deal

Israeli attacks come amid ongoing talks with Lebanese officials to implement framework for peace between two countries.

The Israeli army has attacked the southern Lebanese town of al-Mansouri and carried out blasts in the nearby village of Majdal Zoun, Lebanon’s National News Agency reports, despite the “ceasefie” and ongoing talks between the two countries.

The explosion in Majdal Zoun on Friday was heard as far away as city of Tyre, over 15 kilometres (nine miles) away, according to local reports.

The attack and demolitions have become a routine feature of life in southern Lebanon, despite a United States-brokered framework that is supposed to end the fighting and lead to “peace”.

On Thursday, an Israeli strike on an ambulance in Nabatieh al-Fawqa injured two medics. The Lebanese Health Ministry called the attack a “flagrant violation of international and humanitarian laws and norms”.

Israel has been systematically levelling entire villages near the border, with Israeli officials openly declaring the objective of erasing Lebanese towns out of existence to create a “security zone”.

Israel occupies nearly fifth of Lebanese territory and has killed more than 4,000 people since fighting erupted on March 2, maintaining that its operations are aimed at stopping Lebanese armed group Hezbollah from launching assaults into northern Israel.

However, the demolitions bear close resemblance to Israel’s tactics in Gaza, where a “ceasefire” has not halted the Israeli military’s campaign to destroy the territory. Rights advocates say Israel’s policies aim to make the strip uninhabitable.

US President Donald Trump promised to “help” Lebanon during a White House meeting with Lebanese president Joseph Aoun earlier this week.

Asked whether there will be a timeline for Israel’s withdrawal from the country, Trump said: “They’re in the process of doing that. They’re in the process of redeploying [to] other sections.”

Under the framework agreement signed in Washington on June 26, the Lebanese army is to take over Israel-occupied territories in the south, provided that Hezbollah is disarmed.

Lebanese and Israeli officials have been meeting regularly to discuss the implementation of the deal with the next round of talks scheduled for August 4 in Italy.

Hezbollah has rejected the agreement outright, with its leader Naim Qassem calling the deal “null and void” and calling for armed resistance to push Israel out of Lebanon.

The deal sets no timeline for withdrawal. Instead, it outlines two “pilot zones” where the Lebanese military “will gradually assume full and effective security responsibility”.

The Lebanese army deployed to the first pilot-zone villages this week. But residents returning to Froun and Ghandouriyeh say their villages were never occupied by Israeli forces, arguing that Israel has not given back any territory.

United States President Donald Trump agreed to a 30-year nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia on Wednesday that would see Washington transfer nuclear technology to the Gulf kingdom.

This has drawn concerns that if the deal comes to fruition, it could spark a nuclear arms race across the Middle East amid reports that Riyadh would be able to enrich its own uranium, a necessary step in acquiring nuclear weapons.

US officials have stressed the proposed deal would serve civilian nuclear purposes, although exact details of the agreement have not been made public.

It has now been tabled in the US Congress for a review, but is expected to survive resistance from Democrats.

Here’s why some are concerned about the agreement:

Could this spur a nuclear arms race in the region?

Analysts have raised concerns about whether the proposed deal could lead to Saudi Arabia seeking to develop military-grade uranium, which the US Energy Department has not yet confirmed.

Some analysts have warned this could open the door to spurring an arms race with other regional powers.

Saudi Arabia has long voiced its intention to use nuclear energy for power generation, but in 2018, de facto leader Mohammad bin Salman told CBS that Riyadh would “without a doubt” develop a nuclear weapon if Iran did the same.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio insisted on Thursday that the deal would not lead to nuclear proliferation, as US contractors would handle the project, allowing Washington to monitor it. US nuclear reactor designer Westinghouse is believed to be a major contractor.

Former Israeli Defence Minister Avigdor Liberman said in a post on X on Wednesday that Israel must oppose the deal with “all our might.”

“We must all understand that Saudi Arabia’s civilian nuclear programme will end in nuclear weapons and lead to a mad arms race across the entire Middle East,” he posted.

Israel, which developed a nuclear arsenal in the 1960s, has long sought to stop Arab countries and other regional countries from gaining their own nuclear weapons.

Is there a risk of nuclear reactors being attacked in strikes?

Some others have also raised concerns over possible nuclear leaks amid the tensions in the Middle East.

Iran’s Bushehr nuclear power plant, for example, has seen some of its outer facilities hit in the US and Israel’s war on Iran. Iran too has hit the perimeter of the United Arab Emirates’ Barakah nuclear power plant in a drone strike.

None of these strikes hit the nuclear plants’ reactors, but analysts say allowing more such facilities in the Middle East when tensions are so high is a mistake.

Damage to a reactor’s core could release highly radioactive gases, causing immediate catastrophic damage within a 20- to 30-kilometre (12- to 18-mile) radius.

Nuclear accidents at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant in 2011 and Chornobyl in Ukraine in the former Soviet Union in 1986 are cautionary stories.

Could Saudi Arabia have access to sensitive material?

That’s unclear for now.

Highly enriched uranium and spent nuclear reactor fuel are key components of nuclear bombs.

According to US media, the agreement includes a clause providing for a “black box” uranium enrichment facility that would be situated in Saudi Arabia but run by US companies.

