“Every makeup artist has their own style, but it was really important to keep what was passed down,” says Naomi Hibino, the kabuki makeup artist behind director Sang-il Lee’s “Kokuho,” a mesmerizing tale of centuries-old Japanese theatrical tradition told through a lens of friendship, rivalry and the cost of pursuing perfection. Orphaned Kikuo (Ryô Yoshizawa) is taken in by a renowned kabuki actor (Ken Watanabe) and raised alongside his son Shunsuke (Ryûsei Yokohama), as the two devote their lives to mastering the stylized art. Their breakthrough arrives with a performance of Temple Maiden, a dance tracing the love and envy of two maidens who turn into serpents. Together with kabuki hairstylist Tadashi Nishimatsu — Kyoko Toyokawa did the film’s non-performance hair and makeup — Hibino blended faithful Edo era references with visual distinctions between characters. “Shunsuke is from a well-to-do family, so I wanted to give him a vibrant, youthful and also a cute look,” notes Hibino. “The way I imagined Kikuo was to keep it simple, so the simplicity is reflected in the makeup. [In Temple Maiden] it’s really subtle, but the edge of the eye is a little different. I made [Kikuo] look more down-turning.” Hibino applied the white foundation (oshiroi) using methods from the theater, refining it for film to look more “beautiful and delicate.” Hints of pink eye shadow, dark eyeliner, red pigmented eyebrows and crimson lipstick complete the transformation — the next “national treasure” has taken the stage.
As part of Colombia’s peace process, former National Army soldiers confess to taking part in extrajudicial killings to the victims’ families.
Colombia continues to navigate the fragile aftermath of more than five decades of armed conflict. Although the 2016 peace agreement formally ended hostilities between the state and the FARC-EP rebels, sustaining peace has proven far more complex than signing it.
This episode follows former members of the national army accused of carrying out the so-called “falsos positivos” (false positives) — extrajudicial executions in which innocent civilians were executed, then falsely presented as combat casualties by the government as a way to bolster the numbers of enemies killed. Soldiers testified to their involvement in the assassinations to the families of the victims as part of the peace process. We also explore the suffering and anguish of those who have had their families devastated by these killings.
Their testimonies unfold within the framework of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP), the justice mechanism established under the peace agreement between the Colombian state and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP).
The JEP applies a model of transitional and restorative justice centred on victims and with full guarantees of due process. Its mandate is to investigate, prosecute and sanction those most responsible for serious human rights violations. The system provides two pathways: a restorative process for those who acknowledge responsibility, provide full truth, and contribute to reparation and guarantees of non-repetition; and an adversarial process for those who do not.
Currently, more than 17,000 individuals are appearing before the JEP, including former FARC-EP members, members of the armed forces, and civilian third parties. The jurisdiction has issued indictments for maximum responsibility, delivered restorative and adversarial sentences, and conditionally waived criminal prosecution for non-most-responsible participants.
Most businesses believe that sales and customer service reside in separate departments.
Every small interaction sends a message. The way you answer a question, explain a detail, or handle uncertainty all influence how comfortable someone feels pulling out their card. Spending money is personal. People need to feel looked after before they commit.
They want straight answers. They want things explained properly. And they want to sense that the person helping them actually knows what they’re doing.
To boost sales, follow these five customer service strategies below:
Avoid Scripts
A lot of training initiatives teach people what to say, not how to think – and customers feel that immediately.
The moment someone sounds like they’re reciting lines, trust slips. Real confidence comes from understanding, not memorisation. When your team knows the product inside out, they stop performing and start having proper conversations.
They can adapt, explain things in their own words, and, most importantly, respond without that awkward pause where they search for the “right” answer.
Empower Staff To Solve Problems
Empowering your team means your staff can actually help, without having to “check with someone” every five minutes – that just irritates your customers and your staff lose confidence.
Trust your team to make the right call and let them approve replacements and offer sensible credits so they can fix the small stuff immediately.
Demonstrate the kind of leadership that makes your team better.
When someone buys from you, browses certain products, or asks specific questions, they’re giving you clues about what they actually want.
They keep track of preferences, past orders, and birthdays – the small details that are easy to forget but powerful when remembered. The plan isn’t to inundate them with generic promotions or info they never wanted.
It’s to be there at the right place at the right time. For example, send out a reminder when they’re likely running low or make a suggestion that genuinely complements what they already bought.
Following up shouldn’t feel weird. It’s just care in action.
Most customers don’t need a big song and dance. They just want to know you’re still there after the payment goes through. A simple message, a few days later, is powerfully reassuring.
Not to push, and not to upsell, but rather just to make sure they’re in the loop.
Reward Loyalty and Referrals
Rewarding loyalty shouldn’t feel like a corporate points program with fine print nobody reads.
It should feel like appreciation.
Let your regulars feel like insiders. Give them a first look at new ranges before anyone else sees them. Move their order up the queue when you can.
When someone chooses your business again and again, that’s trust. They’re choosing you. They’re betting on your quality, your service, and your word.
Final Thoughts
When service feels thoughtful and reliable, hesitation and doubt drop. Questions get answered on time. That sense of being looked after doesn’t just close one sale – it builds loyalty.
THE Pretty Woman star who infamously scolded Julia Roberts in the iconic scene looks very different these days.
Dey Young has made a rare appearance 35 years after starring as a rather snobby saleswomen on Rodeo Drive in the 1990 romantic comedy.
Sign up for the Showbiz newsletter
Thank you!
Dey Young, who starred in Pretty Woman, has been spotted on an outing in LACredit: BackGridShe is best-known for playing a snobby shop assistant in the 1990 romantic comedyCredit: BackGrid
She has appeared in over 100 movies and television programs throughout her career, but is perhaps best known for her Pretty Woman stint, alongside Julia Roberts and Richard Gere.
The actress, who is now 70-years-old, was seen on a leisurely Sunday morning stroll with her pooch by her side.
She and her dog were strolling along the sidewalk in Los Angeles.
Dey looked chic but kept things simple in a red zip-up, black trousers, and a burgundy colored cap.
As she walked her dog, which was on a leash, the actress also donned some sunglasses and wore her phone on a lanyard across her body.
In Pretty Woman, Dey’s character works at a swanky shop on Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills.
Julia Robert’s character of Vivian Ward works as a prostitute and goes shopping with her client’s credit card.
When she walks into Dey’s character’s shop, the saleswoman tells Vivian they don’t have clothes for her.
Vivian later goes shopping elsewhere before returning to the snobby shop to tell them “big mistake” after splashing hundreds of dollars.
Despite having long been in the business, Dey isn’t slowing down.
She currently has two projects in the works.
Dey previously spoke about her Pretty Woman role.
Speaking to Today in 2021, she said, “I never knew that this movie would be as big as it was, or that this scene would be so iconic.
“I really think the reason is that it’s a moment a lot of people can relate to it.”
Dey Young is known for starring in Pretty Woman as the snobby saleswomanCredit: UnknownDey’s character was snobby to Julia’s characterCredit: Unknown
Before her Pretty Woman stint, Dey had taken on roles in the likes of Rock ‘n’ Roll High School and Strange Behavior.
She wasn’t planning to audition for Pretty Woman until a chance encounter.
“Alan Thicke and I were friends and he invited me to a tennis party,” she said.
“I got paired with up Garry Marshall.
“We ended up winning our match, and that was a really fun thing. At the end of it, Alan told him I was an actress and (Marshall) was like, ‘Oh, really? Well, you know, I think I might have something for you.’”
She then went on to audition for the film, which was in fact originally called 3,000.
The reason the movie was originally titled 3,000, was because that was the amount negotiated for Julia Robert’s character’s rate.
Julia Roberts played a prostitute named Vivian Ward in Pretty WomanCredit: Alamy
Protesters at a World Press Freedom Day event in Kuala Lumpur hold a banner that reads, “Targeting Journalist is A Crime” and a poster of Palestinian-American Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh who was killed while reporting in the West Bank in 2022. Israel accepted she was likely killed by IDF fire, but said it was an accident. File photo by Fazry Ismail/EPA-EFE
Feb. 25 (UPI) — Two-third of the 129 journalists killed around the world while doing their jobs in 2025 were at the hands of Israel, said a new report out Wednesday.
The Committee to Protect Journalists said its annual tally of journalists and media workers killed, the worst in the more than three decades since it started collating the data in 1992, came amid armed conflict at historically unprecedented levels globally.
A record 86 members of the press were killed by Israeli fire, up from the previous record of 85 in 2024, more than 60% of whom were Palestinian reporters from Gaza. The others were killed in Lebanon, Yemen and Iran, said the New York-based CPJ.
There were nine recorded journalist killings in Sudan for the year, six in Mexico, four in Russia — with that figure incorporating Ukrainian press members killed by Russian forces — and three in the Philippines. A dozen-and-a-half other countries in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America accounted for the remaining 21 deaths.
Of the 129 total, CPJ said 47 were documented targeted killings, which CPJ classifies as murder.
“Within the context of rising conflict worldwide, Israel’s disregard for the lives of journalists — and the international laws intended to protect them — is unparalleled. Israel has now killed more journalists than any other government since CPJ began collecting records in 1992, making the Israel-Gaza war (which incorporates Israel’s killings in Gaza as well as its lethal attacks in Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran) the deadliest on record for journalists.
