally and serious loss of control, exemplified by the algorithm issue.”

But, he added, using threats to bully lawmakers will not do them any good.

“Google’s overreaction perfectly illustrates why the code is needed,” he said, “and beyond that, the dire need for all governments, across the globe, to join in efforts in reining in and limiting the power of these companies that is completely out of hand.”

In a major escalation, Google threatened Friday to make its search engine unavailable in Australia if the government approved legislation that would force tech companies to pay for journalism shared on their platforms.

In a major escalation, Google threatened Friday to make its search engine unavailable in Australia if the government approved legislation that would force tech companies to pay for journalism shared on their platforms. Facebook, which appeared with Google at an Australian Senate hearing, reaffirmed a threat of its own, vowing to block users in Australia from posting or sharing links to news if the bill passed. In both cases, the dire warnings — which one senator called blackmail — revealed the apparent willingness of Facebook and Google to hide or erase reliable sources of information for millions of people at a time when social media platforms are under fire for helping misinformation spread worldwide. The companies argue that they already help the media industry by sending it traffic and that the bill would open them up to “unmanageable levels of financial and operational risk.” The response by Google, which controls 95% of all queries in Australia in addition to owning YouTube, has grown particularly aggressive: The company recently buried major Australian news sites in search results in what it called an “experiment.” But the precedent of paying for journalism does not, in itself, seem to be the issue. A few hours before Google threatened to take away its search engine in Australia, the company agreed to pay news publications in France under an agreement that is likely to lead to more deals across Europe. The battle in Australia centers on power: who gets to decide the payments, what prompts a charge for the tech companies and when do they have to reveal changes in their algorithms. Australia’s assertive challenge to the online giants has placed it in the vanguard of a movement to bolster a traditional news media ecosystem that America’s trillion-dollar tech companies threaten with extinction. For Google and Facebook, their intense pushback has become a focal point of their global efforts to limit regulation, as governments around the world look to rein them in. Here’s a summary of the fight: Rapid vs. Prolonged Negotiations Under Australia’s proposed legislation, if media companies and platforms like Google cannot agree on a price for news content, an independent arbitration body will resolve the dispute. That could amount to a first in the world. The agreement in France lets Google negotiate with publishers using criteria the company has established, such as the contribution to general discussion, publication volume and audience size. Disputes would most likely go to court, where they could be bogged down for years, delaying payment. Australia’s bill would streamline the process and strengthen the weaker side — the media. As Rod Sims, chairman of Australia’s consumer protection regulator, explained: “The aim of the code is to address the uneven bargaining position between Australian news media businesses and the big digital platforms who have clear market power.” The tech companies say it would create an incentive for media companies to jack up prices, sending cases to an arbiter who will determine final payment. They point to a government report estimating that 75% of the negotiations could end up with arbitrators. Critics argue that Google and Facebook are simply trying to maintain their position as the ones who get to determine what news is worth. “It’s about the external process being imposed on them by legislation, rather than by them just being able to dole out deals as they see fit,” said Peter Lewis, director of the Center for Responsible Technology at the Australia Institute, an independent research group. “It shifts the balance of power from their hands to a third party, and that’s what they can’t countenance.” Links vs. Previews The fight centers in part on a debate over the nature of search results and on the question of whether tech companies should pay for every article that Australians see on their platforms. In a submission to Australia’s Senate inquiry about the proposal, Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, wrote that “the code risks breaching a fundamental principle of the web by requiring payment for linking between certain content online.” “The ability to link freely,” he added, “meaning without limitations regarding the content of the linked site and without monetary fees, is fundamental to how the web operates.” Melanie Silva, managing director of Google Australia and New Zealand, made the same argument Friday in the Senate and in a video posted to Twitter, where she asked people to imagine recommending a few cafes to a friend — and then getting a bill from the cafes for sharing that information. “When you put a price on linking to certain information, you break the way search engines work,” she said. “And you no longer have a free and open web.” Google and Facebook (along with Twitter and others), however, do not simply link. They frame the work in previews, with headlines, summaries and photos, and then curate and serve up the content while sprinkling in advertisements. Tama Leaver, a professor of internet studies at Curtin University in Perth, noted in a recent essay that this added value lessens the likelihood of someone clicking into the article, hurting media companies while improving the tech companies’ bottom line. “It is often in that reframing that advertisements appear, and this is where these platforms make money,” he wrote. He added that the code could be adjusted to charge the companies only when they create previews, not just links. But Sims, the main architect of the code, said Friday in the Senate that Google and Berners-Lee were simply wrong on the details. “The code does not require Google and Facebook to pay for linking news content,” he said. “Indeed, discussions we are aware of have focused on paying upfront lump sum amounts, not per click.” More broadly, lawmakers and public policy experts have argued that the companies do not just share information like a friend. They harvest details about their users in order to make what they share profitable. As Lewis at the Australia Institute put it, they don’t just give you information about where to get coffee — they follow you to the cafe, watch what you order and where you go next, then sell that knowledge to companies that want to market you something else. Sen. Rex Patrick accused Google of pretending to be concerned about “technical precedence.” In fact, he said, it’s all about “commercial precedence” — money. Google Australia collected roughly $3.3 billion from Australian advertisers in 2019 and paid about $77 million in taxes, with a reported profit of about $637 million. Secret Algorithms vs. Transparency One potentially groundbreaking element of the proposed legislation involves the secret sauce of Facebook, Google and subsidiaries like YouTube: the algorithms that determine what people see when they search or scroll through the platforms. Early drafts of the bill would have required that tech companies give their news media partners 28 days’ notice before making any changes that would affect how users interact with their content. Google and Facebook said that would be impossible because their algorithms are always changing in ways that can be difficult to measure for a subset like news, so in the latest draft, lawmakers limited the scope. If the bill passes in one form or another, which seems likely, the digital platforms will have to give the media 14 days’ notice of deliberate algorithm changes that significantly affect their businesses. Even that, some critics argue, is not enough for Big Tech. “I think Google and Facebook are seriously worried that other countries will join in Australia’s effort,” said Johan Lidberg, a professor of media at Monash University in Melbourne. “This could eventually cause substantial revenue losses globally and serious loss of control, exemplified by the algorithm issue.” But, he added, using threats to bully lawmakers will not do them any good. “Google’s overreaction perfectly illustrates why the code is needed,” he said, “and beyond that, the dire need for all governments, across the globe, to join in efforts in reining in and limiting the power of these companies that is completely out of hand.”