A joint study by the two countries, set to last two years, will determine whether such a facility is needed, or if Saudi Arabia should import commercial-grade low-enriched uranium.

“That’s really the concern,” Matthew Kroenig, a fellow with the Atlantic Council, told Al Jazeera, saying there’s been no such arrangement anywhere else in the world.

“What does the US really mean by a ‘black box’? So will the US bring its engineers there full time, forever? Realistically, the Saudis will be involved, they will learn the tech, and they could kick out the US in the future,” Kroenig said.

Washington could be seeking to model Moscow’s agreement with Turkiye and Egypt, where Russian contractors manage active nuclear power plants, including the needed uranium and the highly radioactive spent fuel from the reactors.

The difference, Kroenig pointed out, is that Russia does not enrich the uranium in those cases.

On the other hand, the UAE, which runs a civilian nuclear programme that has been held up as a gold standard for non-proliferation, imports all of its low-enriched uranium from France, the United Kingdom and Russia among other countries.

Kroenig suggested that the US could be using the two-year study as a negotiating tactic, noting that the same claims of impact studies have been used to stall South Korea’s requests to enrich its own uranium.

“The deal doesn’t immediately speak about uranium enrichment, so my hope is that this is a negotiating tactic and that after two years the US will say ‘oh no, this doesn’t make sense right now’”, he said.

Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, told CBS News in 2018 that his own nation was not planning to acquire a nuclear weapon, but that “without a doubt if Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible”.

Earlier US media reports suggested the deal could allow Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium in the future – which can be used as fuel for power plants, but also potentially to make nuclear bombs. However, Trump’s remarks appear to deny this.

Rosemary Kelanic, the director of the Middle East programme at the US-based Defense Priorities think tank, said it would be “quite shocking” if the US were to allow Saudi Arabia uranium enrichment facilities.

“The US has never done that before. We have never helped another country enrich on their own soil,” she said, adding that this was because “if you can produce your own nuclear fuel, you become a much bigger risk” for building nuclear weapons.

The agreement will now be sent to the US Congress for review.

Some lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle are expected to oppose the deal, though Trump’s Republican Party controls both the upper and lower chambers and opponents of the deal do not appear to have the votes needed to block it.

July 23 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said on social media Thursday that Saudi Arabia must sign the Abraham Accords as part of its nuclear deal with the United States.

Trump added that the nuclear deal will be approved but Saudi Arabia’s entry into the Abraham Accords is a required condition.

“The Civil Nuclear Deal (There will be no enrichment of material!) being made between the United States Department of Energy and Saudi Arabia, which pertains only to non-military use such as the ones that Iran and UAE (and others) already have, will be approved, but it is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords,” Trump wrote. “The United States is not opposed to Civil (Non-Enriched) Nuclear Facilities.”

Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman signed the agreement on Wednesday. The Department of Energy says U.S. companies will benefit from the deal with involvement in establishing nuclear facilities in Saudi Arabia to the tune of billions of dollars.

The nuclear deal is to last 30 years and will involve the United States supporting Saudi nuclear development.

The Abraham Accords are meant to normalize relations between Israel and Arab nations in the Middle East, including the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia’s entry into the Abraham Accords would be a step toward a diplomatic relationship with Israel.

Saudi Arabia has called for progress toward Palestinian statehood, a sticking point that has drawn Israel’s criticism of the nuclear deal with the United States.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have also voiced skepticism over the nuclear deal, fearing that it may ultimately lead to the enrichment of uranium and plutonium for the development of nuclear weapons.

“This agreement will set off a nuclear race in the region, further disincentivizing Iran from limiting its own program,” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., posted on social media.

This move for Bamba underlines a marked shift in transfer strategy for Newcastle.

It is certainly hard to imagine the club spending £55m on a 29-year-old again like they did when they signed forward Yoane Wissa from Brentford last summer.

Instead, Newcastle have targeted players aged 20 and under on the continent this time around.

Bamba, like Steur, Ewen Jaouen and Bazoumana Toure, will need time to adapt to the physicality and intensity of the Premier League.

It is worth stressing Bamba has made only 12 competitive starts in all competitions for Monaco.

But Newcastle have to take calculated risks this summer before such talents become potentially out of reach.

Just like Newcastle‘s £23m move for Steur, negotiations were carried out discreetly by all parties involved.

News that an agreement had been reached arrived only when Bamba was on his way to Tyneside.

Further reinforcements are needed, but Newcastle are set to complete their fourth signing of the summer.

By contrast, at this stage of a particularly turbulent window a year ago, the club had brought in only Anthony Elanga.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has agreed to work with Saudi Arabia to develop a civilian nuclear program, a watershed moment following a years-long effort to curb the proliferation of nuclear technology in the Middle East.

The announcement comes as President Trump has vowed to continue executing a war against Iran over its own nuclear ambitions. On Wednesday, the president warned he would target a bridge or power plant for every commercial vessel Iran fires upon in the Strait of Hormuz, after earlier this week threatening to strike a new facility Tehran is reportedly building to conceal its continued nuclear work.

The Saudi deal stoked surprise and immediate concern across Washington, where lawmakers are expected to have a vote on the matter, as well as in Israel, itself a nuclear power that has long feared an atomic arms race could grip the region.