“Three of these killings, including one murder, occurred after the October 2025 ceasefire,” the committee said.
The CPJ said the surge in killings globally was being driven by an entrenched climate of impunity for attacks on press and media workers in which action to find and hold those responsible to account was increasingly rare.
“There have been almost no transparent investigations into the targeted killings in 2025 — the highest number of journalists deliberately killed for their work in the past decade — and no one has been held accountable,” said the CPJ.
“These killings of journalists violate international humanitarian law, which stipulates that journalists are civilians and should never be deliberately targeted,” it added.
That impunity emboldened those intent on silencing journalists, including in countries where there is no current armed conflict.
CPJ warned that the rise in killings was a reflection of the wider risks confronting press freedom amid the chilling effect of efforts to discredit journalists, abuse of the law to try to make fair, accurate and balanced reporting a crime and inflammatory rhetoric and harassment online, even in Western “liberal democracies.”
“Journalists are being killed in record numbers at a time when access to information is more important than ever. Attacks on the media are a leading indicator of attacks on other freedoms, and much more needs to be done to prevent these killings and punish the perpetrators,” warned CEO Jodie Ginsberg.
“We are all at risk when journalists are killed for reporting the news,” she added.
Former South African president Nelson Mandela speaks to reporters outside of the White House in Washington on October 21, 1999. Mandela was famously released from prison in South Africa on February 11, 1990. Photo by Joel Rennich/UPI | License Photo
Palestinian journalist Yousef Al Helou documented Gaza and its people in the summer of 2023, months before the start of Israel’s genocidal war. His film, ‘Phoenix of Gaza’, stands as a testament to Palestinian resilience and has become a tribute to people that were later killed.
SOME fans across the country have discovered that their tickets to see Harry Styles have been automatically refunded.
The popular artist, 32, announced his latest tour Together, Together last month which will debut new songs from his upcoming album Kiss All The Time. Disco, Occasionally.
Sign up for the Showbiz newsletter
Thank you!
Some fans have woken up to discover their tickets to see Harry have been voidedCredit: AFP
In addition to performing 12 shows in Wembley Stadium, Harry had one gig booked at Manchester‘s Co-op Live in March.
However, due to overwhelming demand that couldn’t be met, select tickets to the show have been cancelled and refunded.
Ticketmaster released a statement on the decision to axe the tickets, explaining that some customers managed to purchase tickets they shouldn’t have been able to buy in the first place.
These include many of the £20 tickets which were later resold on other ticket selling sites, and therefore were no longer eligible for use at the venue.
Ticketmaster explained: “We’re working with the Harry Styles ‘One Night Only’ team to cancel and refund any orders that have violated the rules of sale.
“As all tickets are non-transferable, any tickets listed on unauthorised resale sites are void and will not get fans into the show – so we’re cancelling and refunding these.
“There is also a ticket limit of 2 tickets per person, so any orders above that are being cancelled and refunded.”
The majority of the voided tickets appear to have been sold on Viagogo.
Ticketmaster added: “They [Viagogo] have been asked to stop listing tickets, in line with the artist team’s goal of keeping tickets in the hands of fans for no more than £20 [+ fees].
“While we are cancelling all tickets we find listed there, ultimately Viagogo controls what is on their site – meaning listings can remain even after we’ve cancelled them.”
If you’re hoping to see Harry at the event, your best bet is to keep an eye on Ticketmaster’s wesite.
Though the show is in incredibly high demand, so luck will need to be on your side.
Feb. 25 (UPI) — Dr. Casey Means is scheduled to appear before the Senate Wednesday to discuss her confirmation to become surgeon general.
Means, 38, a friend of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., wellness influencer and Make America Healthy Again advocate, was scheduled to appear in October before the Senate Health, Education Labor and Pension Committee virtually because she was pregnant with her first child. But it was postponed because she went into labor.
Her brother, Calley Means, is a lobbyist and senior adviser to the Health and Human Services Department.
She attended Stanford University for undergrad and medical school. She published a 2024 book, Good Energy, in which she described quitting her residency at Oregon Health and Science University. She had completed almost all of the five-year residency but said she was disillusioned with modern medicine. She advocates for healthy eating, limited pharmaceutical use and alternative remedies.
Her medical license lapsed in January 2024.
Because of this, she has faced questions over qualifications for the job, which would give her the authority to issue warnings and advisories for Americans.
HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard said that Means’ “credentials, research background, and experience in public life give her the right insights to be the surgeon general who helps make sure America never again becomes the sickest nation on Earth.”
Kennedy recommended Means to President Donald Trump, who nominated her in May. Trump had withdrawn his previous nomination, former Fox News medical contributor Dr. Janette Nesheiwat.
Means has said she is for “unbiased research” in the childhood vaccine schedule. She has specifically questioned the safety of the hepatitis B vaccine being given soon after birth.
“I bet that one vaccine probably isn’t causing autism, but what about the 20 that they’re getting before 18 months?” CNN reported she said on Joe Rogan’s podcast in 2024.
There is no evidence that vaccines cause autism.
President Donald Trump delivers his State of the Union address during a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, on February 24, 2026. Pool photo by Kenny Holston/UPI | License Photo
We made it! After this weekend, when the Producers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild hand out their highly predictive precursors, the final shape of the Oscar race should be (reasonably) clear — and nominees worn out by months of campaigning will be breathing a sigh of relief.
Before I share highlights from this week’s issue, one programming note: This will be my last letter from the editor until our inaugural Cannes issue drops in May. (Don’t worry, I will be plenty busy in the interim catching up on this year’s top Emmy contenders.)
Thanks as always for following along, and may you triumph in your Oscar pool!
Cover story: Rose Byrne
(Ryan Pfluger / For The Times)
Times columnist Mary McNamara and I don’t agree on everything, but we do agree on this: “Damages” deserves to be ranked alongside “Mad Men” and “Breaking Bad” in any discussion of the Golden Age of TV.
That’s thanks in one part to a gripping flash-forward narrative structure now so common it could be considered a cliché, and in another to Glenn Close’s indelible performance as ruthless litigator Patty Hewes. But it’s also a testament to the multifaceted talents of Rose Byrne, who went “toe-to-toe” with Close in what would become her breakthrough role — and then confidently pivoted to projects like “Insidious,” “Bridesmaids” and “Spy.”
“Byrne is something of a creative chameleon, moving easily from drama to comedy to horror, film to television to stage and back again,” McNamara writes in this week’s cover story. “In many ways, her gut-wrenching, darkly funny performance as a woman pushed beyond all endurance in “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You” is a culmination of all the characters she brought to life before it.”
Inside Warner Bros.’ dominant Oscar haul
(Christina House/Los Angeles Times)
Whether you come down on the side of “Sinners” or “One Battle After Another” in the best picture race may be perfect fodder for debate with friends over a few small beers, but for Warner Bros. executives Mike De Luca and Pam Abdy it would be akin to choosing a favorite child. After all, both projects emerged from the pair’s desire, as contributor Gregory Ellwood writes, to make WB “a destination where filmmakers of all varieties, including auteurs, bring their projects for ‘white glove’ treatment.”
As De Luca explains, “Everything was original once… If you don’t refresh the coffers with new IP to create new franchises, at some point you get to Chapter 10 or 11 and people start to move on.”
The many faces of ‘The Secret Agent’
(Ryan Pfluger/For The Times)
The moment Tânia Maria arrives onscreen as Dona Sebastiana in “The Secret Agent,” you can’t help but ask yourself, “Who is that?!” (Star Wagner Moura had the same reaction.) But the real feat casting director Gabriel Domingues pulls off in the Oscar-nominated Brazilian thriller is to make you ask yourself the same question, over and over, every time a new character appears.
How did Domingues find a range of actors to represent the country’s endless diversity? It’s part of his process, writes contributor Carlos Aguilar: “He prides himself on doing the shoe-leather work of looking for fresh, compelling faces in cities where others might not think to look — those without a prominent arts scene, for instance.”
Colonel Jang Do-young (L), public affairs director of South Korea Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Colonel Ryan Donald (R), public affairs director of U.S. Forces Korea, pose for a photo during a press briefing on the 2026 Freedom Shield military exercise at the Defense Ministry in Seoul on Wednesday. Pool Photo by Jung Yeon-je/EPA
SEOUL, Feb. 25 (UPI) — The United States and South Korea will kick off a major joint military exercise next month, both countries announced Wednesday, as they prepare for the transfer of wartime operational control from Washington to Seoul.
The annual springtime Freedom Shield exercise will take place March 9 to 19 and will incorporate “realistic threats, including lessons learned from recent conflicts … to further strengthen the Alliance’s readiness and capabilities through combined, joint, all-domain operations,” the militaries said in a joint statement.
“This exercise will also serve as an opportunity to support ongoing preparations for a conditions-based wartime operational transition, consistent with alliance agreement,” the statement added.
South Korea is looking to complete the handover of wartime command from the United States before President Lee Jae Myung’s five-year term ends in 2030.
The exercise will feature computer simulation-based command post exercises as well as “Warrior Shield” field training, the allies said.
Freedom Shield comes as the Lee administration attempts to improve frayed relations with Pyongyang, which frequently condemns the allies’ joint drills as rehearsals for an invasion.