An Australia with no Google? The bitter fight behind a drastic threat

With just a few days to go for India's <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/budget">Union Budget 2021</a>,&nbsp;Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is expected to unveil plans to boost economic growth.

In Union Budget 2021, corporates and industry lobby groups expect the government to announce greater spending on healthcare and infrastructure, as well as tax breaks for the automotive, manufacturing and tourism industries, reeling from the coronavirus crisis.

Also read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/union-budget-2021-government-may-raise-duty-on-finished-goods-and-imports-358740" hreflang="en">Union Budget 2021: Government may raise duty on finished goods and imports</a>

Here's what&nbsp;corporates, economists and market experts expect from&nbsp;2021/2022 federal budget on February&nbsp;1:

Healthcare and pharmaceuticals

The drugs industry is hoping for incentives to spur more investment in research and development (R&amp;D), via bigger tax deductions on R&amp;D spending, said Sudarshan Jain, secretary-general of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance.

Kiran Mazumdar Shaw, chief of Biocon Ltd, hopes the government will raise healthcare spending to 2.5 per cent&nbsp;of gross domestic product by fiscal 2025 from about 1 per cent now.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/union-budget-2021-government-needs-credible-sources-for-additional-revenue-to-boost-economy-356849" hreflang="en">Union Budget 2021: Government needs credible sources for additional revenue to boost economy</a>

Real estate and infrastructure

The real estate and construction sector, a bellwether for the Indian economy, is hoping for tax reliefs for home buyers and regulations curbing a rise in construction costs.

Automobile industry

The automobile industry hopes for a roadmap for a recently announced production-linked incentive scheme and policy on scrapping of commercial vehicles.

Toyota Kirloskar, the Indian unit of Toyota Motor Corp, said it was looking forward to support measures for the manufacture of hybrid electric vehicles and parts.

Aviation

The aviation industry is looking for lower taxes on aviation turbine fuel and levies such as airport charges, parking and landing and navigation charges, said Moody's India unit, ICRA.

Tourism and hospitality

The National Restaurant Association of India is hoping for more liquidity support, with low collateral, and a minimum moratorium of six months.

Personal tax breaks for domestic travel would also help, said Deep Kalra, founder and top official of online booking website MakeMyTrip Ltd.

Retail

Brick-and-mortar retail firms seek a national retail policy, to help combat the growing popularity of online sellers.

"Formulation of national retail policy, removing the distinction between e-commerce and physical retail under one policy has been spoken about and we hope that this happens in FY 21," said Preet Dhupar, the chief financial officer of Ikea India.