A Saudi nuclear program has long been tied to the standoff over Iran’s nuclear work, which successive U.S. administrations have said extends beyond civilian purposes. After Iran struck a nuclear deal with world powers in 2015, Saudi Arabia vowed to match whatever nuclear capabilities Tehran was allowed to keep.

In the decade since, U.S. officials had tried to keep Saudi Arabia from developing its own program, fearing it would fuel nuclear competition across the Middle East. But it became a consistent and central point of negotiation between the two allies.

Both the Trump and Biden administrations ultimately offered to support a limited, monitored program as part of a broader deal to normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, hoping that a diplomatic breakthrough would mitigate the risks of an arms race.

But the agreement secured this week left skeptics in Washington and the region unclear what the United States had secured in return.

The deal comes after Trump told reporters this week that the goal of resuming war with Iran was to prevent them from ever obtaining nuclear weapons, a challenge that has vexed the international community since the outset of the century.

U.S. presidents have long sought to prevent Middle Eastern countries from acquiring technologies that could be used to build weapons of mass destruction. The 2003 invasion of Iraq over false claims about Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs prompted Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi to abandon his nuclear work. Over the next two decades, the United States and Israel also targeted Syria’s nuclear and chemical weapons programs under Bashar al-Assad.

But Iran’s slow march to nuclear weapons capability, enriching uranium near to weapons-grade with no clear civilian or scientific ends, has prompted other countries in the region to question whether they, too, might need similar capabilities to counterbalance a historic foe. Israel, which views the Islamic Republic and its nuclear program as existential threats, is widely believed to possess its own nuclear weapons.

Hours after the nuclear deal was reported by the Wall Street Journal, the White House was silent on the details and Trump administration officials were left scrambling when asked by lawmakers and reporters for answers.

While traveling in Manila, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters he was aware of the news reports, but deferred to the White House to provide more public information.

When pressed about the risks of such a deal, Rubio said he would not “opine directly on the agreement,” but said the United States “is not going to reach any agreement with any country in the world that leads to the risk of proliferation.”

The White House confirmed the deal Wednesday afternoon.

Back in Washington, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz told members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that he has not yet seen the agreement with Saudi Arabia.

The deal, which would last 30 years and involve American firms developing the program, is expected to be submitted for review to Congress. Lawmakers will consider the deal as they grow increasingly uneasy about the Trump administration’s handling of an expanding Iran war, which Trump and Israel launched, arguing for the need to wipe out Tehran’s capabilities to build nuclear weapons.

As the war enters its fifth month, Trump has continued to defend the military efforts and has dismissed the idea that war is unpopular among Americans as they feel the economic effects.

“Americans aren’t against the war,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday. “Americans don’t want high gasoline prices but they’re not against the war.”

Trump’s remarks were made as he traveled to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to attend a dignified transfer of U.S. service members killed in the war. Asked what he would say to the families who lost their loved ones, Trump said he’d tell them they’re loved.

“All I’m going to say is, we love you. We love your child, and that’s what they are to them. They’re their children. There’s no games, no nothing,” Trump said. “That’s their child, and all you can do is throw out your heart.”

Earlier in the day, Trump said the United States will destroy a bridge or power plant in Iran each time it shoots at a ship in the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway for the global energy supply.

Trump’s threat to target bridges and power plants would mark yet another escalation that could affect civilians in the region.

Hasan Ghashghavi, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, denied Trump’s claim on Tuesday that Iran was requesting negotiations, saying in a statement on X that it was “in no way consistent with the facts.”

“It seems that Trump, in order to extricate himself from the quagmire he’s trapped in, should seek better paths,” he wrote. “Repetitive lies no longer even bring about short-term market relief.”

Times staff writer Nabih Bulos in Beirut contributed to this report.

Paramount Skydance has notched a needed win as it continues to pursue its $111-billion deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery.

On Wednesday, the European Commission gave its consent, allowing tech scion David Ellison’s industry-reshaping merger to move forward in the countries that make up the European Union.

Europe joins 64 other regulatory entities that have either approved the deal or chosen not to challenge it, Paramount said in a statement.

“These clearances recognize that the combination of Paramount and WBD will enhance consumer choice and enable a creative-first company to invest in more projects and bring stories to audiences worldwide,” Paramount said. “It will create a scaled media and entertainment company capable of competing with the tech companies that have come to dominate the industry.”

European regulators added just one condition: Paramount must end a partnership with Universal Pictures to share distribution of movies in Europe. Beyond that, regulators concluded that even with the proposed Paramount-Warner consolidation there were enough producers to avoid competitive harms.

“The Commission found that, at film production level, enough film studios remain as competitors,” the European Commission said in a statement. “These include other major US studios like Disney, NBC Universal … and Sony, along with smaller US studios such as Amazon MGM, A24 and Lionsgate, as well as European studios.”

But the merger would result in a “high concentration” of film distribution, the commission said, so Paramount would have 13 months to end its joint venture, United International Pictures, which distributes Paramount and Universal films to cinema owners in Europe.

Paramount must not “directly or indirectly … enter into any agreement or understanding with Universal to jointly co-distribute films” in the European countries for 10 years, the commission said.

