camera

Former Rep. Katie Porter, the 2026 gubernatorial candidate who has a narrow edge in the polls, raised eyebrows Tuesday when footage emerged of her apparently ending a television interview after becoming irritated by a reporter’s questions.

The footage shows CBS Sacramento reporter Julie Watts asking Porter, a Democrat, what she would say to the nearly 6.1 million Californians who voted for President Trump in 2024, and the UC Irvine law professor responding that she didn’t need their support if she competed against a Republican in the November 2026 run-off election to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom.

After Porter highlighted her experience winning a closely divided Orange County congressional district, she grew palpably irritated by Watts’ follow-up questions about her dismissiveness about needing support from voters who supported Trump.

“I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative. What is your question?” Porter said.

Watts responded that she had asked every other candidate similar questions in relation to Proposition 50, the redistricting ballot measure that Newsom and other California Democrats put on the ballot in a special election in November.

Porter said she would seek every vote she could win, but then grew testy over follow-up questions.

“I don’t want to keep doing this. I’m going to call it,” Porter said, saying she objected to multiple follow-up questions. “I want to have a pleasant, positive conversation. … And if every question you’re going to make up a follow-up question, then we’re never going to get there.”

She later said, “I don’t want this all on camera.”

Porter, a protege of Mass. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, won election to Congress in 2018 and gained attention for grilling executives and her use of a white board to explain complex policies. The 51-year-old unsuccessfully ran for U.S. Senate in 2024 and returned to teaching law at UC Irvine.

On Tuesday night, Porter’s campaign said that the interview continued for an additional 20 minutes after the heated exchange but did not offer further comment.

The former congresswoman’s Democratic rivals in the 2026 gubernatorial race seized on her comments, and Democratic strategists not associated with any candidate in the race also cringed.

“When you’re governor, you’re governor of everyone, not just the people in your party. It’s a bad look to say you don’t want or need votes from certain Californians, even those you really disagree with,” said Elizabeth Ashford, who served as a strategist for Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger as well as former Vice President Kamala Harris when she was the attorney general of California.

“But, also, even good candidates have bad nights,” Ashford added. “This was a miss for Katie, but not every interview is going to go great.”

GOOGLE has always excelled when it comes to smartphone cameras – but the latest effort might have gone too far.

When I tried out the new Google Pixel 10 Pro XL’s star feature I gasped and said “Good God”.

6

6

I showed friends some of the results and they were stunned – if a little disturbed – by what the device’s mega zoom was capable of.

My colleague Sean Keach has already tried the smaller Pixel 10 Pro and has given his verdict on the identical camera features on there too.

But is it all worth it?

As The Sun’s main Android smartphone reviewer I’ve been putting the Pixel 10 Pro XL through its paces and here’s what I found…

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Look and feel

Google has stuck to a pretty consistent, solid look on the Pixel 10 Pro XL.

As ever with annual upgrades, you may even struggle to tell the difference between last year’s Pixel 9 Pro XL which I also reviewed.

I love the mat glass back and the shiny G logo, it just gives off such a confident premium vibe.

The camera bar is pretty much the same as last year too and I’m still undecided about the bulkiness of it, even though it’s quite tidy and neat.

But given the sorts of photos it takes, all that kit has to be packed in somewhere.

The display has had a noticeable upgrade this year, which is brighter and bursting with crisp detail too.

However, the Pixel 10 Pro XL hasn’t been taking a techy dose of Ozempic like Samsung and iPhone this year with thinner models – it weighs 232g, up a bit on last year.

I absolutely adore the new colours this year too, with Moonstone (the one I’m reviewing) Jade, Porcelain and Obsidian.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Performance and features

Google continues to use its own Tensor chip in Pixel smartphones and this year’s Tensor G5 kit is said to be about 35 per cent faster.

It certainly operates smoothly and without any hiccups in my testing – but this chip isn’t as powerful as the Snapdragon chip found in most other top end smartphones around.

The handset runs on Android 16, the latest version of the operating system and it’s my absolute favourite around – which should be a given seeing as Google owns Android.

A lot of the features are centred on AI once again and most are photography based, which I’ll go into later.

But there are some other tools such as Voice Translate, which translates calls in real-time and sounds like each speaker’s own voice.

Having tried it with my partner in French, it was somewhat eerie to hear.

And it’s all done on device, so no sensitive call conversations are sent off to the cloud.

Google is also among the best for offering quick and fast Android upgrades for years to come, with a commitment to seven operating system versions and seven years of security upgrades.

Who offers free updates longest?

The longer you receive updates, the longer you can safely continue using your smartphone – with the latest features thrown in too for free.

Samsung
Samsung offers at least seven generations of OS updates and seven years of security updates on most of its smartphones, even its latest cheaper FE model.

OnePlus
At the launch of the OnePlus 13, OnePlus committed to at least four years of Android updates and five years of security updates.

Xiaomi
Xiaomi offers four years off Android updates and five years security updates.

Google
For the Pixel 10 series, Google said that devices would receive at least seven years of support.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Battery

You can easily get a good day’s worth of use out of the Google Pixel 10 Pro XL with a good mix of browsing, messaging and Netflix as I tend to test it on.

But it’s not the best battery around – I got more out of the Galaxy S25 Ultra.

There is fast charging though, that’ll get you from zero to full in about an hour and a half with a compatible plug charger.