Local media have reported that Seoul is proposing scaling down field training during this year’s exercise — a move that Washington has allegedly resisted.
At the summertime Ulchi Freedom Shield exercises in August, half of the 40 planned field training exercises were rescheduled to later in the year.
“Complex combined exercises often require additional coordination, looking at the scale and sequencing of these events,” Col. Ryan Donald, public affairs director of U.S. Forces Korea, said at a press conference Wednesday. “The important thing to remember is Freedom Shield and Warrior Shield will go on this March as a major defensive-oriented exercise.”
In addition to U.S. and South Korean forces, personnel from other member countries of the United Nations Command will join the exercise, while the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission will observe to monitor compliance with the Armistice Agreement.
“You’ll see U.S., South Korean and United Nations Command member states participating in tough, realistic, demanding training — and that is the real measure of the alliance,” Donald said.
Col. Jang Do-young, public affairs director of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the press conference that field training exercises were still being coordinated.
He added that March’s Freedom Shield will not include scenarios directly related to a North Korean nuclear attack, but would include training for “deterrence of nuclear threats.”
Last week, a South Korean lawmaker said that Pyongyang is planning to hold a large-scale military parade to show off its latest weapons at the conclusion of the ongoing Workers’ Party Ninth Congress.
The Trump administration has directed U.S. diplomats to actively oppose foreign laws that restrict how American tech companies handle citizens’ data abroad. An internal State Department cable, dated February 18 and signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, described such measures as threats to artificial intelligence services, global data flows, and civil liberties.
Experts say the move signals a return to a more confrontational approach after previous efforts focused on building goodwill with European customers. The administration warned that data sovereignty rules could increase costs, introduce cybersecurity risks, and expand government control in ways that enable censorship.
Data Sovereignty in Focus
Data sovereignty or localization initiatives have accelerated, especially in Europe, amid ongoing tensions over U.S. trade policies and concerns about privacy and surveillance. European regulators, wary of American tech giants, have tightened rules on how data is stored and shared. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) remains the most prominent example, restricting cross-border data transfers and imposing stiff fines on companies that fail to comply.
The State Department cable cited GDPR as “unnecessarily burdensome” and highlighted China’s restrictive data policies as an example of how technology rules can expand geopolitical influence. Beijing, it noted, bundles infrastructure projects with policies that provide access to international data for surveillance and strategic leverage.
Diplomatic Action Plan
The cable, labeled as an “action request,” instructed diplomats to track proposals that could limit cross-border data flows and to counter regulations deemed excessive. Talking points included promotion of the Global Cross-Border Privacy Rules Forum, a multinational initiative launched in 2022 by the United States, Mexico, Canada, Australia, and Japan to support free flow of data while ensuring privacy protections.
This directive follows a pattern of U.S. opposition to European digital regulation. Last year, diplomats were ordered to challenge the EU’s Digital Services Act, aimed at making the internet safer by forcing social media firms to remove illegal content. The U.S. is also reportedly planning an online portal to help users bypass content moderation, including restrictions on material flagged as hate speech or terrorist propaganda.
Analysis: A More Assertive U.S. Digital Strategy
The cable reflects a strategic shift toward actively protecting the interests of U.S. tech companies globally. While previous administrations attempted to engage Europe diplomatically, the current approach pressures foreign governments to loosen privacy and data storage regulations that could hinder U.S. business.
By framing data sovereignty laws as a threat to AI development, cybersecurity, and civil liberties, the administration is positioning the free flow of data as a cornerstone of U.S. economic and technological influence. At the same time, rising competition from China in digital infrastructure and AI adds urgency, highlighting the geopolitical stakes of controlling international data flows.
The broader implication is a growing clash between national data policies and global digital commerce. As countries enact stricter rules to protect citizens’ data, U.S. tech firms and policymakers are increasingly asserting that global interoperability and AI innovation must take priority, signaling potential tensions in transatlantic and international digital governance for years to come.
FANS of Benny Blanco have been left feeling queasy after noticing a “disgusting” detail from his new podcast.
On Tuesday, the musician – who is married to Selena Gomez -launched his new multimedia podcast, Friends Keep Secrets; but fans were more taken by the host’s hygiene than the show itself.
Sign up for the Showbiz newsletter
Thank you!
Fans have been left ‘disgusted’ by Benny Blanco’s dirty feet, which he showed in a new podcast episodeCredit: YouTube/ Friends Keep SecretsJust minutes into his new show, the music producer lifted his bare feet onto the couch and flashed them to the cameraCredit: YouTube/ Friends Keep SecretsThe stomach-churning moment left fans wondering how Selena ‘copes’Credit: Getty
Just minutes into the first episode, which features Benny and his co-hosts Lil Dicky and Kristin Batalucco, the record producer kicked back on a couch with no socks on.
And fans quickly noticed that he the soles of his feet appeared dirty, quickly taking to social media.
“EW! benny, get off the couch and go take ,a shower. you’re not a toddler,” wrote one fan to X.
Another horrified user said: “The fact that his feet are ACTUALLY that filthy makes me sick to my stomach like selena girl what’s going on”.
“Yikes! That’s definitely a “don’t look down” moment.
Sounds like Benny Blanco didn’t expect his feet to make a cameo on the podcast. The joys of live recordings sometimes the unexpected gets all the attention!,” said a third.
“Benny blanco go wash your damn feet,” simply echoed another.
With Benny’s feet garnering more attention that the podcast itself, others shared messages directly for his wife Selena.
Most read in Entertainment
“How is Selena dealing with this?” one social media user said.
One even went as far to say: “Selena needs to divorce him and find someone better”.
Benny and his co-hosts are set to welcome a string of A-listers on the new podcast series, with the producer teasing that Selena will also come onto the show.
Before things turned romantic, the couple actually knew one another for over a decade – meeting back in 2008 when Selena was beginning her career.
The pop star previously had a very public romance with Justin Bieber, before dating The WKEND for around a year.
Users on X branded Benny ‘disgusting’ as they begged him to ‘take a shower’ in brutal remarksCredit: YouTube/ Friends Keep SecretsSelena and Benny have been married since SeptemberCredit: Getty
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was evacuated from his residence in Canberra for several hours Tuesday after a bomb threat was received by a U.S.-based performing arts group linked to China’s Falun Gong movement. File photo by Lukas Coch/EPA
Feb. 25 (UPI) — Australian police evacuated Prime Minister Anthony Albanese from his official residence in Canberra for several hours after a bomb hoax related to a classical Chinese dance and music troupe touring the country that is banned by Beijing.
The New York-based Shen Yun group was sent an email threat on Tuesday saying that explosives had been planted at The Lodge in the Australian capital and would be detonated unless the troupe pulled out of the tour, the BBC and Australia’s ABC News reported.
“Large quantities of nitroglycerine explosives have been placed around the Australian Prime Minister’s Lodge, located on Adelaide Avenue in the Deakin area of Canberra, Australia. If you insist on proceeding with the performance, then the Prime Minister’s Lodge will be blown into ruins and blood will flow like a river,” read the email.
The group is part of the Falun Gong spiritual movement, which is proscribed in China due to its opposition to the Chinese Communist Party, with the United States and other countries accusing Beijing of a brutal campaign of suppression to deprive its estimated 20 million adherents of their rights to freedom of religion and belief.
The government says the group is a dangerous cult.
Australian authorities confirmed only that they had dealt with an “alleged security incident” at Albanese’s home but that “nothing suspicious was located.”
Police said they evacuated Albanese to a safe location for several hours on Tuesday evening local time.
ABC News said there was no evidence the incident was in any way connected to the Chinese government, citing an anonymous Australian government source as saying a member of the local Chinese community opposed to Falun Gong could have been behind the incident.
The Queensland venue where Shen Yun’s tour was due to kick off on Wednesday evening was evacuated by police on Monday after an “unverified threat” linked to the group was made against the iconic Home of the Arts complex in Surfers Paradise, 45 miles southeast of Brisbane.
A search of the site by officers found no suspicious items, police said, but Experience Gold Coast said it had tightened security for the Shen Yun performances being staged at the venue through Sunday.
“We will continue to monitor the situation closely and adjust arrangements if required as the safety of our team and patrons is always our first priority,” a spokesperson said in a statement.
A similar bomb-hoax incident in February 2025 forced the evacuation of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., on the day Shen Yun was due to open a 12-date tour, starting at the Kennedy Center.
A spokesperson for the Kennedy Center told The Washington Post that the threat was targeted at Shen Yun performances.
In 2024, Chinese residents of Los Angeles John Chen and Lin Feng were sentenced to 20 months and 16 months in prison for working for the Chinese government to get Shen Yun’s tax exempt status in the United States revoked by paying bribes to an undercover agent posing as an IRS staffer.
In a wiretap transcript submitted by the Justice Department, Chen is quoted as stating the bribes were to facilitate China’s aim of “toppl[ing]” Falun Gong, while in another Chen and Feng discuss orders from a Chinese government official, including deleting the instructions to avoid detection as well as procedures to notify the official if their bribery scheme failed.
A DOJ news release at the time said the Chinese Communist Party designates Falun Gong as one of the “Five Poisons,” or one of the top five threats to its rule, with Falun Gong adherents routinely subjected to “repressive and punitive measures”, including imprisonment.