Despite early concerns about potential dominance in the children’s television market, Paramount will not be required to divest Cartoon Network, a Warner asset, because of its ownership of Nickelodeon.

“The Commission found that streaming platforms offering children’s content will continue to act as a competitive constraint on the merged entity’s TV channels,” the agency said.

The European Commission joins regulators in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and South Africa that have found the deal would not crush competition in their respective markets. Britain’s Competition and Markets Authority is still investigating the merger’s impacts.

Paramount secured the approval of the U.S. Justice Department last month. The company was hoping to close its blockbuster acquisition of Warner Bros., which owns HBO, CNN and the Burbank studios behind such popular characters as Batman, Superman, Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo, by the end of September to avoid a larger payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

The European Commission’s approval came two days after Ellison’s firm was dealt a substantial setback.

A federal judge in Oakland on Monday issued a temporary restraining order preventing Paramount from finalizing the acquisition for at least 14 days as that antitrust case heats up. The decision came after 12 state attorneys general, led by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit last week alleging the merger would violate U.S. antitrust rules.

District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín scheduled an Aug. 3 hearing to determine whether a longer-term pause is warranted. The states are expected to seek a preliminary injunction, which would tie up Paramount’s merger for months.

Paramount, in its statement, noted the European Commission’s conclusions “directly refute key assumptions that underpin the state AGs’ complaint seeking to block the transaction,” including whether big-budget or blockbuster films should be considered a market.

Wednesday’s approval “marks another significant milestone in bringing Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery together,” Makan Delrahim, Paramount’s chief legal officer said in the statement. “We appreciate the Commission’s constructive engagement and thorough analysis throughout its review.”

Deal critic Alvaro Bedoya, a former Federal Trade Commission member who is now a senior adviser at the American Economic Liberties Project, offered a conflicting view.

“This is not remotely over. The United States is not Europe,” Bedoya said in a statement.

The Writers Guild of America joined the legal fray last week by filing its own antitrust complaint against Paramount, alleging the proposed union of two of Hollywood’s biggest studios would lead to fewer jobs and lower pay for writers. The WGA is also seeking an injunction.

The 37-page lawsuit filed by the state attorneys general alleges that Paramount’s proposed takeover — the largest Hollywood deal in decades — would violate the U.S. Clayton Antitrust Act, a century-old law to prevent mergers that weaken competition and raise costs for consumers.

In her order granting the states’ request for a temporary restraining order, Martínez-Olguín wrote: “The Transaction would also be difficult, if not impossible, to unwind if permitted to proceed given the anticipated consolidation of operations, sharing of business-sensitive information, and potential termination or reassignment of employees.”

Paramount faces a potential $7 billion payment to Warner Bros. should the company fail to close the transaction by next summer.

The 23-year-old Rogers, established as one of the Premier League’s top attacking talents, has signed a contract with the London team until 2033.

The England World Cup forward Morgan Rogers has completed his British transfer record move from Aston Villa to Premier League rivals Chelsea.

No fee was officially disclosed, but media reports on Tuesday said it is worth 117 million pounds ($156.5m), which surpasses England teammate Elliot Anderson’s 116 million pounds ($155m) switch from Nottingham Forest to Manchester City earlier this month.

The all-time record Premier League transfer is still Sweden striker Alexander Isak’s 125 million pounds ($167m) move from Newcastle to Liverpool last year.

The 23-year-old Rogers, established as one of the Premier League’s top attacking talents, has signed a contract with the London team until 2033.

“I’m so excited,” he told the club’s website. “For me, Chelsea are the biggest club in London and a club I’ve always admired since I was a kid.

“I’m really excited about the project with the new manager, the players we’ve got and where the club is heading. That’s why I’m here, and I can’t wait to get started.”

Rogers is the third major off-season signing by new Chelsea manager Xabi Alonso, following wing backs Marco Palestra and Geovany Quenda.

Rogers was part of the England team that finished third, beating France, at the World Cup last week. They had lost to Argentina 2-1 in their semifinal.

He scored 21 goals in 85 Premier League appearances for Villa, and last season helped guide the club to a top-four finish and to the Europa League title.

Rogers joined Villa from Middlesbrough in February 2024 for a reported fee of 8 million pounds (about $10.5m).

He made his England debut in November 2024 and has now won 22 caps for his country.

Chelsea’s previous record signing was Ecuador midfielder Moises Caicedo, who joined from Brighton & Hove Albion for 115 million pounds (about $150m) in 2023.

Chelsea, who finished 10th in the Premier League last season, begin their ‌league campaign away to Fulham on August 24.

More Kraft Heinz products will be available in Walt Disney Co.’s U.S.-based theme parks and on cruise ships after the two companies recently inked a multiyear partnership.

Ten Kraft Heinz brands will be part of the deal, including Heinz, Philadelphia cream cheese and Kraft Mac & Cheese, the companies said in a statement Tuesday.

Both Disney and Heinz declined to comment on the financial terms of the deal, but a Heinz spokesperson said it is Disney’s “highest level of partnership” and designed to be an ongoing effort.

The partnership, which begins this summer, will result in new menu items, experiences and product offerings at Anaheim’s Disneyland Resort, Orlando’s Walt Disney World and on Disney cruise ships sailing out of ports in North America.