Banking

The coronavirus brought a slump in lending by banks, and despite signs the economy is improving, the central bank has warned that the industry could see bad loans nearly double.

Some analysts expect the setting up of a so-called "bad bank", which the government will use to buy bad assets from state-owned banks. There are also expectations for moves to recapitalise state-owned banks.

Public sector banks may need a further 430 billion rupees ($5.9 billion) as capital requirement in the next financial year, ICRA said.

&nbsp;

With just a few days to go for India's Union Budget 2021, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is expected to unveil plans to boost economic growth. In Union Budget 2021, corporates and industry lobby groups expect the government to announce greater spending on healthcare and infrastructure, as well as tax breaks for the automotive, manufacturing and tourism industries, reeling from the coronavirus crisis.

With just a few days to go for India's Union Budget 2021, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is expected to unveil plans to boost economic growth. In Union Budget 2021, corporates and industry lobby groups expect the government to announce greater spending on healthcare and infrastructure, as well as tax breaks for the automotive, manufacturing and tourism industries, reeling from the coronavirus crisis. Also read| Union Budget 2021: Government may raise duty on finished goods and imports Here's what corporates, economists and market experts expect from 2021/2022 federal budget on February 1: Healthcare and pharmaceuticals The drugs industry is hoping for incentives to spur more investment in research and development (R&D), via bigger tax deductions on R&D spending, said Sudarshan Jain, secretary-general of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance. Kiran Mazumdar Shaw, chief of Biocon Ltd, hopes the government will raise healthcare spending to 2.5 per cent of gross domestic product by fiscal 2025 from about 1 per cent now. Also read: Union Budget 2021: Government needs credible sources for additional revenue to boost economy Real estate and infrastructure The real estate and construction sector, a bellwether for the Indian economy, is hoping for tax reliefs for home buyers and regulations curbing a rise in construction costs. Automobile industry The automobile industry hopes for a roadmap for a recently announced production-linked incentive scheme and policy on scrapping of commercial vehicles. Toyota Kirloskar, the Indian unit of Toyota Motor Corp, said it was looking forward to support measures for the manufacture of hybrid electric vehicles and parts. Aviation The aviation industry is looking for lower taxes on aviation turbine fuel and levies such as airport charges, parking and landing and navigation charges, said Moody's India unit, ICRA. Tourism and hospitality The National Restaurant Association of India is hoping for more liquidity support, with low collateral, and a minimum moratorium of six months. Personal tax breaks for domestic travel would also help, said Deep Kalra, founder and top official of online booking website MakeMyTrip Ltd. Retail Brick-and-mortar retail firms seek a national retail policy, to help combat the growing popularity of online sellers. "Formulation of national retail policy, removing the distinction between e-commerce and physical retail under one policy has been spoken about and we hope that this happens in FY 21," said Preet Dhupar, the chief financial officer of Ikea India. Banking The coronavirus brought a slump in lending by banks, and despite signs the economy is improving, the central bank has warned that the industry could see bad loans nearly double. Some analysts expect the setting up of a so-called "bad bank", which the government will use to buy bad assets from state-owned banks. There are also expectations for moves to recapitalise state-owned banks. Public sector banks may need a further 430 billion rupees ($5.9 billion) as capital requirement in the next financial year, ICRA said.

Union Budget 2021: What Indian corporates, economists and market experts expect

In major&nbsp;"major revisions" to its regulations, the US Army has amended its&nbsp;uniform rules and allowed women to wear ponytails and lipsticks while letting men use clear nail polish.

Women in the US Army who are breastfeeding or pumping will also be allowed to wear an undershirt in addition to relaxed grooming standards.&nbsp;They will come into effect o February 24.

Calling it an effort to increase ''diversity'' and ''inclusion'', the US army has updated its grooming standards to address the disparate impact on female soldiers.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/USArmy?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#USArmy</a> has revised Army Regulation 670-1, Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia. 
 
The updates will be effective Feb. 25, 2021 and directly supports the Army’s diversity and inclusion efforts. 
 
Learn more in this STAND-TO! ➡️ <a href="https://t.co/Y2VlaZgQHr">https://t.co/Y2VlaZgQHr</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ArmyLife?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ArmyLife</a> <a href="https://t.co/4y9e7hBJ5a">pic.twitter.com/4y9e7hBJ5a</a>
— U.S. Army (@USArmy) <a href="https://twitter.com/USArmy/status/1354524006104387586?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 27, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The changes are the result of a review launched last year under previous defence secretary Mark Esper, part of an examination of racial discrimination and mistreatment of minorities in the military.