However, Shen Yun has reputational issues around alleged abusive practices and behavior by the group.
In November 2024, a lawsuit was launched alleging forced labor and trafficking, while dozens of performers described being badly treated by the group in interviews given to the New York Times.
Shun Yen denies any wrongdoing, alleging the lawsuit and complaints were part of an ongoing, politically driven smear campaign by the Chinese government.
Former South African president Nelson Mandela speaks to reporters outside of the White House in Washington on October 21, 1999. Mandela was famously released from prison in South Africa on February 11, 1990. Photo by Joel Rennich/UPI | License Photo
The most drastic option also appears the least likely.
Buttler, who signed a new two-year central contract last year, has been a mainstay of England’s white-ball teams for more than a decade. Could they really leave him out entirely for a World Cup semi-final?
That encounter may be at Mumbai’s Wankhede Stadium, where Buttler has made scores of 94 not out, 89 and 116 in the IPL.
Ben Duckett is the spare batter in England’s squad – another man struggling for form.
Duckett is averaging 18.88 across 12 matches this winter across all formats and was out for a first-ball duck in his most recent innings at the start of the month.
Leg-spinning all-rounder Rehan Ahmed would be a left-field replacement. That would be a massive call.
Perhaps Friday’s match against New Zealand, effectively a dead rubber for England given they are already through, is the perfect, pressure-free opportunity for Buttler to help make the hierarchy’s decision an easy one.
“Who is writing Jos Buttler off?,” said former England spinner Alex Hartley.
“If you are, get a grip. He is one of those players where it takes one shot crunched through the covers and he will be back.
“It would be a worry if England were not winning games. I have no doubt when push comes to shove Jos Buttler will be OK.”
The Great British Bake Off winner Nadiya Hussain, who rose to fame on the 2015 series, has spoken out about her change of career and experiences of working as a teaching assistant
Nadiya Hussain has spoken about her difficult career choice(Image: Getty)
Winner of the Great British Bake Off Nadiya Hussain has spoken out about the television industry and the difficult choice she made to leave her agent and her manager.
Nadiya, 41, who won the Bake Off in 2015, spoke about the industry just days after it was announced that she was leaving her teaching assistant job, as she continues this next phase of her career.
Speaking about the matter, she discussed the “overwhelming whiteness of TV and publishing” and admitted she was tired of working in what she described as a broken industry.
She told the Guardian: “It’s broken. This last year has been really important for me to realise that, really accept that, actually, I can’t fix a broken industry.”
Nadiya also talked about what 2025 was like for her, and how it gave the renowned baker an opportunity to think about the next decade of her life after admitting that she felt like she had “started to feel like a caricature of myself”.
She added: “It has been really enlightening at the same time. I’ve had the opportunity to sit back and look at how I see the next 10 years…It’s been scary, but I’ve also really enjoyed figuring out what that looks like for me.”
Last year Nadiya released a cookbook titled ‘Rooza’, one containing dishes inspired by important elements of the Islamic world and culture, including Eid and Ramadan. She also created another volume titled ‘Nadiya’s Quick Comforts’.
With her decision to take back control of her career has come new freedoms and new locations, with Nadiya announcing earlier this month that she was leaving her teaching assistant job.
However, in a post on Instagram, Nadiya said she was leaving the role because of the negative impact it was having on her health. Nadiya has a weakened immune system and lives with fibromyalgia, a chronic condition that causes musculoskeletal pain and fatigue, among other symptoms.
In the social media post, Nadiya explained why she had to leave a job she had been in for only three months: “I’ve always wanted to work with children in younger years as a teaching assistant and I applied for a few jobs, which in itself was difficult for lots or reasons.
“I applied and got a job as a TA (teaching assistant) at a primary school and I’ve got to say, apart from raising my own children, it was one of the best jobs I’ve ever done.
“I loved every second of waking up in the morning with a spring in my step for these beautiful children. I just loved every second of doing that job.
“But unfortunately doing a job like that as somebody with a weakened immune system it just played havoc with my health…. I was sick all the time and it got to the point where it was affecting my mental health and I just wasn’t performing, giving my best because I was always sick.”
She added: “But unfortunately with a weakened immune system working as a TA in a primary school was just proving impossible and it was one of the hardest decisions I had to make to step away for it.”
Feb. 25 (UPI) — The Supreme Court‘s ruling to limit President Donald Trump‘s use of emergency powers to impose tariffs is forcing the administration to look to different statutory authorities to carry out its trade policy.
On Friday, the Supreme Court ruled that the president could not use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to generate revenue through tariffs. While this caused Trump to seek another avenue to impose tariffs, landing on a global 15% rate through Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, his plans to use tariffs to negotiate trade deals have not changed.
The decision impacts a great deal of the tariffs Trump has enacted during his second term, Purba Mukerji, professor of economics at Connecticut College, told UPI. She said he has been using the IEEPA to give himself “flexibility” in trade negotiations since returning to the White House.
Trump expressed disappointment in the high court’s decision on Friday but Mukerji said it was expected by economists and is unlikely to disrupt the president’s broader economic policy. Tariffs on steel and aluminum, as well as those that target certain sectors, are likely to remain in place.
U.S. markets have not strongly reacted to the Supreme Court ruling in either direction. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by less than a point on Monday, only to rebound on Tuesday. The S&P 500 followed a similar path.
The yield on 10-year U.S. Treasury notes has reflected some uncertainty, though concerns about AI displacing workers, global tensions and broader trade concerns may be factors as well.
“For the business leaders who make decisions, for importers and exporters and foreign countries that are dealing with us in their trade negotiations, this is not a surprise,” Mukerji said. “So I don’t think there will be any long-lasting consequences of this particular Supreme Court ruling, except to put the whole trade negotiations and trade policy on much firmer footing.”
Consumers hoping to see prices come down are unlikely to see significant changes from the ruling either, Mukerji added.
“As far as consumer prices go, I am encouraged by the fact that we didn’t see the rise in consumer prices that was expected in all sectors coming out of tariffs,” she said. “I don’t expect that to be coming down in the future. I don’t think much will change on the ground.”
A study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York published earlier this month reports that 94% of Trump’s tariffs imposed last year were paid by U.S. entities and consumers during the first eight months of 2025.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported in December that it had collected $200 billion in tariff revenue. The largest portion of tariffs collected was on imports from China, a report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond said. The report is based on data from the U.S. Treasury Department and Census Bureau.
We Pay The Tariffs, a coalition of more than 800 small businesses, is circulating a petition to call for the federal government to refund businesses due to the tariffs being ruled unlawful.
“A legal victory is meaningless without actual relief for the businesses that paid these tariffs,” Dan Anthony, executive director of the organization, said in a statement. “The administration’s only responsible course of action now is to establish a fast, efficient and automatic refund process that returns tariff money to the businesses that paid it.”
It remains unclear what will happen to the revenue the court ruled has been unlawfully collected. The Supreme Court did not address refunds for tariffs paid.
Mukerji said reimbursing collected tariffs poses some practical challenges. She explained that while the United States maintains a database of who has paid what tariffs, it often shows a delivery company, like FedEx, as the entity that made the payment, not the importer who in reality incurred the costs.
“So you kind of have to reimburse FedEx, who then turns around and reimburses the importer,” she said. “That is a mess because then we depend on the account keeping, say by FedEx, so it becomes more complicated there.”
There is also a matter of fairness as some wholesalers pass the costs of tariffs on to retailers, who then pass them on to consumers, Mukerji said.
Following the court’s decision, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the Trump administration will look to Section 122, as well as Section 301 of the Trade Act and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 tariff authorities to pursue “virtually unchanged tariff revenue” this year.
These statutes notably do not require congressional approval to impose tariffs like the Supreme Court affirmed the IEEPA did.
Section 122 gives the president the authority to impose a maximum 15% tariff for up to 150 days. Tariffs imposed under this authority would remain in effect into July at the latest.
Section 301 of the Trade Act gives the president the authority to impose tariffs in response to unfair trade practices, theft of intellectual property and discriminatory policies by trade partners. An investigation by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative must be completed to determine if there is a violation and allow for the use of Section 301 authority.
Trump’s broad tariffs on China were issued in 2018 under the authority of Section 301.
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act allows the president to impose tariffs and other trade restrictions on imports if they are determined to threaten national security. This must be preceded by an investigation by the Commerce Department into the potential of a threat.
Trump used Section 232 to place tariffs on steel and aluminum during his first term.
While President Joe Biden peeled back on many of Trump’s policies when he came into office, he kept some trade policies like these largely intact and reinforced them through investigations.
For Section 301 tariffs, Biden allowed the required four-year review to continue throughout his term, ultimately raising tariffs on electric vehicles from China as well as some semiconductors, critical minerals and other sectors.
For Section 232 tariffs, Biden kept Trump’s tariff framework largely in place and continued to use the national security justification to keep tariffs as a point of negotiations.
“Biden actually made them stronger,” Mukerji said. “Most of them continued under Biden and they were extended and made even stronger. So these trade policies now have the strength of a solid foundation. These stand on the shoulders of investigations so they have this lasting power.”
The Supreme Court’s decision has caused some ongoing negotiations to shift or pause.