In the short term, new Heinz condiment stations and custom-designed equipment will be installed throughout the parks, the companies said.

Beyond the use of Kraft Heinz brands at Disney parks and on cruise ships, the partnership also allows for “integrated marketing campaigns” and digital content across Disney’s media platforms.

“Together we will build creative experiences for our consumers across our destinations, platforms, and fan touchpoints,” Becca Vodnoy, Walt Disney Co. senior vice president of corporate alliances, said in the statement.

Hollywood’s biggest deal in decades is on hold.

On Monday, a federal judge temporarily blocked Paramount Skydance’s efforts to complete its purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery, ruling that the proposed $111-billion merger “raises serious questions” about whether the combination violates U.S. antitrust law.

District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín, based in Oakland, granted a request for a temporary restraining order from a coalition of 12 state attorneys general, led by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, to freeze the deal while the court delves more closely into its impact on markets.

The order pauses the deal for 14 days. Martínez-Olguín’s ruling sets up a showdown for Aug. 3, when she considers a motion for a preliminary injunction — which, if granted, could tie up the deal for months in advance of a trial.

“This is a critical first win in our case to ensure this megamerger never sees the light of day,” Bonta said in a statement. “History tells the tale of what happens when a few people have great power over markets that are central to Americans’ lives: fewer opportunities for more people, worse products and services for all people.”

Two century-old film studios — with rights to Harry Potter, Batman, Scooby-Doo, “Top Gun,” “Ted Lasso” and “Game of Thrones” — would be combined, and HBO, CNN and HGTV would come under new ownership.

“The judge basically said, ‘Look, let’s not race to the finish line here,’” Eric Talley, a Columbia Law School professor, said in an interview. “At the end of the day, maybe this thing gets signed off on, but I think the AGs are going to be given a fair chance to bring their claims forward.”

The ruling dealt a blow to tech scion David Ellison’s efforts to quickly finalize his massive merger, which has the support of President Trump. Ellison wants to complete the deal by September to avoid a higher payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

Paramount, in a statement, said the restraining order simply preserves the status quo, which Paramount had already pledged to do in court papers last week that offered to hold off on finalizing the transaction.

“We are confident the evidence will demonstrate that the State AGs’ antitrust arguments are without merit as their alleged markets and claims of anticompetitive effects are without any basis in modern market realities,” Paramount said in the statement.

Larry Ellison, co-founder of software giant Oracle, is bankrolling his son’s ambitions to acquire a second major entertainment company in less than a year. The Ellison family acquired the smaller Paramount in August.

The Democratic state attorneys general, including from New York, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon and Washington, filed their lawsuit a week ago.

The 37-page lawsuit alleges that Paramount’s proposed takeover — the largest Hollywood deal in decades — would violate the U.S. Clayton Antitrust Act, a century-old law to prevent mergers that weaken competition and raise costs for consumers.

The lawsuit represents the stiffest challenge to a deal that had been swiftly clearing its various regulatory hurdles. Nearly two dozen regulators from around the globe, including Australia, Austria and Saudi Arabia, have already signed off.

The U.S. Justice Department last month approved the merger, saying the combination would probably bolster competition — not harm it. That decision wasn’t a surprise because Trump has been rooting for a CNN shakeup. The president told the network’s Jake Tapper earlier this month: “We’re trying to have CNN go on a normal path.”

“This merger is lawful, pro-competitive, and will benefit consumers, creators, workers, and the entertainment industry,” Paramount said. “We will continue to vigorously defend the transaction and will look forward to the hearings on the substance of the State AGs’ action.”

Paramount shares slid 2% to $8.57 on Monday. Warner shares tumbled nearly 4% to $25.86 — the stock’s lowest mark this year.

Martínez-Olguín’s order came after a hearing in Oakland on Friday that represented an opening salvo between the two sides in the fight over a merger that would dramatically reshape the entertainment industry.

“In many ways this case is a poster child for a much larger set of questions — some of which are specific to the entertainment industry but many are more specific to our regulatory state in general,” Talley said.

Because of the case’s expedited status, the judge said she looked closely at only one of the three markets where the plaintiff states allege the merger could bring anticompetitive harms — wide-release Hollywood films.

“Plaintiffs present compelling evidence that the combined firm resulting from the transaction will possess substantial market share in the wide-release theatrical distribution market,” Martínez-Olguín wrote in her 10-page order.

If allowed to merge, Paramount-Warner Bros. would control about 27% of the market of films that are initially released into more than 3,000 theaters.

“On this combined firm market share alone, the Court is persuaded that it can presume the proposed merger is likely to violate antitrust laws,” the judge wrote.

The ruling doesn’t signal that the states will win but, Talley said: “This is an important mark in the road that suggests that, in the eyes of the judge, at least one of their allegations has the seeds of a valid case.”

Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery are “temporarily enjoined and restrained from closing or consummating the transaction or taking any steps, directly or indirectly, to integrate or consolidate their operations pursuant to the transaction,” the judge wrote.

The order extends to all officers, attorneys, and “other persons who are in active concert or participation with Defendants,” Martínez-Olguín wrote.

The merger is far from dead, Emarketer senior analyst Ross Benes said in a statement after the ruling.