In the past&nbsp;women&nbsp;with longer hair had to tie it in buns, which many said was uncomfortable and interfered with their helmets.

Lt. Gen. Gary Brito, Army deputy chief of staff for personnel said: "We are continuously assessing our policies to identify areas for improvement, then implementing policies that demonstrate our commitment to ensuring all Soldiers feel as though they are valued members of the Army team."

"We know that actions speak louder than words when it comes to inclusivity and equity within our ranks, and we believe that the changes we announced today are one example of policies that put our people first."

<img alt="Trump" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="5608a571-ac02-4cb0-bd31-f20344a6ed86" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%282%29_122.jpg" />

In picture: US Army grooming standards and AR 670-1

The decision received a mixed response on social networking platform Twitter with some making fun of it while others applauded&nbsp;the move.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Lol. Nail polish for Joe? Seems legit.
— Anonymause77 (@anonymause77) <a href="https://twitter.com/anonymause77/status/1354532405906911237?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 27, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
As a vet I applaud the Army's progressive stance. Thank you.
— planetransgender (@planetrans) <a href="https://twitter.com/planetrans/status/1354699886843850757?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 28, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The announcement comes a week after the US Air Force had changed its rules on how women in the service are allowed to wear their hair.

President Joe Biden on Monday signed an executive order that overturned a controversial ban by his predecessor on transgender individuals serving in the US&nbsp;military, a move cheered by LGBTQ advocates that fulfils a campaign promise.

Flanked by Vice President Kamala Harris, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, Biden signed the executive order in the Oval Office.

“It’s simple: America is safer when everyone qualified to serve can do so openly and with pride,” Biden said on Twitter after the signing.

Former Democratic President Barack Obama in 2016 allowed trans people to serve openly and receive medical care to transition genders, but Republican President Donald Trump froze their recruitment while allowing serving personnel to remain.

When Trump announced the ban in 2017 on Twitter, he said the military needed to focus on “decisive and overwhelming victory” without being burdened by the “tremendous medical costs and disruption” of having transgender personnel.

A November 2020 report by the LGBT-rights think tank the Palm Center co-written by former military Surgeons General said the transgender ban had hurt military readiness.

Austin in a statement said he supported the move and would immediately take action to ensure that transgender people are eligible to enter the military.

The US&nbsp;Supreme Court ruled that the Trump transgender policy of 2019 could stand while it faces separate lawsuits in lower courts.

About 1.3 million active personnel serve in the US&nbsp;military, Department of Defense data shows. There are no official figures on the number of trans members but the Rand Corp, a US&nbsp;policy research institute, estimated in 2016 about 2,450 active service members were transgender.

In major "major revisions" to its regulations, the US Army has amended its uniform rules and allowed women to wear ponytails and lipsticks while letting men use clear nail polish.

In major "major revisions" to its regulations, the US Army has amended its uniform rules and allowed women to wear ponytails and lipsticks while letting men use clear nail polish. Women in the US Army who are breastfeeding or pumping will also be allowed to wear an undershirt in addition to relaxed grooming standards. They will come into effect o February 24. Calling it an effort to increase ''diversity'' and ''inclusion'', the US army has updated its grooming standards to address the disparate impact on female soldiers. The #USArmy has revised Army Regulation 670-1, Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia. The updates will be effective Feb. 25, 2021 and directly supports the Army’s diversity and inclusion efforts. Learn more in this STAND-TO! ➡️ https://t.co/Y2VlaZgQHr#ArmyLife pic.twitter.com/4y9e7hBJ5a — U.S. Army (@USArmy) January 27, 2021 × The changes are the result of a review launched last year under previous defence secretary Mark Esper, part of an examination of racial discrimination and mistreatment of minorities in the military. In the past women with longer hair had to tie it in buns, which many said was uncomfortable and interfered with their helmets. Lt. Gen. Gary Brito, Army deputy chief of staff for personnel said: "We are continuously assessing our policies to identify areas for improvement, then implementing policies that demonstrate our commitment to ensuring all Soldiers feel as though they are valued members of the Army team." "We know that actions speak louder than words when it comes to inclusivity and equity within our ranks, and we believe that the changes we announced today are one example of policies that put our people first." In picture: US Army grooming standards and AR 670-1 The decision received a mixed response on social networking platform Twitter with some making fun of it while others applauded the move. Lol. Nail polish for Joe? Seems legit. — Anonymause77 (@anonymause77) January 27, 2021 × As a vet I applaud the Army's progressive stance. Thank you. — planetransgender (@planetrans) January 28, 2021 × The announcement comes a week after the US Air Force had changed its rules on how women in the service are allowed to wear their hair. President Joe Biden on Monday signed an executive order that overturned a controversial ban by his predecessor on transgender individuals serving in the US military, a move cheered by LGBTQ advocates that fulfils a campaign promise. Flanked by Vice President Kamala Harris, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, Biden signed the executive order in the Oval Office. “It’s simple: America is safer when everyone qualified to serve can do so openly and with pride,” Biden said on Twitter after the signing. Former Democratic President Barack Obama in 2016 allowed trans people to serve openly and receive medical care to transition genders, but Republican President Donald Trump froze their recruitment while allowing serving personnel to remain. When Trump announced the ban in 2017 on Twitter, he said the military needed to focus on “decisive and overwhelming victory” without being burdened by the “tremendous medical costs and disruption” of having transgender personnel. A November 2020 report by the LGBT-rights think tank the Palm Center co-written by former military Surgeons General said the transgender ban had hurt military readiness. Austin in a statement said he supported the move and would immediately take action to ensure that transgender people are eligible to enter the military. The US Supreme Court ruled that the Trump transgender policy of 2019 could stand while it faces separate lawsuits in lower courts. About 1.3 million active personnel serve in the US military, Department of Defense data shows. There are no official figures on the number of trans members but the Rand Corp, a US policy research institute, estimated in 2016 about 2,450 active service members were transgender.