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Camera

The camera on the Google Pixel 10 Pro XL is where things get really juicy.

You have a treasure trove of powerful lenses paired up with AI power to enhance everything.

There’s a 50-megapixel main camera, 48-megapixel ultrawide and 48-megapixel 5x telephoto, as well as a 42-megapixel selfie snapper.

The photos I get on a Pixel are always super impressive with incredible detail and popping with vibrant colour.

It exudes beauty inside and out, and makes taking stunning photos effortless

This year’s shocker is the Pro Res Zoom which can get extremely detailed shots from a remarkable distance, seeing things my naked eye cannot.

It can go up to an eye-watering 100x.

Anything above 30x onward uses an AI model on the phone to recreate bits lost from digital zoom, so it does raise questions about how real the results are.

Whatever way you look at it, the images are highly convincing, as you’ll see from the snaps I took from the same position below with no zoom, a 10x zoom, a 50x zoom and a 100x zoom.

One thing to note: when using the zoom faces are automatically blurred.

6

6

6

6

Google Pixel 10 Pro XL: Price

One bit of good news about the price is it hasn’t increased from last year’s models.

So the Pixel 10 Pro XL starts at £1,199.

If that’s a bit steep for you, you might want to consider the Pixel 10 Pro instead which has much of the same in a smaller physical form from £999 instead.

There’s also a freebie worth £190 included with all the Pro models.

You get access to Gemini Pro for a whole year, which is Google’s more powerful and fast AI system, capable of extra skills such as Veo 3 Fast for text-to-video generation.

All prices in this article were correct at the time of writing, but may have since changed.

Always do your own research before making any purchase.

COPS have released CCTV footage as part of an urgent hunt to help find a missing 18-year-old girl.

Concerns are growing for Lily Higgins, who was last seen leaving her home in Leicester, Leicestershire, yesterday afternoon.

2

2

Video taken from her doorbell camera shows the teenager leaving her address in Torridon Close at around 2.30pm.

She was reported missing by her concerned family just before 8pm.

Drones have been deployed in the area as officers urgently search for the missing teen.

The youngster is described as being 5ft 2in, of a slim build with long blonde hair.

She was last seen wearing a black puffer coat, black jogging bottoms, a checked scarf and black trainers.

Leicestershire Police confirmed specialist teams were hunting for Lily.

The force said: “Police have released an image take from the home doorbell camera that shows Lily leaving the home address.

“A specialist search team are currently out looking for Lily.

“The police drone has also been used to assist with searching.

“Anyone who has seen her or has information that could assist in the police search, call 101, quoting incident number 621 of 17 September.”

More to follow… For the latest news on this story keep checking back at The Sun Online

Thesun.co.uk is your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see video.

Like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/thesun and follow us from our main Twitter account at @TheSun.

This fourth “The Conjuring” movie claims to be “Last Rites” and let’s hope that’s a promise.

While it’s highly likely the wildly successful Conjuring Cinematic Universe will itself continue — whether via scary nun, creepy doll or some other cursed object — the story of Ed and Lorraine Warren has been thoroughly wrung dry at this point and there’s no juice left to squeeze, as demonstrated in the dirge that is this final movie.

Credit where it’s due: The horror franchise has turned in some spectacularly scary and entertaining entries, anchored by performances from Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga as the married paranormal investigators the Warrens, based on an infamous real-life couple. Thanks to their presence, these films have been the best of the Conjuring series, exploring themes of faith and seeing as believing when it comes to both God and the Devil. These films have also offered portrayals of the Warrens that skirt any of their personal controversies, presenting them as blissfully married, heroic figures. Onscreen text might indicate that they were polarizing figures, but the films itself never engage with the scandals.

The first two films, directed by James Wan, ingeniously engaged with many variations on the idea of vision: physical, psychic and through a camera’s lens. Bravura cinematography aligned the audience point of view with Lorraine’s terrifying otherworldly dreams of hauntings, possessions and demonic presence. Michael Chaves, who directed the spinoff “The Nun II” and “The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It,” has mostly upheld these requirements, though his approach is more bombastic than Wan’s elegant style.

Chaves is once again behind the camera for “The Conjuring: Last Rites,” with a script by Ian B. Goldberg, Richard Naing and David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick that promises to deliver a final Warren case that devastated the family and ended their careers on a dark note. Instead, “Last Rites,” is merely a sluggishly routine send-off for the Warren family.

If you’ve seen a “Conjuring” movie, you’ll know what to expect and “Last Rites” doesn’t break with formula. While the film starts in 1964 with the harrowing birth of the Warren’s beloved daughter Judy, the plot largely takes place in 1986, an annus horribilis for the misbegotten Smurl family from West Pittstown, Penn., haunted by an antique mirror adorned with three carved baby heads, picked up from a swap meet. After a series of unfortunate eventsand increasingly violent visitations, a media frenzy surrounds them and the Warrens turn up to rid the house of creepy crawlies.

This time there’s the added complication of wedding planning: Judy (Mia Tomlinson) is about to get married, but she just can’t shake those pesky psychic flashes she inherited from her mother. Judy is the one who ventures to the Smurl household first. Then her parents, who had been hoping to hang up their ghost-hunting spurs, reluctantly join her for one last ride. Ax-swinging ghouls, terrifying baby dolls and demonic possessions ensue.