“The order is likely to be a speed bump,” Benes wrote. “Thanks to the company’s symbiotic relationship with Trump, most challenges ahead that could stop the deal will be steamrolled.”

The Lakers have signed forward Matisse Thybulle to a one-year, $3.3-million contract, people familiar with the deal but not authorized to speak publicly told The Times Monday.

Thybulle, who spent last season playing for the Portland Trail Blazers, made the NBA’s all-defensive team twice over his seven-year career. He is a defensive wing player that the Lakers sought to surround Luka Doncic and Austin Reaves.

Thybulle averaged 5.8 points per game last season and shot 43.3% from the field, 39.8% from three-point range, in 30 games.

The Lakers now have a 16-man roster. They’ll have to either trade or waive a player to be at the league maximum number of 15.

Aston Villa have completed the £38m signing of midfielder Joao Gomes from Wolves.

The Brazil international joins for an initial £34m with £4m in add-ons.

Villa completed a club record deal worth more than £50m for Freiburg midfielder Johan Manzambi on Friday, beating Newcastle to the Switzerland international.

Atletico Madrid had also been keen on Gomes, but the 25-year-old left Wolves’ training camp in Portugal on Thursday to have a medical and finalise his move to Villa Park.

Villa midfielder Amadou Onana is out until next year after suffering a serious knee injury with Belgium at the World Cup.

Villa have also sold Youri Tielemans to Manchester United for £35m, while fellow midfielder Morgan Rogers is set to leave after a £117m deal was agreed with Chelsea.

Gomes made 41 appearances for Wolves last season and was named Player of the Year as they finished bottom of the Premier League.

He played 130 times for the club, scoring seven goals, after joining from Flamengo in 2023.

Wolves technical director Matt Jackson said: “Joao deserves everything he gets from the game. He’s a model professional, a lovely young man and a great family man.

“He’s the type of professional coaches love and players love, so he will go on to be the outstanding player that we know he is.

“We’re obviously sorry to see him go, but we have to take responsible decisions for the football club, and then we build to be stronger collectively.

“It’s a very natural part of football – the best run football clubs who don’t have unlimited resources have to work this way.

“The model is something that we have to adopt, and our fans have always been hugely understanding of that.”

If you feel like your favorite morning news or talk show is frequently trying to sell you something, you’re right.

Shopping segments within the program content of NBC’s “Today,” ABC’s “Good Morning America” and “CBS Mornings” have grown in recent years. Using QR codes on the screen, viewers are taken directly to dedicated e-commerce sites where they can put in their orders, with the program getting 20% or more of the revenue generated.

The segments typically feature a contributor or expert presenting household items, fashion or personal care products, alongside the host viewers know and trust. While hosts typically don’t do the actual pitching, their presence provides a seal of approval that helps drive a purchase.

The segments are also a staple of talk shows and syndicated programs such as “The View,” “The Jennifer Hudson Show,” “Entertainment Tonight” and “Inside Edition” and have spread to local TV stations. Ownership groups have signed deals with companies that match them up with brands looking for exposure that goes far beyond what they get with a 30-second commercial.

“This is the savior for media, if they really focus on it,” said Brian Meehan, co-founder of Knocking, a Connecticut-based company that specializes in embedding e-commerce into TV and digital content.

That may seem bit hyperbolic, but there is little doubt that TV outlets are looking for help as they navigate the upended media industry.

Streaming has pulled viewers away from traditional television, driving down ad revenues. Since 2022, ad spending on broadcast and cable TV has dropped 23%, to $51 billion in 2025. Consumers bypassing or canceling their cable subscriptions are cutting into the fees stations receive from pay TV providers.

As a result, both networks and TV stations have had to make significant cuts in their news operations to maintain profit margins. The daytime syndication business has declined dramatically as well, with NBCUniversal exiting the market and canceling “Access Hollywood” and “The Kelly Clarkson Show.”

Networks and stations don’t reveal how much they earn from the shopping segments, which typically run four minutes, but insiders say it’s well into the eight-figure range.

Bill Hague, executive vice president for the media research firm Magid, said more TV stations are turning to the segments to help fill the additional hours of local news they are programming instead of syndicated talk shows.

“Why invest in syndication when you can have the same audience and more revenue tied to it?” Hague said, adding that the company’s research shows consumers don’t believe the practice diminishes the quality of a newscast.

Jeff Rossen, a former consumer reporter for NBC News, recently pitched online shopping deals for Tegna’s TV local stations. The products he demonstrated sold briskly, likely helped by the credibility and trust he has accrued as a journalist.

That authority matters to viewers. NBC says its research shows that 94% of “Today” viewers trust the product recommendations made on the program.

Morning shows, with their mix of hard news, entertainment segments and lighter fare, have always had more latitude in what they present. But the current dire circumstances of the TV business explain why there is little pushback.

“If helping me buy a better blender also helps pay for an investigative reporter, I’m fine with it,” said Andrew Heyward, a former CBS News president who has consulted for TV station groups.

Heyward said consumers have gotten accustomed to editorial content being a gateway to online shopping. The New York Times gets a cut of sales linked to its Wirecutter product review site.
Book reviews in the Los Angeles Times are linked to Bookshop.org, and the newspaper gets a commission for any sales.