US Army changes uniform rules for women to allow ponytails and nail polish

Zalmay Khalilzad, the US negotiator who brokered a deal with&nbsp;Afghanistan's Taliban, has been asked to stay in his post under President Joe Biden even as the administration reiterated Wednesday it was assessing the fine print of that agreement.

"We've asked him to continue the vital work that he's performing," Secretary of State Antony Blinken told his first news conference since taking office.

Khalilzad, a political scientist born in&nbsp;Afghanistan, is a veteran of Republican administrations who served as US ambassador to the United Nations, Iraq and&nbsp;Afghanistan&nbsp;under former president George W. Bush.

Donald Trump's administration, eager to end America's longest war, tasked Khalilzad with negotiating with the Taliban, culminating in a deal signed in Qatar on February 29 last year.

Under the accord, the United States will withdraw all troops from&nbsp;Afghanistan&nbsp;by May 2021 with the Taliban promising not to allow the territory to be used by terrorists -- the original goal of the US invasion following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Blinken reiterated concern that the new administration has not seen parts of the accord that were not made public.

"One of the things that we need to understand is exactly what is in the agreements that were reached between the United States and the Taliban, to make sure that we fully understand the commitments that the Taliban has made as well as any commitments that we've made," Blinken said.

The Taliban did not halt violent attacks in&nbsp;Afghanistan&nbsp;although the militants started their first talks with the internationally recognized government.

Biden as vice president under Barack Obama was an early proponent of leaving&nbsp;Afghanistan&nbsp;and has generally backed the goal of an exit.

But he has also called for a small force to remain to be able to target terrorist threats -- a position unlikely to be backed by the Taliban.

Zalmay Khalilzad, the US negotiator who brokered a deal with Afghanistan's Taliban, has been asked to stay in his post under President Joe Biden even as the administration reiterated Wednesday it was assessing the fine print of that agreement.

Zalmay Khalilzad, the US negotiator who brokered a deal with Afghanistan's Taliban, has been asked to stay in his post under President Joe Biden even as the administration reiterated Wednesday it was assessing the fine print of that agreement. "We've asked him to continue the vital work that he's performing," Secretary of State Antony Blinken told his first news conference since taking office. Khalilzad, a political scientist born in Afghanistan, is a veteran of Republican administrations who served as US ambassador to the United Nations, Iraq and Afghanistan under former president George W. Bush. Donald Trump's administration, eager to end America's longest war, tasked Khalilzad with negotiating with the Taliban, culminating in a deal signed in Qatar on February 29 last year. Under the accord, the United States will withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by May 2021 with the Taliban promising not to allow the territory to be used by terrorists -- the original goal of the US invasion following the September 11, 2001 attacks. Blinken reiterated concern that the new administration has not seen parts of the accord that were not made public. "One of the things that we need to understand is exactly what is in the agreements that were reached between the United States and the Taliban, to make sure that we fully understand the commitments that the Taliban has made as well as any commitments that we've made," Blinken said. The Taliban did not halt violent attacks in Afghanistan although the militants started their first talks with the internationally recognized government. Biden as vice president under Barack Obama was an early proponent of leaving Afghanistan and has generally backed the goal of an exit. But he has also called for a small force to remain to be able to target terrorist threats -- a position unlikely to be backed by the Taliban.