Earlier this week, a planned meeting with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Washington, D.C., was put on hold. The sides were planning to meet for three days to discuss an interim trade deal that would likely go into effect in April.
The European Union’s parliament canceled a vote to ratify a trade deal with the United States on Monday in response to the Supreme Court decision and Trump’s subsequent new tariffs.
“A deal is a deal,” the European Commission said in a statement on Saturday. “As the United States’ largest trading partner, the EU expects the U.S. to honor its commitments set out in the Joint Statement — just as the EU stands by its commitments.”
With the Supreme Court’s decision, the Trump administration and future administrations definitively have one less tool to use when imposing tariffs. The ruling does not mark an end to Trump’s tariff plans. It only clarifies his authority to impose tariffs. Meanwhile, the president is left to negotiate trade deals under greater scrutiny.
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., speaks during a press conference ahead of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday. GOP members invited guests from their state who had benefited from the Working Families Tax Cuts to attend the address. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
Days after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed forging a network of allied nations, including in the Middle East and Africa, to stand against what he called “radical” adversaries, the country’s president is on an official visit to key ally, Ethiopia.
It is not yet known which Arab and African countries will form part of Netanyahu’s hypothetical “hexagon of alliances”, which he said on Sunday will include Israel, India, Greece, Cyprus and others to stand against their enemies in the Middle East. Chief among those enemies is presumably Iran and its network of resistance groups from Hezbollah in Lebanon to the Houthis of Yemen.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Analysts doubt Israel could secure enough influence over nation-states to form a formal security pact.
However, the country is deepening its ongoing charm offensive in Africa, which it began during the genocide in Gaza, as its reputation suffered a decline on the continent, with the African Union (AU) releasing multiple statements condemning Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians.
In a rare visit, Israeli President Isaac Herzog arrived in Ethiopia on Tuesday. The last presidential trip to the East African country took place in 2018.
“The relationship between our peoples is woven deep into the pages of history and human tradition,” Herzog said in a statement upon his arrival. “At the heart of the story of both our nations lies a clear common thread – the ability to join hands, unite resources of spirit and substance, to innovate, develop, and grow for the benefit of all.”
Herzog, on Wednesday, met with Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed who said the two leaders talked about “ways to improve collaboration in areas of mutual interest,” without revealing further details.
But beneath the surface, observers say the visit also represents a battle for influence over Addis Ababa, which has received similar high-level delegations from Turkiye and Saudi Arabia in recent days.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu inspecting a guard of honour at the National Palace during his State visit to Ethiopia in 2016 [File: Tiksa Negeri/Reuters]
Shared ties and shared anger
Ethiopia and Israel are bound by several links, from shared histories of their people to shared scrutiny over recent political moves in the Horn of Africa that have angered several of the region’s influential nations.
Both countries maintain friendly ties largely due to the Beta Israel community, or Ethiopian Jews, who hail from northern Tigray and Amhara. Historically, Ethiopian Jews suffered religious persecution, and after Israel’s formation, it sought their emigration under its Law of Return policy. Between the late 1970s and mid-1990s, tens of thousands of Ethiopian Jews were covertly transported to Israel – during a time when several African countries, including Ethiopia, had cut off ties with Israel over the 1973 Yom Kippur War and its invasion of Egypt.On the cusp of a civil war in Ethiopia in 1991, Mossad, Israel’s spy agency, launched a daring operation that airlifted 14,000 Ethiopians over the course of just two days.
About 160,000 Ethiopian Jews now live in Israel. Many within the community have struggled to integrate and have complained of discrimination and racism. In 2019, tens of thousands of Ethiopian Jews flooded the streets in protest across Israeli cities after a 19-year-old of Ethiopian origin was shot dead by the police.
Ethiopia-Israel state relations have, meanwhile, remained steady. In 2016, when Netanyahu visited the country in his first prime ministerial visit – Addis Ababa became one of the first African countries to voice support for Israel’s long-sought observer status at the AU. Fierce opposition from South Africa, Algeria and other countries supporting Palestine delayed the process until 2021. Later, in 2023, the AU confirmed it had withdrawn the status.
Mashav, Israel’s aid agency, has, in the past decade, provided aid to Ethiopia in the form of agriculture and water cooperation projects, although Addis Ababa receives much more significant funding from wealthier partners like China. When Israel sponsored several African journalists on media trips to the country last year, Ethiopia was among the countries it invited journalists from.
More recently, both countries are bound by their support for Somaliland, which Somalia claims as part of its territory and which Israel sees as critical to its own national security, Hargeisa-based analyst Moustafa Ahmad told Al Jazeera.
In December, Israel recognised Somaliland’s statehood, becoming the first country to do so. Months before, there were unconfirmed talks about plans to move displaced Palestinians to Somaliland or to South Sudan, another key Israeli ally in the region. Analysts speculate that countries like South Sudan and the United Arab Emirates, another close friend of Israel, may also recognise Somaliland.
Israel’s focus on the Horn of Africa intensified after a late 2024 report from a United Nations expert panel, which found that the Somalia-based armed group, al-Shabab, was actively collaborating with Yemen’s Houthis. Where the Houthis were providing weapons and drone training, al-Shabab was, in return, granting access to a smuggling corridor stretching along the Somali coast and connecting to the Gulf of Aden, where Iranian weapons could be smuggled into Yemen.
The move to recognise Somaliland was therefore meant to disrupt that cooperation by stationing an Israeli naval base in the region, analysts note.
“It’s part of their calculations even if they haven’t said it publicly,” Ahmad said.
Several countries, as well as the AU, have pushed back on Israel’s recognition of Somaliland, calling it a violation of Somalia’s sovereignty. In Somaliland, however, many have celebrated the move.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan holds hands with Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud and Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, left, following a media conference in Ankara, on December 11, 2024 [File: Murat Kula/Presidential Press Office/Handout via Reuters]
Addis Ababa under pressure
While neither Israel nor Ethiopia has provided details of topics on the agenda during Herzog’s visit, Somaliland is likely at the top of the list.
Addis Ababa had in 2024 enraged its neighbours after it signed a controversial port deal with Hargeisa that would allow it access to the sea, reportedly in exchange for a future recognition of Somaliland. Although massive and rapidly industrialising, Ethiopia is landlocked, having lost its sea access after Eritrea seceded in 1993. Prime Minister Abiy has often said sea access is critical for his country.
The fall-out between Ethiopia and Somalia was so severe that analysts sounded the alarm over possible armed conflict between the two neighbours until Turkiye, a key development partner for Mogadishu, stepped in to smooth things over by pressuring Addis Ababa to coordinate with Mogadishu instead.
It is likely, analysts say, that Israel is now hoping to push Ethiopia further towards recognising Somaliland, which boasts a 850km (528-mile) coastline. In Hargeisa, many are disappointed after more countries failed to follow Israel’s steps, Ahmad said.
Addis Ababa, though, might not appreciate further pressure at the moment as it faces increasing regional isolation on several fronts.
One key reason is the controversial Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), which Egypt and Sudan say is blocking the water supply they need for irrigation.
A source of national pride for Ethiopians, the dam was funded almost entirely through citizens’ donations and government funds. Israeli engineers participated in the project, and Israel reportedly sold weapons to Ethiopia to protect the dam amid tensions with its neighbours, although the Israeli government denies this.
At the same time, Addis Ababa is also facing tensions with Eritrea, which has moved closer to Somalia and Egypt. Both countries have historically feuded, and recently, tensions have again risen over the 2020 Tigray War and Abiy’s repeated statements about his country needing access to the sea.
“Addis Ababa is cautious of making a decision that will cement its regional isolation at this time [because] it is clearly hedging among various actors seeking to influence the Horn of Africa and Red Sea region,” Ahmad said.
Pressure is also mounting on Addis Ababa from countries eager to keep the status quo.
On Sunday, Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Ethiopia and said in his speech: “I would like to emphasise that Israel’s recognition of Somaliland does not benefit Somaliland or the Horn of Africa.”
His statement drew a backlash from Hargeisa, which called it “unacceptable interference” aimed at wrecking relations between Somaliland and its partners.
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, which is embroiled in an ongoing rift with the United Arab Emirates over how to deal with the conflict in Yemen, also intervened in the fray in February. Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Waleed Elkhereiji was in Addis Ababa this week to discuss “regional peace”, just two weeks after Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud arrived in the city for talks with Abiy.
So far, it is unclear if Riyadh has recorded any success in influencing Addis Ababa.
How Israel will fare in that regard is also still unclear.
A MUMMY influencer lifted the lid on how much social media stars actually earn for their content.
On Tiktok, Charli Wooley documents her life with her hubby and young children, and also her incredible shopping hauls and skincare routine.
Sign up for the Showbiz newsletter
Thank you!
TikToker Charli Wooley poke about how much she earns on TikTokCredit: tiktok/@charli0191She went viral in 2024 after sharing a compilation of her husband scaring their sonCredit: tiktok/@charli0191The video got 22.2 million viewsCredit: tiktok/@charli0191
The mum-of-two has 89,000 followers on TikTok with a combined 9.8 million likes across her hundreds of videos.
In late 2024, Charli went viral thanks to her hilarious video showing a compilation of her husband scaring their oldest son.