Amazon and other web platforms have made e-commerce account for 21.8% of all U.S. retail purchases, according to the Department of Commerce.

Direct selling on traditional media goes back decades. In 1978, a Clearwater, Fla., radio station accepted 112 electric can openers from an advertiser who could not afford to pay for commercial time. Station owner Bud Paxson had a newscaster auction the inventory over the air and it sold out quickly, leading to a regular show called “Suncoast Bargaineers.”

In 1982, Paxson moved the concept to a local Tampa cable outlet, called it Home Shopping Channel and, after a few years, took it national as Home Shopping Network. HSN soon had celebrities pitching their own product lines, a technique that is now occasionally used by the morning shows.

Candi Carter, whose Cistus Media handles e-commerce for Tegna, said viewers have long been accustomed to seeing products touted inside of programming content, going back to the days of Oprah Winfrey’s “favorite things” segments.

“Brands do it for visibility,” Carter added. “They don’t have to pay a product integration fee and they get revenue from the sales.”

The broadcast networks experimented with direct selling to viewers over the years. NBC even put its name on ShopNBC, a cable channel it co-owned in the 1990s. But the concept was not mastered until NBC’s “Today” introduced “Steals and Deals” in 2010 as an occasional segment that grew over time.

The program now has 30 contributors who present wares in about 350 shopping segments each year. They are available across digital, social, newsletters and mobile platforms after they air on “Today.”

ABC’s “Good Morning America” started its own version in 2011, brazenly calling it “Deals and Steals.” The network now has daily segments on both “GMA” and the afternoon hours “GMA 3” and “The View.” Network contributor Tory Johnson has handled “Deals and Steals” since its launch and has long been one of the most familiar faces on “GMA.” Other contributors, such as former fashion magazine editor Laurie Bergamotto, have been added over the years.

Meehan recalls the biggest hurdle to launching the segments at ABC was the language explaining the arrangement to viewers — making it clear that the network stands to benefit.

“It came down to the attorneys just saying, ‘ABC may receive promotional or financial consideration,’” he said. “It took a long time to go through that process.”

CBS News, historically cautious about any endeavors that could tarnish its legacy as a journalism organization, was the last of the traditional networks to get into e-commerce in 2022 after COVID-19 lockdowns depressed ad revenues. The division was also under pressure to improve its financial performance as Shari Redstone, then-chair of parent Paramount, was intent on improving the company’s balance sheet ahead of a sale.

“Shop CBS” segments, as they’re called, are presented multiple times a week on “CBS Mornings” and “CBS Saturday Morning” and have become key revenue drivers for the struggling news division. Any resistance from producers or on-air talent recedes once they learn how much money e-commerce takes in, according to one veteran at the division not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

While ABC and NBC broker their e-commerce deals in-house and through some of their contributors, CBS turned to Knocking to develop its segments. The company makes deals with product suppliers looking for in-program exposure, supplies the on-air talent that does the pitching with the network’s hosts and builds the websites that handle the transactions.

While on-air network journalists appear in the segments, they are not asked to do the selling. When CBS News signed on with Knocking, the division insisted the talent and producers involved be able to test the products before putting them on air. When they can react with enthusiasm, it’s a big help.

“When ‘CBS Mornings’ co-host Nate Burleson puts on a massager and he’s like, ‘Ooh, wow, this feels like real human hands,’ — none of that is scripted,” said Meehan.

Still, programs are putting their credibility on the line by selling the products. There is little margin for error or customer dissatisfaction, as disgruntled viewers will tune out.

Meehan said Knocking does its best to mitigate that possibility by accepting returns up to six months after purchase.

“A bad experience will hurt both the product or service being featured, and the broadcaster,” Heyward said. “All the parties have a vested interest in honesty, and in a good user experience.”

Paramount Skydance’s top antitrust attorney told a judge Friday that David Ellison’s company would voluntarily delay its proposed $111-billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery at least until mid-August amid a legal challenge brought by 12 state attorneys general.

The states, led by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, have asked a judge to issue a temporary restraining order that would prevent Paramount from finalizing its deal as the court battle ramps up. Paramount made the pledge in hopes of avoiding such a ruling that would tie its hands — and give the states an early win in the litigation.

Federal District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín said she would decide by Wednesday whether to issue a restraining order.

Tech scion David Ellison has been a regular in Washington D.C. this year as he races to consolidate Warner Bros. Discovery — less than a year after his family bought Paramount.

(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

Friday’s hearing in Oakland opened the first chapter in the fight over the blockbuster deal that both sides agree would dramatically reshape Hollywood. Two century-old film studios — with rights to Harry Potter, Batman, “Top Gun,” “The Big Bang Theory” and “Game of Thrones” — would be combined, and HBO and CNN would come under new ownership.

Antitrust attorney James H. Weingarten, of the Washington law firm Milbank, represents California and the other states. He told the judge it would be impossible to untangle the two companies if they are allowed to combine.

“If this merger is allowed to close … the harms begin,” Weingarten said. “The job losses, the synergies — that’s the fancy word for ‘we’re going to save money and there might be job cuts.’ All of that process starts rolling.”