In “Last Rites,” the thematic metaphor for seeing is the mirror itself, suggesting that we need to look at the darkest, most terrifying parts of ourselves and not shut them out. Lorraine has tried to protect her girl from the life she has led, facing down the most terrifying demons, ghosts and spooks, but she can’t stop Judy’s destiny and the only way out is to not look away.

“Last Rites” extends the concept of a new generation by incorporating Judy’s fiancé, Tony (Ben Hardy), as a fresh member of the family business. His function in the story is a bit awkward and random, but required for the Warren plotline to end on a high note (that opening bit about the family devastation never seems to come to pass).

The heart of these movies has always been Wilson and Farmiga, and without them, the “Conjuring” movies wouldn’t be worth it. With this fourth movie, the Warren lore has been so thoroughly picked over, the tropes and rhythms now so ingrained, the jump scares end up feeling routine at best. Enduring the dour drudgery of “Last Rites,” it’s never been clearer that it’s time to give up the ghost.

Katie Walsh is a Tribune News Service film critic.

Picture this: A gaggle of 21-year-olds squeeze into a booth, pull the curtain and smile for the camera. After a series of mysterious analog rumblings, the booth expels a tiny strip of prints. The posers crowd in to savor the tiny film prints — and raise their cameras to snap digital images of them.

While boomers blink in puzzlement, legions of digital natives have embraced the old-school ritual and machinery of the photo booth — and the people at San Francisco-based Photomatica are among those building empires on that enthusiasm. Their latest venture: a Photo Booth Museum in Silver Lake, which opens Thursday.

For anyone who grew up with digital photography, a photo booth is a sort of visual adventure — a selfie with “analog magic.” And at $6.50 to $8.50 for a strip of four photos, it’s more affordable than plenty of other entertainment options. Photomatica, one of several companies riding the photo booth wave, has been restoring and operating these contraptions since 2010. This is the company’s second “museum.”

At the new L.A. site at 3827 W. Sunset Blvd. (near Hyperion Avenue), the company has gathered four restored analog photo booths — two of which date to the 1950s — and one digital booth. The 1,350-square-foot space is designed to look “as if you walked into a Wes Anderson movie set,” said spokeswoman Kelsey Schmidt.

The machines are retrofitted to accept credit cards and Apple Pay, but otherwise the technology is original on the old machines — which means no retakes and a 3-to-5-minute wait for image processing. The film-based booths print black-and-white images only; the digital booth offers a choice of color or black and white.

Is this at all like a traditional museum experience? No. It’s a for-profit venture. Though visitors might learn a little about photography history, the core activity is making and celebrating selfies. So far, Schmidt said, the booths have been especially popular with people under 25, especially female visitors.

A birthday group gathers for a snapshot in the Photo Booth Museum, San Francisco.

(Christopher Reynolds / Los Angeles Times)

Photomatica rents out and operates about 250 booths (including bars, restaurants, hotels, music venues and special events) nationwide. The company hatched the museum idea after drawing immediate crowds with a booth in the Photoworks film lab on Market Street in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood.

On its Thursday opening night, the L.A. Photo Booth Museum will operate from 6 to 10 p.m., offering up a limited number of free photo sessions and key chains. Otherwise, daily hours will be 1 to 9 p.m.

LOVE Island fans are convinced the Casa Amor boys told Meg about Dejon’s behaviour in unaired scenes.

Despite a couple of wobbles following the arrival of bombshells Malisha and Billykiss, Meg believed Dejon was loyal to her.

4

4

However, seeds doubting his intentions seemed to have been sown in Meg’s mind during a villa game shortly before Casa Amor when Billykiss brought up Dejon’s unwillingness to close things off with her.

Though Meg initially said there was no need to for them to do that and the other girls were just jealous, days later she was reduced to tears thinking about Dejon’s behaviour.

The dramatic emotional switch appeared to come out of the blue as she poured her heart out to Helena.

Now viewers think the new boys have told her how Dejon has really been acting, having seen some of the show before taking part themselves.

One person wrote in a fan forum: “It was a bit odd that it took casa for Meg to finally wake up and realize that Dejon has been playing with her since day 1? Like a lot of the girls warned her. I genuinely believe that the producers or the casa boys let her in on some info. And also, if Helena knew why didn’t she tell her? Lol.”

Another said: “The casa boys definitely got into her head. Ty was telling her that Dejon never tells her the full story or something like that and I’ll bet others have said things.”

A third wrote: “Probably some of the Casa boys said stuff to her about what’s been shown and people’s opinions of him on the outside.”

A fourth said: “I think she’s been told some stuff but she won’t stick to her opinion.”

Meg chose to couple up with Dejon at the very start of the series and they’ve been together ever since.

Though very flirtatious, he has remained loyal to “his Meg,” claiming the “tests” have only made them stronger as a couple.

Though some viewers feel Dejon’s game plan is to stick with Meg so he can coast to the £50k prize.

And Meg is also now doubting his intentions, telling Helena: “I just feel really upset today. I don’t know why.

“I was just talking about things with Em, and I don’t know, we just, like, certain things with me and D, like, it actually makes me realise he really doesn’t mean what he says sometimes.”

In Casa Amor, Dejon admitted he had a spark with new girl Andrada, telling her: “And I feel like the more time we spend with each other, the better things are getting.”