Biden asks US negotiator with Taliban to stay on

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson heads to Scotland on Thursday in a bid to stem growing support for another independence referendum by arguing that the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the benefits of staying together.

The bonds that tie England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland together in a $3 trillion economy have been severely strained by both Brexit and Johnson's handling of the coronavirus outbreak.

Opinion surveys show that a majority of Scots would now back independence, though Johnson has repeatedly said that now is not the time for another referendum that could break apart the more than 314-year-old union between England and Scotland.

Ahead of his visit, which was criticised by Scottish nationalists, Johnson said that Scotland as a part of the United Kingdom gained access to a coronavirus vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and the shots are being administered by the shared armed forces, who are creating 80 new vaccine centres in Scotland.

"We have pulled together to defeat the virus," Johnson said. "Mutual cooperation across the UK throughout this pandemic is exactly what the people of Scotland expect and it is what I have been focussed on."

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon criticised Johnson’s trip, questioning whether his reasons for visiting are "really essential" and arguing it sets a bad example to the public.

Sturgeon, who runs Scotland's semi-autonomous government, is hoping a strong performance by her Scottish National Party in an election for the country's devolved parliament in May would give her the mandate to hold a second referendum.

If Scotland voted for independence it would mean the United Kingdom would lose about a third of its landmass and almost a tenth of its population - just as the world's sixth-biggest economy is grappling with the impact of Brexit.

Johnson, who would have to agree to a new referendum, has said there is no need for a new vote after independence was rejected by Scottish voters in 2014.

Scotland voted against independence by 55 per cent&nbsp;to 45&nbsp;per cent&nbsp;in a 2014 referendum. But a majority of Scots also backed staying in the European Union in the subsequent 2016 Brexit vote, stoking demands by Scottish nationalists for a new independence vote after the UK as a whole voted to leave.

Scottish nationalist attempts to force a change to the United Kingdom's constitution are a massive distraction while the government battles COVID-19, British Minister for the Cabinet Office Michael Gove said.

"At the moment, when we are prioritising the fight against the disease and also the need for economic recovery in due course, talking about changing the constitution and so on is just a massive distraction," Gove told Sky News.

Gove said that Johnson, who had made himself minister for the union, was the best frontman for the keeping the United Kingdom together.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson heads to Scotland on Thursday in a bid to stem growing support for another independence referendum by arguing that the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the benefits of staying together.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson heads to Scotland on Thursday in a bid to stem growing support for another independence referendum by arguing that the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the benefits of staying together. The bonds that tie England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland together in a $3 trillion economy have been severely strained by both Brexit and Johnson's handling of the coronavirus outbreak. Opinion surveys show that a majority of Scots would now back independence, though Johnson has repeatedly said that now is not the time for another referendum that could break apart the more than 314-year-old union between England and Scotland. Ahead of his visit, which was criticised by Scottish nationalists, Johnson said that Scotland as a part of the United Kingdom gained access to a coronavirus vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and the shots are being administered by the shared armed forces, who are creating 80 new vaccine centres in Scotland. "We have pulled together to defeat the virus," Johnson said. "Mutual cooperation across the UK throughout this pandemic is exactly what the people of Scotland expect and it is what I have been focussed on." Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon criticised Johnson’s trip, questioning whether his reasons for visiting are "really essential" and arguing it sets a bad example to the public. Sturgeon, who runs Scotland's semi-autonomous government, is hoping a strong performance by her Scottish National Party in an election for the country's devolved parliament in May would give her the mandate to hold a second referendum. If Scotland voted for independence it would mean the United Kingdom would lose about a third of its landmass and almost a tenth of its population - just as the world's sixth-biggest economy is grappling with the impact of Brexit. Johnson, who would have to agree to a new referendum, has said there is no need for a new vote after independence was rejected by Scottish voters in 2014. Scotland voted against independence by 55 per cent to 45 per cent in a 2014 referendum. But a majority of Scots also backed staying in the European Union in the subsequent 2016 Brexit vote, stoking demands by Scottish nationalists for a new independence vote after the UK as a whole voted to leave. Scottish nationalist attempts to force a change to the United Kingdom's constitution are a massive distraction while the government battles COVID-19, British Minister for the Cabinet Office Michael Gove said. "At the moment, when we are prioritising the fight against the disease and also the need for economic recovery in due course, talking about changing the constitution and so on is just a massive distraction," Gove told Sky News. Gove said that Johnson, who had made himself minister for the union, was the best frontman for the keeping the United Kingdom together.