The video has 2.9 million likes and racked up a whopping 22.2 million views.
She recently made a video speaking to the camera where she explained exactly how much she earned for going viral and explained she had joined TikTok’s Creator Fund, which pays content creators for their views.
To join the program TikTokers must be 18 or older, have a minimum of 10,000 followers, a minimum of 100,000 views within 30 days of the video upload and run an account that follows TikTok Community Guidelines.
“So, I had a video that got 22.2 million views and I earned £3,500 from it,” Charli explained but then went into detail about how the rate of pay is calculated.
She told how TikTok pays a ‘rate per minute (RPM)’, but that rate change depending what time of the month the video is viewed.
“When it gets to near the end of the month in the Creator Fund, the RPM seems to drop. So if you do a video from the first to the 15th, my RPMs are normally about 50p, but when it gets past the 15th, it drops,” Charli said.
“And I think I did this video just after the RPM was lower and I’m pretty sure my RPM was only 20p. So, if my RPM would have been 50p, it would have been so much more but I’m super grateful anyway for what I got.”
Charli continued by saying “I would definitely advise joining” the Creator Fund because “it’s ridiculous that you can get that much money from one video.”
According to the TikTok official website, the Creator Fund “gives TikTok’s best and brightest the opportunity to earn money with their creative talent.”
While it is not a grant or ad revenue program, the Creator Fund provides payment to qualified TikTokers based on a “variety of factors” across their content.
“We want all creators to have the opportunity to earn money doing what they love and turn their passion into a livelihood,” the website continues.
With no limit on the number of qualified TikTokers who can join the fund, payments may increase or decrease at different times throughout one’s run on the platform.
Some factors affecting the funds a qualified TikToker may earn include number of authentic views per video, the amount of engagement, and whether or not the work falls within the Community Guidelines.
Charli said she earned a little more than £3,000 for the TikTokCredit: tiktok/@charli0191
London, United Kingdom – Legal experts have documented almost 1,000 incidents in which pro-Palestine voices have been allegedly targeted in the United Kingdom, data that they say represents a “systematic effort” to repress the country’s solidarity movement.
The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) said on Wednesday that it has verified 964 cases of “anti-Palestinian repression” from January 2019 until August 2025, including students being investigated over their solidarity, activists being arrested, employees facing disciplinary procedures and artists having their events cancelled.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
The findings of the study, carried out in collaboration with researchers at Forensic Architecture, are a “sample indicative of a far wider and deeper pattern”, said the group comprising lawyers and legal officers.
The ELSC pitched the report as an Index of Repression, a database that is open to the public.
“We’re launching this database to show that repression of the Palestine solidarity movement in Britain is pervasive,” Amira Abdelhamid, ELSC’s director of research and monitoring, told Al Jazeera.
One documented case involves a University of Warwick student who was reported to police by their university for carrying a sign that drew parallels between Israel and Nazi Germany during a campus rally in November 2023.
(Al Jazeera)
The student was arrested for “racial aggravation against the Jewish community” and investigated by their university. But in January 2024, after the ELSC stepped in, the police dropped the student’s caution and deleted all associated records. The university confirmed in March that there would be no further disciplinary action.
ELSC said “Zionist advocacy” groups, journalists and media outlets were involved in 138 incidents – including UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), a pro-Israel organisation that it said played a part in 29 of the documented cases.
“The goal of this analysis is to denaturalise this politically produced process,” the group said. “This strategic targeting across sectors represents a kind of division of repressive labour. It aims to dismantle solidarity at every stage, from the formation of political consciousness in universities and schools, to its expression in culture, to its organisation in public spaces.”
Another incident involved a football club’s kit manager who was dismissed after posting his views about Israel’s conduct on social media.
The case of Dana Abuqamar, a University of Manchester student, is also analysed in the database. The Home Office revoked her visa after she told Sky News that, after 16 years of Israel’s blockade of Gaza, “We are both in fear (of) how Israel will retaliate … but also we are full of pride.”
She later clarified that her comments were not in support of the October 7 attacks into southern Israel, during which more than 1,000 people were killed. The UKLFI reported her to the police and her university, but in 2024, she won a human rights appeal.
“The main immediate goal of this anti-Palestinian repression is to depoliticise the movement, to make it seem as though it’s not a legitimate political and ethical struggle, but rather a security problem, a problem of so-called anti-Semitism or a breach of compliance,” ELSC’s Abdelhamid said.“I don’t think that has succeeded … two years on we still see people resisting the repression happening in Britain [and] speaking up and acting for Palestine and against the genocide.”
Since Israel’s onslaught on Gaza began in October 2023, tens of thousands of Britons have rallied in support of Palestine.
According to YouGov, one in three Britons have “no sympathy at all for the Israeli side in the conflict” after Israel killed more than 70,000 people in two years and decimated the Gaza Strip.
The government, led by Labour leader Keir Starmer, has long been accused of cracking down on pro-Palestine solidarity because of a wave of arrests during demonstrations and due to its proscription of Palestine Action as a “terror” organisation – a ruling recently deemed unlawful by the High Court.
In January, Human Rights Watch said that its research found a “disproportionate targeting of certain groups, including climate change activists and Palestine protesters, undermining the right to protest freely and without fear of harassment”.
As court documents tied to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein continue to surface, the scandal has become an international embarrassment, exposing how quickly powerful men can turn into reputational liabilities. That discomfort reached New Delhi, where Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates was expected to deliver the keynote address at the AI Impact Summit but ultimately did not attend amid criticism and apparent unease within the Modi government over his past meetings with Epstein. The spectacle was revealing. Public moral outrage travels swiftly when scandal threatens reputations and diplomatic optics. Yet that sensitivity to association sits uneasily beside a domestic reality in which sexual violence against women unfolds with brutal regularity, drawing neither comparable embarrassment nor consequence. The contrast is grotesque. A political culture capable of signalling discomfort towards a global scandal remains strikingly untroubled by the everyday brutality faced by women at home.
Under the Modi administration, the news cycle churns with reports of gang rapes like factory output — steady, relentless, and numbing in repetition. The rapes have become so common that they are reported like the weather. Heatwave deaths. Flash flood. Five-year-old abducted, raped, murdered. And like the weather, only God is responsible. Not the rapist. Not the court. Not the police. Definitely not the prime minister.
Between the time this piece was commissioned and published, a five-year-old was gang-raped in Meerut, a 26-year-old was gang-raped in Faridabad, and a 17-year-old was gang-raped in Odisha. A 42-year-old was gang-raped in Delhi’s suburbs. A 12-year-old girl was kidnapped and gang-raped in Bikaner. There were more gang rapes in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, and Kanpur. I could give you statistics, but numbers could never convey the larger, all-encompassing terror of living with predators. The threat of sexual violence is as constant as gravity. The cases are gruesome — intestines pulled out, rods inserted, tongues cut out, acid thrown, decapitation, strangulation, and burning. When I look at government data about rape — an average of 86 women are raped every day — it feels as grisly as stumbling upon a mass grave in Excel sheets.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his home minister, Amit Shah, ostensibly obsessed with restoring law and order at any cost, seem entirely unconcerned that India is the gang rape capital of the world on their watch.
The most alarming instance of this was when convicted rapist and Bharatiya Janata Party politician Kuldeep Singh Sengar, found guilty of raping a minor in 2017 and a native of Makhi village in Unnao district of Uttar Pradesh, was granted bail by a high court, raising the possibility of his reintegration into the very social and political landscape that had once enabled his impunity. A high court granted him bail in December. Thankfully, it was stayed by the Supreme Court, but only after infuriated women gathered in Delhi to protest. Sengar had raped a teenager, who was also gang-raped by his associates. Her father was murdered in police custody. A case was registered only after she threatened to burn herself in front of the chief minister’s residence. Her tragic story showcases how Indian men, like the Modi administration, remain remarkably unembarrassed about the state of affairs.
Sadly, this is not an aberration; it is the system speaking in its mother tongue.
Public memory matters because each new case unfolds against the residue of the ones we were told would change everything. In 2012, I read about the “Nirbhaya” gang rape three days after the incident, on my way from the airport. I had been deliberately avoiding the news until she ended up at Safdarjung Hospital, and my editor needed a health update from me. After I learned all the details of what men had done to this young woman, I thought the world would stand still. A threshold had been crossed. Something told me the world would start anew. There were protests, and people everywhere would know her name, and something like this would never happen again.
All of my naivety was drowned in a chorus of “Not All Men”, as the gang rape was turned into something viral to hang a hashtag on. The refrain did not defend innocence so much as redirect attention away from accountability and back towards male comfort.
It is impossible for me to hear of such cases and not think: What if it were me? My body. That rod. Those men. The suffering and mutilation of women’s bodies is so reliable that there is now a market to help ease our fear. Security apps. Pepper sprays and wearable panic alarms. Every time I write about this subject, I sit with the absolute inadequacy of the written word in the face of men who film the rapes, brag about them, and get rehabilitated nevertheless.