His eyes also lit up after Andrada made a steamy confession.

Clearly determined to turn his head for good, the newcomer opened up about her high sex drive. 

When Dejon asked about her type, Andrada said: “I have to want them three times a day… I have to.” 

Looking impressed, Dejon asked: “So you have a high sex drive?”

She said: “I do… It’s really bad.”

But Dejon remarked: “That’s not bad.”

However, he later backtracked by declining to share a bed with her out of “respect” for Meg.

Will they pick up where they left off in tonight’s recoupling?

Love Island continues tonight at 9pm on ITV2.

4

4

Love Island star Megan Forte Clark has opened up on her time in the villa admitting that she saw red “for days”

Megan Forte Clark confessed that she “saw red” in the Love Island villa and is now dishing on her biggest regret.

In last month’s show, during the first public vote, viewers were tasked with choosing their least favoured couple, leading to Remell Mannings and Megan being booted off the island.

The 24-year-old brunette, who found herself entangled in a love triangle with Conor Philips despite being initially paired with Tommy Bradley, was seen locking lips with Conor on the terrace – later spilling to the other girls: “I kissed Conor on the terrace… I was like ‘just f**king kiss me then… he was itching to do it.”

Following a dramatic confrontation, Tommy washed his hands of the romantic tug-of-war, leaving Conor free to pursue Megan – but fate had other plans as a surprise public vote saw her leave the villa soon after.

Speaking candidly to Ode Entertainment post-villa life, Megan opened up about the tensions between herself, Tommy, and Conor, revealing an impulsive side she now regrets.

On TikTok, the lass from Dublin divulged: “I wish I’d taken a breath”, adding a frank admission: “You know when you hear something and you just see red, and I saw red for about four days.”

She lamented the poorly timed intervention by Conor, stating: “And then obviously while I was seeing red, Conor swooped in so it was just really bad timing. Of course, you only see the hour out of the 24.”

Confirming her and Tommy parted ways amicably, the musical theatre star stated: “When you see red like that, someone needs to sit you down and say like ‘girl’.”

She elaborated: “I felt like the girls were seeing where I was coming from, so I think that’s why I got more wound up.”

Viewers promptly took to social media to share their opinions, with one fan suggesting: “Bring her back for Casa.” Meanwhile, another insisted: “Please bring her back for Casa.”

Following Megan’s exit, which tugged at the heartstrings, Tommy is now coupled up with Emily, who previously paired with Conor. The atmosphere intensified as a tearful Conor questioned Megan: “Will you wait for me?” to which she tenderly responded: “I’ll wait for you.”

Adding to the drama, Conor confessed to Ben that he sees Megan as potential girlfriend material outside of the show.

Love Island airs Sunday to Thursday on ITV2 and ITVX at 9pm

Tourists are warning fellow flyers to brace for pat-downs especially if you are bit sweaty at airport security especially if it’s hot and your trousers are clinging in awkward places…

Flying is stressful enough. Add unnecessarily hot weather to the mix, and, being a nervous flyer plus a public groin search, it’s chaos. According to travellers online, if you’re even slightly sweaty, especially down there, airport body scanners might just flag it.

One tourist took to Reddit to share their baffling experience after being stopped for a pat-down in the same spot, not once, but twice, while going through a US Transport Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint, UNILAD reports.

They wrote that they were a “5’8″, 169lbs, midsized adult woman”, and explained: “My crotch was flagged twice.” They added that they were wearing “bike shorts and normal underwear”.

READ MORE: Win tickets to see Oasis at Wembley in our fab competition

Another Redditor asked what many were probably thinking: “Were you sweating?” The woman replied honestly: “Probably a little, I’m terrified of flying, so I was nervous.”

While she wasn’t offended by the pat-down, she couldn’t help but wonder why she was targeted and her wife wasn’t.

And she’s far from alone. One man shared a similar saga online after noticing his “sensitive area” kept setting off the scanner no matter what he wore. He tested everything from double-knee trousers to pyjama bottoms in an attempt to get through unnoticed. Still, no luck, he was patted down every time.

Eventually, someone in the thread offered what seemed like the most plausible explanation.

“I’ve flown a lot over the last few years. I’m a bigger guy, and I’ve had that problem. My unscientific testing has told me the following. If I’m sweaty, I’m getting a pat down. The machine triggers on sweat, especially in the lower back and private areas.”

Apparently, sweat can create odd shadows on the scanner image, and that’s when TSA officers step in.

The seasoned flyer continued: “Boxer briefs over boxers, the boys need to be high and tight. Pants material doesn’t make too much of a difference. What does is sag. When you get in the machine, pull your pants as high up as you can. Sagging pants make a shadow or something, and it guarantees a pat down.”

And if you’re thinking this is all a bit much, they did offer one final word of reassurance: “The last thing is to be patient. They don’t want to search you down there any more than you want to be searched, but sometimes it’s just going to happen.”

So, if you’re heading on holiday and find yourself sweating buckets in the airport queue, maybe give those clingy trousers a miss. Or at least hoik them up properly before the scanner. And definitely don’t leave the fan at home to keep yourself cool, or you could be facing a sweaty pat down.