British PM Johnson heads to Scotland to argue against the breakup of UK

India on Thursday dispatched the first batch of home-grown&nbsp;Covishield&nbsp;vaccine consignments&nbsp;to Sri Lanka as a gift under the neighbourhood policy.

Staff at an airport in Mumbai prepared boxes containing vaccines for shipment to Sri Lanka. Anurag Srivastava, official Spokesperson, Ministry of External Affairs, took to Twitter to make the announcement.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/VaccineMaitri?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#VaccineMaitri</a> continues! 
 
Consignments of Made in India Covid vaccines airlifted for Sri Lanka!<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NeighbourhoodFirst?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NeighbourhoodFirst</a> <a href="https://t.co/RLyfa7xDAE">pic.twitter.com/RLyfa7xDAE</a>
— Anurag Srivastava (@MEAIndia) <a href="https://twitter.com/MEAIndia/status/1354637814499971073?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 28, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had made a commitment to his Sri Lankan counterpart Mahinda Rajapaksa during a virtual summit in September last that India will provide all possible support to the island nation to minimise the health and economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic.

Many low and middle-income countries are relying on India, the world's biggest vaccine maker, for supplies to start COVID-19 immunisation programmes and bring an end to their outbreaks.

This month, India, the world's largest vaccine manufacturer began exporting the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine to neighbouring Asian countries, drawing their praise in what could prove a pushback against China's activities in the region.

So far, India has sent consignments of coronavirus vaccines under grant assistance to Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Mauritius and Seychelles. 
Last week, India began commercial exports and sent two million doses each to Brazil and Morocco.

India is also sending coronavirus vaccines as commercial supplies to Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Bangladesh and Myanmar.

In a major announcement, India on January 19 said it would send COVID-19 vaccines under grant assistance to Bhutan, Maldives, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar and Seychelles and supplies to Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and Mauritius will commence after confirmation of necessary regulatory clearances.

India is one of the world's biggest drugmakers, and an increasing number of countries have already approached it for procuring the coronavirus vaccines.

India has already rolled out a massive coronavirus vaccination drive under which two vaccines, Covishield and Covaxin, are being administered to frontline health workers across the country.

While Oxford-AstraZeneca's Covishield is being manufactured by the Serum Institute, Covaxin is being produced by Bharat Biotech. 
India had earlier supplied hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir and paracetamol tablets, as well as diagnostic kits, ventilators, masks, gloves and other medical supplies to a large number of countries to help them deal with the pandemic.

India on Thursday dispatched the first batch of home-grown Covishield vaccine consignments to Sri Lanka as a gift under the neighbourhood policy. Staff at an airport in Mumbai prepared boxes containing vaccines for shipment to Sri Lanka.

India on Thursday dispatched the first batch of home-grown Covishield vaccine consignments to Sri Lanka as a gift under the neighbourhood policy. Staff at an airport in Mumbai prepared boxes containing vaccines for shipment to Sri Lanka. Anurag Srivastava, official Spokesperson, Ministry of External Affairs, took to Twitter to make the announcement. #VaccineMaitri continues! Consignments of Made in India Covid vaccines airlifted for Sri Lanka!#NeighbourhoodFirst pic.twitter.com/RLyfa7xDAE — Anurag Srivastava (@MEAIndia) January 28, 2021 × Prime Minister Narendra Modi had made a commitment to his Sri Lankan counterpart Mahinda Rajapaksa during a virtual summit in September last that India will provide all possible support to the island nation to minimise the health and economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic. Many low and middle-income countries are relying on India, the world's biggest vaccine maker, for supplies to start COVID-19 immunisation programmes and bring an end to their outbreaks. This month, India, the world's largest vaccine manufacturer began exporting the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine to neighbouring Asian countries, drawing their praise in what could prove a pushback against China's activities in the region. So far, India has sent consignments of coronavirus vaccines under grant assistance to Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Mauritius and Seychelles. Last week, India began commercial exports and sent two million doses each to Brazil and Morocco. India is also sending coronavirus vaccines as commercial supplies to Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Bangladesh and Myanmar. In a major announcement, India on January 19 said it would send COVID-19 vaccines under grant assistance to Bhutan, Maldives, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar and Seychelles and supplies to Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and Mauritius will commence after confirmation of necessary regulatory clearances. India is one of the world's biggest drugmakers, and an increasing number of countries have already approached it for procuring the coronavirus vaccines. India has already rolled out a massive coronavirus vaccination drive under which two vaccines, Covishield and Covaxin, are being administered to frontline health workers across the country. While Oxford-AstraZeneca's Covishield is being manufactured by the Serum Institute, Covaxin is being produced by Bharat Biotech. India had earlier supplied hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir and paracetamol tablets, as well as diagnostic kits, ventilators, masks, gloves and other medical supplies to a large number of countries to help them deal with the pandemic.