It wouldn’t be out of place to call this moment unprecedented, but it is beyond that. It is existential. Whether it is the United States or India, women are watching the same choreography of power protecting itself, as men of consequence close ranks and wait out the storm. The similarity lies not in scale or context, but in the recurring spectacle of institutions cushioning powerful men while survivors fight alone. For a while now, both countries — allegedly the biggest and the oldest democracies — have been on a trajectory of self-destruction, with men leading the way. Under Modi as well as Trump, rape has become an extension of politics. Women are violated no longer by men alone, but by courts, hospitals, and newsrooms, too. It is the age of monsters. It did not begin with Epstein, Gates, or Sengar, of course, but they are the symbols of it.
While the middle class was busy buying into the dream of upward mobility, careerism, and two bedrooms in a gated suburb, we let thugs cultivate a wholesale misogynist empire that runs on hate for women. I do not know what to do with the rage I feel. What do you do when you are constantly told that your body, your people, your gender are disposable? I don’t know.
What I do know is that the teenager who survived Sengar is still fighting for justice. I know that the survivors of Epstein’s sex trafficking network are fighting for justice, too. These women are fighting with heart and soul and sweat and muscle. I know that I have no right to be despondent while they stand tall, looking every inch the hero they are. I also know that nobody puts up a fight like that unless you love your sisters.
At this dark hour, it feels important to place on record that as the Modi administration recoils theatrically from the shadow of the Epstein scandal at the summit stage, the satire writes itself. A government that cannot, or will not, protect its women should be far more ashamed of what is ordinary than of what is scandalous.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
At more than 2,700 feet, “The Great Wall of Los Angeles” is one of the longest murals in the world and among the most important public artworks in the city. Created by artist Judy Baca between 1974 and 1984, the mural is a groundbreaking depiction of Southern California history from the viewpoint of women and minorities and a potent national symbol at the intersection of art and activism.
Baca’s leadership of the collaborative project made her a legend in the art world. She is the co-founder and artistic director of Social and Public Art Resource Center, or SPARC, a community mural nonprofit and has been hailed as one of the most influential figures of L.A.’s Chicano muralism. “The Great Wall” is on the National Register of Historic Places, and Baca is a National Medal of Arts recipient.
But now Baca, 79, has come under criticism from some of those who have worked most closely with her in recent years.
In interviews, 10 former SPARC employees — including two managers — accuse Baca of using her nonprofit to benefit her private, for-profit art practice, Judy Baca Inc. They allege Baca personally benefited from a $5-million Andrew W. Mellon Foundation grant to expand “The Great Wall,” sold the project’s archives to the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art at a large profit to herself, and has blurred the line between her nonprofit and for-profit endeavors.
Baca and SPARC’s board chair, Zojeila Flores, vigorously deny any impropriety or misuse of funds. In an interview, they said grant funds were used appropriately and that Baca maintains a mutually beneficial profit-sharing agreement with SPARC.
Baca ascribes the criticism to disgruntled former employees and hopes SPARC can finish its work on the mural “without more of this sort of rage and hostility and anger and hate.” It’s on schedule to be completed by 2028, she said, showing The Times sections of the mural in progress at a rented space at Bergamot Station Arts Center, an acclaimed, high-end gallery in Santa Monica.
Artist Judy Baca talks to the media after starting to paint a new section of “The Great Wall of Los Angeles” as part of a LACMA exhibition on Oct. 26, 2023.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
Baca supporters believe she is a visionary who has used the reputation she earned with “The Great Wall” to continue lifting underserved communities.
“I don’t know how to better serve a community than to represent them well,” said Kelly Watts, who, as a teen in the 1980s, participated in painting “The Great Wall” as a student artist. Watts now lives in Tennessee and said she isn’t familiar with the inner workings of SPARC but that what matters to her is Baca’s guidance over the years. “Judy has been a mentor of mine and has always been a really positive influence on me and my growth as an artist.”
The $5-million grant
At the root of the allegations is Baca’s 2017 announcement that she intended to expand “The Great Wall” to include hundreds of feet of new imagery, representing history from the 1960s up to the present day. The mural, which is in a floodwater channel that runs through the leafy Valley Glen neighborhood in the San Fernando Valley, originally concluded with depictions of two Olympic gold medalists, track star Wilma Rudolph and Native American runner Billy Mills. Baca also sought to add interpretive stations, illuminate the mural at night and build a pedestrian bridge over the Tujunga Wash flood control channel to provide a better view of the work.
Judy Baca painting “The Great Wall of Los Angeles” in 1983.
(SPARC Archives / SPARCinLA.org)
Baca’s goals were boosted in 2021 when the Mellon Foundation — one of the largest and most important nonprofit funders of art projects in the nation — supported “The Great Wall” plans with a $5-million grant to be paid over three years, ending in 2024. The grant was distributed through Mellon’s newly formed $250-million Monuments Project “to express, elevate, and preserve the stories of those who have often been denied historical recognition.” (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, the Emmett Till Interpretive Center in Mississippi and other noted institutions also received separate grants.)
Among those who question Baca’s stewardship of the grant are Pete Galindo, a former director of the Great Wall of Los Angeles Institute, which SPARC formed to oversee the mural expansion, and Carmen Garcia, who served as director of SPARC for six months ending in early 2023. Both alleged Baca required SPARC employees to also do work for Judy Baca Inc., Baca’s private business for her art.
Garcia resigned after repeatedly raising concerns about alleged misappropriation of Mellon grant funds, which Baca denied, and calling for the board to investigate Baca. She said she was “forcefully” led out of the building.
Galindo was fired in February 2022 after less than a year in his role. He alleges Baca terminated him in retaliation for questions he raised about how she was using the grant and objecting to her work assignments. Before his Great Wall Institute role, Galindo said he had known Baca for nearly 30 years, beginning as a UCLA student in 1996 and later working in various roles on a variety of SPARC initiatives, including as a community public art director.
According to documents reviewed by The Times, including Galindo’s offer letter and a spreadsheet with Mellon grant line items, Galindo’s $75,000 salary was paid through SPARC and the grant, which stipulates the money be used “to support the preservation, activation, and expansion of one of the country’s largest monuments to interracial harmony through civic engagement and muralist training.” But Galindo alleged Baca assigned him work outside SPARC and the Great Wall: to help sell her personal artwork, aid in fixing a termite infestation in her archives and help to manage the production of a mural titled “La Memoria de la Tierra: UCLA,” which was not related to “The Great Wall.”
The Times reviewed a series of text messages between Galindo and Baca in which Baca asked Galindo to help with jobs outside his Great Wall duties, including dealing with termites. The messages included a question to Baca from Galindo confirming she’d like the team to “print the UCLA mural at scale for review.” Baca replies that she will call momentarily. Another group chat between Galindo and two other SPARC employees is about meeting to move Baca’s belongings out of her office at UCLA in 2021.
Baca denied Galindo’s allegations, including that she asked Galindo to help manage the UCLA mural — a task outside of the Mellon grant’s purview. She said the project was brought to her personally and she referred the work to SPARC. The mural was completed on-site through a research and teaching facility known as the Digital/Mural Lab, she said. SPARC received money for the project, Baca wrote in a statement, although Baca got paid a commission — an “established practice” at SPARC for paying artists for their work.
In an interview, SPARC board chair Flores declined to say how much Baca earned from that project or Baca’s specific commission rate. However, on a hypothetical $200,000 project she said about $58,000 could go to SPARC for costs and fees. The remaining $142,000 could go to other vendors and Baca.
For decades, Baca brought in dozens of commissions to SPARC without being paid, SPARC said in a statement. The board voted to change that in recent years with a so-called “fiscal sponsorship arrangement,” which allows paid projects to piggyback on SPARC’s tax-exempt status. In this case, Baca earns a commission and SPARC receives funds for employee work on projects.
SPARC’S website currently lists nine board members. Baca and Flores are included, as is Mercedes Gertz, who rents an art studio in SPARC’s building. Baca’s cousin, Anthony Salcido, serves as the board’s finance chair. Bookkeeper Gloria Thompson is also Baca’s cousin.
“Mr. Salcido began working with SPARC only after consultation with legal counsel and Board approval, with Judy recused from the vote,” Flores wrote in an email. “Ms. Thompson began with SPARC as a volunteer and later became bookkeeper following formal consultation with legal.”
In 2022, after he was fired from SPARC, Galindo wrote a letter to Emil J. Kang, then the Mellon Foundation’s program director for arts and culture, to allege that Baca had misused the Mellon grant money by asking him to do work for her personal business.
“Throughout my time as the Great Wall of Los Angeles Institute Director, she focused my work on her personal exhibitions, sale of artworks, training her personal assistant, overseeing commissions, press and documentation,” Galindo wrote in the letter, concluding, “While Judy’s contribution to the field over the years cannot be denied, her treatment of employees, unequal pay scales and overall exploitation of staff and artists is anathema to the values and ideals of social justice movements and the monuments they inspire.”
Baca said she could not comment on personnel matters, but in a statement, SPARC said, “We strive to be fair and professional in all our personnel matters.”
Judy Baca poses in front of her artwork “La Salsera” at LA Plaza de Cultura y Artes in downtown Los Angeles in 2024.
(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)
Galindo said he did not receive a reply to his letter from Kang or the Mellon Foundation.
The Mellon Foundation issued a statement to The Times, confirming it had received Galindo’s letter, which “was handled in accordance with Mellon policy on third party complaints about our grantees.” The foundation added that it “does not comment on issues pertaining to internal matters of its grantees.” SPARC’s grant status never changed.