READ MORE: ‘I tried this discounted Karcher pressure washer and my patio has never looked so good’

It has been five years since May 25, 2020, when George Floyd gasped for air beneath the knee of a Minneapolis police officer on the corner of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue. Five years since 17-year-old Darnella Frazier stood on the curb outside Cup Foods, raised her phone, and bore witness to nine minutes and 29 seconds that would galvanize a global movement against racial inequality.

Frazier’s video didn’t just show what happened. It insisted the world stop and see.

Today, that legacy lives on in the hands of a different community, facing different threats but wielding the same tools. Across the United States, Latino organizers are lifting their phones not to go viral but to go on record. They are livestreaming Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, filming family separations, documenting protests outside detention centers. Their footage is not content. It is evidence. It is warning. It is resistance.

Here in Los Angeles, where I teach journalism, several images have seared themselves into public memory. One viral video shows a shackled father stepping into a white, unmarked van — his daughter sobbing behind the camera, pleading with him not to sign any official documents. He turns, gestures for her to calm down, then blows her a kiss. Across town, LAPD officers on horseback charged at peaceful protesters.

In Spokane, Wash., residents formed a spontaneous human chain around their undocumented neighbors mid-raid, their bodies and cameras forming a barricade of defiance. In San Diego, white allies yelled “Shame!” as they chased a car of uniformed National Guard troops out of their neighborhood.

The impact of smartphone witnessing has been both immediate and unmistakable — visceral at street level, seismic in statehouses. On the ground, the videos have fueled the “No Kings” movement, which organized protests in all 50 states last weekend. Legislators are responding too — with sparks flying in the halls of the Capitol. As President Trump ramps up immigration enforcement, Democratic-led states are digging in, tightening state laws that limit cooperation with federal agents.

Local TV news coverage has incorporated witnesses’ smartphone video, helping it reach a wider audience.

What’s unfolding now is not new — it is newly visible. Latino organizers are drawing from a playbook sharpened in 2020, one rooted in a longer lineage of Black media survival strategies forged during slavery and Jim Crow.

In 2020, I wrote about how Black Americans have used various media formats to fight for racial and economic equality — from slave narratives to smartphones. I argued that Frederick Douglass and Ida B. Wells were doing the same work as Darnella Frazier: using journalism as a tool for witnessing and activism. In 2025, Latinos who are filming the state in moments of overreach — archiving injustice in real time — are adapting, extending and carrying forward Black witnesses’ work.

Moreover, Latinos are using smartphones for digital cartography much as Black people mapped freedom during the eras of slavery and Jim Crow. The People Over Papers map, for example, reflects an older lineage: the resistance tactics of Black Maroons — enslaved Africans who fled to swamps and borderlands, forming secret networks to evade capture and warn others.

These early communities shared intelligence, tracked patrols and mapped out covert paths to safety. People Over Papers channels that same logic — only now the hideouts are ICE-free zones, mutual aid hubs and sanctuary spaces. The map is crowdsourced. The borders are digital. The danger is still very real.

Likewise, the Stop ICE Raids Alerts Network revives a civil-rights-era blueprint. During the 1960s, activists used Wide Area Telephone Service lines and radio to share protest routes, police activity and safety updates. Black DJs often masked dispatches as traffic or weather reports — “congestion on the south side” meant police roadblocks, “storm warnings” signaled incoming violence. Today, that infrastructure lives again through WhatsApp chains, encrypted group texts and story posts. The platforms have changed. The mission has not.

Layered across both systems is the DNA of “The Negro Motorist Green Book,” the guide that once helped Black travelers navigate Jim Crow America by identifying safe towns, gas stations and lodging. People Over Papers and Stop ICE Raids are digital descendants of that legacy: survival through shared knowledge, protection through mapped resistance.

The Latino community’s use of smartphones in this moment is not for spectacle. It’s for self-defense. In cities like Chicago, Los Angeles and El Paso, what begins as a whisper — “ICE is in the neighborhood” — now races through Telegram, WhatsApp and Instagram. A knock becomes a livestream. A raid becomes a receipt. A video becomes a shield.

For undocumented families, the risk is real. To film is to expose oneself. To go live is to become a target. But many do it anyway. Because silence can be fatal. Because invisibility protects no one. Because if the story is not captured, it can be denied.

Five years after Floyd’s final breath, the burden of proof still falls heaviest on the most vulnerable. America demands footage before outrage. Tape before reform. Visual confirmation before compassion. And still, justice is never guaranteed.

But 2020 taught us that smartphones, in the right hands, can fracture the status quo. In 2025, that lesson is echoing again, this time through the lens of Latino mobile journalists. Their footage is unflinching. Urgent. Righteous. It connects the dots: between ICE raids and over-policing, between a border cage and a city jail, between a knee on a neck and a door kicked in at dawn.

These are not isolated events. They are chapters in the same story of government repression.

And because the cameras are still rolling — and people are still recording — those stories are being told anew.

Five years ago, we were forced to see the unbearable. Now, we are being shown the undeniable.

Allissa V. Richardson, an associate professor of journalism and communication at USC, is the author of “Bearing Witness While Black: African Americans, Smartphones, and the New Protest #Journalism.” This article was produced in partnership with the Conversation.

The grandiose castle on “The Traitors” is an apt setting for the conniving game show, immersing players in a historic location in the Scottish Highlands. Both the U.S. and U.K. versions of the series use Ardross Castle, a 19th century structure once owned by the grandson of the creator of Worcestershire sauce. It’s now owned by the McTaggart family, who graciously allow “The Traitors” to take over multiple rooms and the vast grounds during filming.