India sends 5,00,000 doses of Covishield vaccine to Sri Lanka

Myanmar launched a COVID-19 vaccination programme on Wednesday, with healthcare staff and volunteer medical workers the first to receive shots of the AstraZenca and Oxford University vaccine donated by neighbouring India.

The Southeast Asian country managed to contain the number of COVID-19 cases early in the pandemic but is now fighting a second wave, recording more than 138,000 cases and 3,082 deaths.

Last week, Myanmar received 1.5 million doses of the vaccine manufactured by the Serum Institute of India, amid a diplomatic drive by New Dehli to supply neighbouring countries just as regional rival China has also pledged vaccine consignments.

"This should create a situation to reduce the rate of infection, so it is such a relief for healthcare workers," Tun Myint, a health ministry official overseeing vaccinations at the Yangon General Hospital, told reporters.

The number of daily new COVID-19 cases has dropped recently, though medical experts say it is unlikely to provide a full picture given relatively low testing rates.

"We are so tired from the long fight" against the pandemic, said volunteer medical worker Khant Ko Ko, who received a vaccine shot at the Ayeyarwady Centre, a facility in Yangon where coronavirus patients are treated.

Myanmar's fragile healthcare system has relied heavily on thousands of volunteers to assist during the pandemic.

Phone Min Khant, another volunteer, said he felt happy to get the vaccine and pleased that Myanmar was among the first countries in Southeast Asia to launch an immunisation drive.

The next group of people due to be inoculated will be members of parliament on Friday and Saturday, the health ministry has said.

Myanmar has an ambitious target to vaccinate the whole population, of about 54 million people, this year.

The health ministry has said up to 30 million additional doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine have been ordered with a further two million due to arrive by the first week of February.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi during a visit this month promised Myanmar 300,000 doses of a Chinese COVID-19 vaccine.

Myanmar launched a COVID-19 vaccination programme on Wednesday, with healthcare staff and volunteer medical workers the first to receive shots of the AstraZenca and Oxford University vaccine donated by neighbouring India.

Myanmar launched a COVID-19 vaccination programme on Wednesday, with healthcare staff and volunteer medical workers the first to receive shots of the AstraZenca and Oxford University vaccine donated by neighbouring India. The Southeast Asian country managed to contain the number of COVID-19 cases early in the pandemic but is now fighting a second wave, recording more than 138,000 cases and 3,082 deaths. Last week, Myanmar received 1.5 million doses of the vaccine manufactured by the Serum Institute of India, amid a diplomatic drive by New Dehli to supply neighbouring countries just as regional rival China has also pledged vaccine consignments. "This should create a situation to reduce the rate of infection, so it is such a relief for healthcare workers," Tun Myint, a health ministry official overseeing vaccinations at the Yangon General Hospital, told reporters. The number of daily new COVID-19 cases has dropped recently, though medical experts say it is unlikely to provide a full picture given relatively low testing rates. "We are so tired from the long fight" against the pandemic, said volunteer medical worker Khant Ko Ko, who received a vaccine shot at the Ayeyarwady Centre, a facility in Yangon where coronavirus patients are treated. Myanmar's fragile healthcare system has relied heavily on thousands of volunteers to assist during the pandemic. Phone Min Khant, another volunteer, said he felt happy to get the vaccine and pleased that Myanmar was among the first countries in Southeast Asia to launch an immunisation drive. The next group of people due to be inoculated will be members of parliament on Friday and Saturday, the health ministry has said. Myanmar has an ambitious target to vaccinate the whole population, of about 54 million people, this year. The health ministry has said up to 30 million additional doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine have been ordered with a further two million due to arrive by the first week of February. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi during a visit this month promised Myanmar 300,000 doses of a Chinese COVID-19 vaccine.

Myanmar launches vaccination drive, prioritises frontline healthcare workers

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

Vyomica Berry

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.