Garcia, who was hired as SPARC’s executive director after Galindo left the organization, remembered dealing with heightened inquiries from Mellon representatives, including culture program director Kang. Once, she said, the foundation asked SPARC for additional information on how grant money was being spent.
SPARC said in its response to The Times that such questions from funders were routine.
“Mellon consistently reviews all of its grantees’ performance, as is standard for nonprofit funders,” SPARC said.
Baca told The Times that she was unaware that Mellon had raised questions about how the grant was being used. However, in a text exchanged with Garcia in 2023 and reviewed by The Times, she indicated she had spoken to Kang at a National Medal of Arts event in Washington, D.C.
“They will ask us to improve some things but generally we had a long discussion and lots of laughs about me ‘hating the interrogation by a bunch of white me[n],’” Baca wrote. “He got a laugh out of it and knew they were a pain in the a—.”
When asked about the text she sent to Garcia, Baca said, “It was an informal conversation at a White House reception. We didn’t talk about the specifics of the grant itself. The conversation really was about the review process.”
Who should profit from ‘The Great Wall’?
Work on “The Great Wall of Los Angeles” began in 1974 and was completed over five summers by Baca with the help of many now well-known artists including Isabel Castro, Ulysses Jenkins, Judithe Hernández, Patssi Valdez, Margaret Garcia, Christina Schlesinger and Judy Chicago. More than 400 young people and their families — many from underserved neighborhoods — also contributed to the project, including 80 youths recruited from the juvenile justice system.
The collective effort made “The Great Wall” a work of social justice, and in 1976 led to the founding of Baca’s nonprofit, SPARC, with its stated mission of producing, preserving and promoting, “activist and socially relevant artwork,” and fostering “artistic collaborations that empower communities who face marginalization or discrimination.”
“The Great Wall of Los Angeles” on April 9, 2025.
(Carlin Stiehl / For The Times)
Some former SPARC employees feel that Baca has failed to honor the community that toiled to create “The Great Wall.” They have expressed concern that Baca has benefited unfairly from the project, and, in particular, the sale of work related to it.
Flores disagrees, writing, “For 50 years, SPARC has used art to empower communities facing marginalization and/or discrimination. This currently includes immigrant populations traumatized by ICE. Further, SPARC ensures that working artists can remain in Venice, a neighborhood with deep artistic and cultural roots.”
When “The Great Wall” was originally copyrighted in 1983, authorship of the work was attributed to both “Judith F. Baca” and the “Social Public Art Resource Center.” In 2011, however, after a restoration effort led by SPARC in which the mural was completely painted over, the project was again copyrighted, this time solely under Baca’s name. Former employees question the ethics of Baca’s profiting off a celebrated community effort, but Flores said Baca has always retained ownership of her work and that, “Owning a copyright is not the same as owning an artwork itself.” Baca, Flores said, evenly splits copyright licensing fees with SPARC.
Baca sold “The Great Wall” archives to the Lucas Museum in 2021. The sale included more than 350 objects and ephemera, including concept drawings, site plans, sketches and correspondence with community leaders, scholars, historians and collaborators.
A Lucas Museum representative declined to comment on how much the museum paid for the archive or whether or not the acquisition was made from Baca or SPARC.
Galindo said he was told by former SPARC executive director Carlos Rogel that it sold for $1.5 million. Rogel declined a request for comment. Another source close to SPARC, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation, also said the sale was for $1.5 million.
Baca and Flores declined to say what the archives sold for. In an emailed response, Flores wrote that Baca was the owner of “The Great Wall” archive and was not paid by SPARC to produce that work.
“Nonetheless, following the sale, and although Judy was not required to do so, she generously donated $521,000 to SPARC,” Flores wrote.
Galindo and other former employees also expressed concern about Baca’s rising salary and believe it is out of proportion with SPARC’s mission of uplifting and aiding underserved communities and youth. In the two years prior to receiving the Mellon grant, Baca made $42,916 and $50,000, respectively. The year after SPARC received the grant, Baca’s salary rose to $215,000. In 2023, she made $236,149, and the following year, $211,004. The increase in Baca’s salary is discussed in an internal email and executive board meeting minutes reviewed by The Times, which state that SPARC’s board voted to set Baca’s annual compensation to be commensurate with what Baca was paid before she retired as a UCLA professor and that the additional money should come from the Mellon grant. Records of her 2025 and 2026 salaries were not currently available.
“The Great Wall of Los Angeles” depicts the history of California through the 1950s. An expansion to be completed in 2028 will add scenes from the 1960s to 1990s.
(Carlin Stiehl/For The Times)
SPARC said in a statement that Baca’s salary “is lower than the market rate for similar non-profit CEOs and lower than the market value commissioning rate for artist Judy Baca who is the author of The Great Wall Mural.”
Ongoing work on “The Great Wall” is currently done by a variety of people. For the new panels, which begin with the civil rights era of the 1960s, research is done by Baca and her team from the Great Wall Institute (there is currently no institute director, according to SPARC’s website). From there, Baca creates rough drawings, and drafts are made by artists from SPARC’s Digital/Mural Lab. Baca suggests edits and gives directions, and later she will add her own personal touches.
Eventually, colorations are submitted by various artists, and Baca does one final hand coloration of the entire piece. During The Times’ visit to see the mural expansion in progress, two artists were painting on sketches that had been fine-tuned by Baca and printed onto giant panels. These panels will eventually be attached to the wall of the flood water channel where “The Great Wall” resides, Flores said.
Former SPARC digital mural artist Toria Maldonado alleged it was not always clear if the work they were doing was for SPARC or for Judy Baca Inc. They were asked on occasion to work on assignments that appeared to be for the benefit of the latter, Maldonado said.
Maldonado said they and two other SPARC employees once redrew the 1960s segment of “The Great Wall” for a private collector. Baca, Maldonado said, “was selling a print, and wanted to refine it, and had us do that assignment.” Maldonado shared a checklist with The Times featuring notes about what work needed to be done on the segment, including shading Malcolm X’s hair.
In an email, Flores called Maldonado’s allegations, “factually inaccurate” and “misleading.”
“Judy was the owner of the segment referenced. It was hand-colored by Judy and assistants whom Judy paid personally, and this work was done in her personal studio,” Flores wrote. Baca’s studio is a Frank Gehry-designed space at her Venice home.
Maldonado said that they had never been to Baca’s personal studio and that their salary was always paid through SPARC.
From May through August 2023, segments of “The Great Wall” were exhibited at Jeffrey Deitch Gallery in L.A. Baca didn’t sell any works during that show, Flores wrote in an email, but in 2025, “a coloration by Judy’s hand of a segment presented in that show was sold. This work was created in Judy’s private studio and owned by her.” Baca declined to disclose how much the segment sold for. SPARC began showing more of “The Great Wall” expansion in February at Jeffrey Deitch Gallery. The original panels will not be for sale, but “if a work of Judy’s is sold at the show, she receives the proceeds as the owner of the work,” Flores wrote.
The room where art happens
Galindo and Garcia also alleged that SPARC inappropriately leases its premises to board member Gertz and others.
Since 1977, SPARC has been housed in a former Venice police station and jail, a 1920s Art Deco building owned by the city of Los Angeles. In 2000, the city signed a lease allowing SPARC to use the building for free until 2055. That agreement stipulates the property be used for “production, exhibition, promotion and distribution of and education about public art on a nonprofit basis.” SPARC can sublease portions of its building to those engaged in similar work with a city official’s approval. It must submit annual financial reports to the city with earnings from such deals.
The Times reviewed Instagram posts made by Gertz touting a 2023 exhibition of her personal art at SPARC, another in 2024 advertising a holiday sale, as well as one that shows her working in her studio inside the building. SPARC said Gertz pays market rate for her studio but declined to specify how much that is, only that it is, “equivalent to the rent paid by all the other artists who sublet space in the building.”
Judy Baca outside her Venice nonprofit, the Social and Public Art Resource Center, better known as SPARC, in 2021.
(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)
According to documents obtained through a California Public Records Act request, the city only has one sublease on file for SPARC from 1991. When asked if the city had approved SPARC’s deal with Gertz, Amy Benson, the director of the city’s real estate services division, wrote in an email that she had no further information to provide.
Flores wrote in an email that she was unable to speak to the specifics of a question about whether or not SPARC submits annual financial reports, inclusive of its subleasing income, to the city but noted, “we will follow up to make sure that the City has the documents you mention.” According to the latest available tax filings, SPARC made $64,991 in “rental property income” in 2024 and $57,590 in 2023.
Asked if Gertz’s use of SPARC for her personal, for-profit art practice, violates SPARC’s understanding of the lease, Flores wrote, “Our understanding is that our lease allows any use of the premises that is reasonably consistent with our nonprofit mission… Ms. Gertz uses her studio to weave textiles and also to lead art workshops for immigrants in the community, an activity that we think is entirely in keeping with our mission.”
Baca has also sold her personal art for profit at SPARC. When Baca’s art is for sale she “is treated like all other artists” and receives 60% of profits, the nonprofit said in a statement.
“I’m certain there are hundreds of artists in Los Angeles making socially engaged work who would benefit from a solo exhibition at SPARC,” Galindo wrote in an email.