“There’s something about coming to a place that’s so steeped in history and playing a game there,” says executive producer Rosie Franks. “The castle has contributed so much to the identity of the show. We’d struggle to make the same show without it. It is a gift of a location because you don’t need any TV trickery.”

“If it wasn’t for that environment, I don’t think the players would get so invested,” adds executive producer Mike Cotton. “That feeling of being somewhere special in the middle of an isolated place allows us to create this very three-dimensional world they can inhabit.”

Here, Cotton and Franks answer all of your burning questions about “The Traitors” castle.

How was Ardross Castle selected?

The producers looked at more than 40 castles. Scotland was always a draw, as was something with fantastical flourishes. “It’s like a Disney castle that’s got Gothic and dark undertones to it,” Cotton says. “We wanted something that had that feeling but also had a great hall where we could house the round table. We needed a really big room for that.”

One of the refurbished castle rooms where “Traitors” contestants roam freely.

(Euan Cherry / Peacock)

Do we see all of the castle on the show?

Not even close. When “The Traitors” first arrived, the team discovered that areas of the building were desolate. “There’s huge parts of that castle that we don’t use within our show because they’re not renovated or haven’t been touched for a long time,” Franks says. “Plus, to rig an entire 19th century castle with cameras would be a big job.”

“What you see onscreen is a majority of the downstairs of the castle,” Cotton adds. “The cast can roam free in our space, but obviously we can’t have them roaming free over the entire castle because it would be impossible to cover it.”

The castle’s size has led to new discoveries during the series’ run. “It wasn’t until Season 2 that we discovered it had this space that felt like a dungeon,” Cotton recalls. “When Phaedra asked Kate to become a traitor, she was in this dungeon. It was a discovery we didn’t realize was underground. We’d walked over it for a whole year.”

How many cameras are in the house?

There are about 50 cameras in the castle, most of which are hidden. In the great hall, the cameras are behind wood paneling that was built inside the room to surround the round table. There are also cameras in the pillars throughout the house in addition to actual camera operators. “A lot of the pillars look like they’ve been there for 50 or 100 years, but they’ve actually been built specifically for us,” Cotton says.

Not all of the cameras are recording at once. “We’ve got a gallery of screens where we can see all of them, and then we choose a certain number that we’re recording,” Franks says. “We’re located separately in a production village in the castle’s stable block, and we’re very hands off with the game.”

Does the set change from the U.K. to the U.S. editions?

The sets are mostly the same, but the art does change. For the U.S. show, there are pictures of Alan Cumming and Andy Cohen added to the walls. Occasionally, small trinkets will be swapped out.

A secret room, hidden behind a bookcase, was transformed into a wine cellar for Season 3.

(Euan Cherry / Peacock)

Does the set evolve between seasons?

Yes. The producers make “small alterations,” Franks explains. “We like to freshen up little bits each time,” she says. “We did create a little secret room, which has been through different iterations. Last season, it was a wine cellar you access through the bookcase.”

“It feels like it’s a real place,” Cotton adds. “Yes, we fill it with some slightly eccentric decor at times, but we want it to be its own thing. With all these big Scottish castles, they don’t redecorate every single year, so we don’t either.”

What was the inspiration for the round table?

The round table is 14 feet in diameter to accommodate all the players. Season 1 production designer Mathieu Weekes looked at the table on the original Dutch show, “De Verraders,” which featured a compass, and added the phases of the moon. It houses a few cameras and is as hefty as it looks. “The top is a really big, solid piece of wood that’s got some light slightly embedded in it,” Cotton says.

Are there Easter eggs in the decor?

Of course there are. The producers hide tongue-in-cheek details in the rooms each season. For example, the book that opened the wine cellar in Season 3 was titled “The Seer,” a nod to the big finale twist. “The artwork sometimes alludes to the tones of the show or things that are going on in the castle or missions,” Franks says. “We like to drip-feed viewers throughout so that the whole thing feels like a joined-up experience.”

“The Traitors’” round table.

(Euan Cherry / Peacock)

Do the players sleep in the castle during filming?

The producers refuse to answer this definitively because it could affect future games. “The success of ‘The Traitors’ really does rely on us maintaining the integrity of the game, and that includes us keeping the details of what happens behind the scenes a secret,” Franks says.

“Keeping the traitors’ identities secret is the No. 1 thing for us,” Cotton adds. “For everyone to go to their rooms and go to bed, and then for us to get the traitors back out is a military operation. As soon as we start to talk about exactly where they sleep and how it works, we’re really worried that might unpick it all. The players are desperate to find out who the traitors are and they’ll go to any means possible to do it.”

Does the show film all of the outdoor challenges on the actual castle grounds?

Cotton says about 90% of them are filmed on site. The other 10% are done at a nearby loch. But one of the main attractions to Ardross was its 2,000 acres of land. “It’s got a river that runs through it. It’s got its own hills, it’s got fields, it’s got forest, it’s got marshland,” Cotton says. “And we use all of that. Part of the appeal was that it has a huge natural playground around it that we could use for missions.” Are there any restrictions on using real fire when filming?

None. “The Traitors” even has its own fire team to light the medieval-looking torches around the castle. “We love fire,” Cotton says. “There’s nothing like when you go in somewhere and you can smell a wood fire. We always say that the game plays really psychological because they’re immersed. So much of that is down to the castle and the set and the smells.”

It’s easy to forget sometimes that, alongside everything else that’s crowding your news brain right now, deforestation in the Amazon is still a massive crisis for the planet, one that is fast reaching a point of no return regarding our ability to curtail its terrible impact.

Movies love superheroes that take on their villains with big-stage swagger. But documentaries thrive on underdogs and when it comes to standing up to the illegal logging and mining that’s flattening South America’s leafy canopy, Indigenous people have more than shown their mettle against buzzing chainsaws or buzzy politicians. The energetic dispatch “We Are Guardians” from directors Edivan Guajajara, Chelsea Greene and Rob Grobman, is the latest advocacy feature to bring cameras into the Amazon to juxtapose beauty and devastation — as well as a David vs. Goliath battle as it’s experienced on the ground.

We meet soft-spoken family man Marҫal, from the Indigenous territory of Arariboia, whose decades-old group of organized, unpaid, weapons-trained and face-painted “forest guardians” take the fight directly to loggers, wherever they can sneak up on them, at great risk to their lives. (Their foes are armed too.) Though Marçal speaks eloquently of his holistic view of their mission — he’s protecting the water, the trees and the region’s wildlife — he also shows concern that the Amazon’s uncontacted peoples stay free of interference too.

Meanwhile, activist Puyr Tembé from the Alto Rio Guama territory is working hard to get more Indigenous women into politics and in seats of power — a tall order at a time (filming mostly took place between 2019 and 2022) when rapaciously pro-agribusiness Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro openly treated the rights of Indigenous peoples as dismissable and a nuisance. As Tembé articulates, it takes a reforesting of the mind and heart to catalyze progress.

These dedicated warriors certainly earn our admiration in the good/evil binary of the conflict, but complications help give the documentary shape, as in the attention given a crusty logger named Valdir, who agreed to be featured on camera. A logger for over 50 years since he was 8, he knows exactly what’s wrong with his job, but is trapped in the maw of an industry as a means of survival for his family. Even a wealthy landowner can come off like a victim here, as is the case with Tadeu, a businessman who in the 1990s started an ecological sanctuary on his 28,000 hectares, and whose complaints to the Brazilian government about illegal encroachment on his land fall on deaf ears.

There’s a comprehensiveness to how “We Are Guardians” lays out a big, knotty problem of environment, politics, geography and business — internationalized yet hyper-local — while spotlighting the Indigenous push-back efforts. But the movie’s verité style of thumbnail portraiture doesn’t always dovetail neatly with the other elements: the unloading of facts, getting those drone shots in and projecting a thriller-like atmosphere. Coming on the heels of the aesthetically sharp and immersive “The Territory” from a couple years ago (which covers some of the same ground), “We Are Guardians” feels more like a highlighting of issues than a documentary journey that takes you somewhere.

But sometimes, it’s whatever gets out the message, right? When it comes to climate change, our media diet is starved. So if you need that refresher course in the importance of saving the Amazon, “We Are Guardians,” like a well-made pamphlet, does the job with plenty of efficiency and heat.

Cinematographer Kim Ji-yong admits that a “happy accident” furnished one of the most alluring images of “Squid Game” Season 2: an overhead shot in which contestants stand on a merry-go-round while playing a devious game where they must form groups of a specific number before time runs out or be eliminated. “We planned the shot and pre-lit the scene from eye level, but when we actually went to put the camera up there, that was the first time we saw it,” he says. The elevated perspective was framed more than 100 meters above the contestants, with Kim wanting the image to “look flat” and “not as realistic.” The result is a surreal portrait that mimics the shape of an eyeball, a metaphorical reminder of the control room watching the contestants’ every move. During gameplay, an immersive camera, often handheld, makes the audience feel like a participant. Adding to the mystique is a painterly palette of primary colors. “For the whole season, I wanted to place red and blue lights, the colors coming from the X and O, in the dorm room,” Kim says. “When they play merry-go-round, the moment they pick who to go with, the light changes to red and blue. It symbolizes choice.”

JOJO SIWA and Chris Hughes have driven fans wild with an intimate backstage moment as her mum captures sweet moment on camera.

The pop star, 22, who just performed two shows in London, gave fans a behind-the-scenes look at her pre-show routine—with Chris, 32, right by her side.

8

8

8

8

8

In a post to TikTok JoJo gave fans an inside look into her pre-show routine, the former Big Brother star was seen in the video warming up and spending time with her dancers. 

JoJo captioned the post: “Pre show is always my favorite hour. Just pure chaos and love and energy warming up. What a beautiful perfect 2 shows in London this week wow.”

The clip showed JoJo getting ready before being joined backstage by her new beau Chris.

The singer is shown stretching whilst the camera pans to Chris who cheekily chimes “Stretch it off then” as he walks into the room.

The pair were later filmed by mum Jessalyn hugging each other, holding hands and putting bracelets on each other. 

Former Love Islander Chris also learnt her hit song Karma and is videoed singing the lyrics alongside her. 

Fans rushed to the comments, gushing over the pair’s sweet on-camera moment.

One user penned: “Chris is the biggest green flag ive ever seen, u two are the cutest (red heart emoji)”

Another chimed: “The way his hand stays on her leg after she gets off his lap.”

“Sweet christopher being JoJo’s number1 fan” added a third. 

“Chris singing your lyrics Love ittttt!” wrote a fourth.

JoJo recently sent fans wild at her London gigs this week after she told them onstage she had “never felt so ­special and so loved”.

She also went on to change the lyrics of Bette Davis Eyes to “Chris Hughes’ eyes” as he looked on, giddy and red-faced at a music venue in Shoreditch.

Chris could not attend the second of her two-night run there — but JoJo didn’t miss her moment to shout out to him, singing to his orange beanie which she had placed in the crowd.

It comes after Chris made the 12-hour flight from the UK to Mexico to support JoJo as she performed to fans in Mexico City.

He later posted cosy snaps of them together online.

The two were then spotted kissing while straddling a lilo at an adults-only hotel during a loved-up getaway there.

When JoJo later returned to London the pair had a emotional reunion at Heathrow airport as JoJo flew in from Los Angeles — Chris greeting her with a large bouquet of red roses.

8

8

8

Red cloaks. Stiff white bonnets. Bent heads. If there’s a single image that Hulu’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” leaves audiences with as it ends its six-season run this week, it’s this one: That of women in a dystopian anti-America called Gilead, evolving from anonymous sexual slaves into rebels, warriors and, sometimes, survivors.

But for “Handmaid’s” creator Bruce Miller and star Elisabeth Moss, who also directed several episodes in the final season, the series, based on the 1985 book by Margaret Atwood, was never about what the women wore. It was about the women inside the color-coded uniforms.

“June started out as a normal person, a mom, a wife,” says Moss, whose other long-running roles include “The West Wing” and “Mad Men.” She won an Emmy for playing the “Handmaid’s” title character in 2017, the same year the show took home the first drama series prize for a streaming show.

“Then [June] had to shut down and become something that I don’t think she wasn’t proud of,” Moss continues. “But I feel she comes out of that into a place of true heroism, where she is able to be herself, be generous, forgive, inspire other people, lead — but also be vulnerable, ask questions, not know everything.”

Elisabeth Moss in the series finale of “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

(Steve Wilkie / Disney)

Miller, who stepped back from showrunning duties for the final season, with Eric Tuchman and Yahlin Chang taking over, especially wanted to ensure that as a man, he was telling a female-forward story from the female point of view — both in the writers’ room and on camera.

“I’m very mindful of the fact that I’m a boy, and who do I think I am?” he says, adding that winning the Emmy boosted his confidence in being a man telling a story about women’s rights. (The series has 15 Emmys total.) “Definitely, when you win an Emmy it helps you feel a bit less like you have one penis over the limit.”

Knowing that, Miller says he centered the story on June and Moss alike, adjusting camera angles to focus on her point of view — but lowered to an eye level that corresponded with the actress’ 5-foot-3 height. “The crowd scenes get much more scary” when you do that, he says. “I want to see the world not just through June’s eyes — but also Lizzie’s eyes, as much as she’s able to show me those things.”

Meanwhile, Moss used roles as executive producer and director to focus on the show’s look and how June came across on camera. Frequently, she’s shown smoldering with fury or dark intent, gazing up from under her brows with a lowered chin, something Moss says she lifted from Stanley Kubrick’s films. “That is ‘Clockwork Orange,’” she says. “I am certainly not the first person to do that look.”

Elisabeth Moss.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

But she might be one of very few actresses to convey it onscreen. “It’s definitely not something women do [on camera],” she says. “Women aren’t allowed to get angry. [June] uses her anger and weaponizes it at so many points during the show — and by the final season, she knows when to do that and when not to.”

The journey June, Elisabeth and “Handmaid’s” have been on began at an uncomfortably synergistic time in American politics: Amid the airing of a series about women subject to state regulation of their bodily autonomy, real-world politicians were successfully rolling back women’s reproductive rights. In 2018, protestors began showing up at real-world events in those handmaid-red cloaks and white bonnets, putting the show in an unexpected spotlight.

“Art does have an impact,” says Moss about that kind of a response, but suggests that repurposing the show’s images, outfits or story in service of real-world politics misses a key element of the series. “I don’t think any of us necessarily set out, when you’re making a TV show, to [make a political statement], because that’s the wrong way to go about it. You’re telling this one woman’s story. … It’s always been ‘The Handmaid’s Tale,’ her story.”

That’s one reason why after six seasons the series chose to end as it did: With June back in the house where it all began, starting her memoirs — “The Handmaid’s Tale.” When Miller pitched that final episode script, Moss says it made her cry.

“I love the idea that at the end is when she starts to tell the story that is the book, and the circular nature of that gives me chills,” she says. “The fact that she realizes that she has to tell it because it wasn’t all bad.”

But the ending also does one more thing: It shows how little is truly resolved. June’s daughter Hannah is still trapped in Gilead, for example. And fans of the series know the action will pick up 15 years later when “The Testaments,” based on a 2019 sequel by Atwood and now in production, begins airing. (Moss won’t say whether she’ll cameo.)

So this is an ending — just not the ending. Now, the story leaves off, still focused on the woman who escaped the bonnet and cloak and not about the trappings of her enslavement. “For me, the ending is perfect,” says Moss. “I also don’t feel like it is an ending. The war is not over. June’s journey is not over.”