Bonta filed the suit Monday, alleging the proposed merger — the largest in Hollywood in decades — would violate the U.S. Clayton Antitrust Act, a 112-year-old law to prevent mergers that weaken competition and raise costs for consumers.

The lawsuit alleges antitrust violations in three markets where the two companies currently compete: wide-release films, potential blockbuster movies and cable television, where the combined entity would own more than 50 cable channels.

Paramount shares fell 4.3% to $8.75 on Friday. Warner stock slipped 1.5% to $26.87 — below Paramount’s offer of $31 a share.

More than two dozen lawyers attended Friday’s hearing, including from Colorado, Oregon, Washington and New York who came to support California, which is leading the case.

Paramount, represented by antitrust lawyer Jeffrey L. Kessler, argued a temporary restraining order was not necessary. The two sides should instead focus on the next big step — whether the judge issues a preliminary injunction, he said. Such a ruling could delay the deal for months.

Kessler said Paramount should be allowed a hearing to defend against a preliminary injunction by the end of August. The company wants to wrap up the litigation by late September to avoid a higher payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

In a show of confidence earlier this year, Paramount offered Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders a “ticking fee” of 25 cents for every quarter after Sept. 30 — until the deal was done. Such payments would cost Paramount more than $7 million a day, which Kessler called a “massive injury.”

California Atty Gen. Rob Bonta is leading a coalition of 12 state attorneys general to try to halt Hollywood’s biggest merger in decades.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

Paramount would also have to pay Warner a $7-billion breakup fee should the deal fall apart.

Kessler argued the states had not made a sufficient case that competition would be harmed. “We don’t think they’ve come close to jumping through that hurdle,” Kessler said.

Earlier this year, Kessler represented the state attorney generals in their winning case against Live Nation Entertainment. A jury found that Live Nation, which owns Ticketmaster, operated as a monopoly. This time, Kessler is representing corporate interests.

Prominent Los Angeles litigator Daniel Petrocelli is representing Warner Bros. Discovery.

Paramount hired attorney Jeffrey Kessler to lead its antitrust defense.

(Noah Berger / Associated Press)

The case was assigned to Martínez-Olguín Wednesday after Paramount requested an earlier judge be removed because he formerly worked as a labor attorney.

Martínez-Olguín said she inherited the case because she was already overseeing another lawsuit dealing with the merger — not because Paramount had agitated for a change.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance has accused some members of the Israeli government of attempting to influence American public opinion to undermine Washington’s agreement with Iran, highlighting growing public differences between the two allies over Middle East policy.

Speaking on a podcast with Joe Rogan released on Wednesday, Vance defended the U.S.-brokered deal that ended last month’s conflict with Iran, despite criticism from Israeli officials and some U.S. lawmakers who argue the agreement leaves Tehran’s missile and nuclear capabilities largely intact.

Vance accuses Israeli officials of influence campaign

Vance said he was certain that some figures within the Israeli government sought to steer U.S. policy toward continuing military operations against Iran.

“I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there have been people within the Israeli government who are trying to actually shift us away from that policy because they want to continue the military campaign,” Vance said.

He added that although he maintains good relationships with some Israeli officials, others were trying to shape American public opinion.

“There are some people within their system that we know beyond a shadow of a doubt are manipulating and trying to change American public opinion to keep the war going on indefinitely,” he said.

Defends Iran ceasefire agreement

Vance argued that the agreement reached last month was the right decision, despite criticism that it failed to place sufficient limits on Iran’s ballistic missile programme or provide a clear roadmap for dismantling its nuclear facilities.

The deal has also been criticised in Israel for restricting its military campaign against Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The vice president said attempts by foreign governments to influence U.S. policy are common and not unique to Israel.

“It doesn’t bother me that Israel tries to do this. It frankly doesn’t even bother me that Russia or some of these other countries do it,” Vance said.

“What does bother me is when those operations, those influence campaigns, actually affect American political judgment.”

Growing public differences with Israel

The remarks add to increasingly visible disagreements between the Trump administration and Israeli leaders over how to handle Iran.

In June, Vance sharply criticised Israeli opponents of the Iran agreement, arguing that President Donald Trump remained Israel’s strongest ally despite objections from some members of the Israeli government.

Israeli officials have argued that the agreement does not adequately address Iran’s nuclear ambitions or ballistic missile programme, concerns they say are widely shared across Israel’s political and security establishment.

Would US have entered the conflict?

Asked whether the United States would have become involved in the recent conflict with Iran without Israeli influence, Vance replied, “Yes, yes I do.”

He added that President Trump independently believes Iran should never obtain a nuclear weapon.

“I think the president, separate from any influence from Israel, believes very strongly, and again I agree with this, that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon,” Vance said.

The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Why it matters

Vance’s comments expose unusually public tensions between senior U.S. and Israeli officials over the future of Middle East policy. They also underscore ongoing debate within Washington over the extent of foreign influence on U.S. decision-making and the long-term strategy toward Iran.

What to watch

The remarks are likely to draw scrutiny from both Israeli officials and members of the U.S. Congress as the Trump administration seeks to preserve the Iran agreement while managing its close security partnership with Israel. Further disagreements over Iran and regional military operations could test the traditionally strong U.S.-Israel alliance in the months ahead.

With information from Reuters.

Only a few days ago, Paramount Skydance’s planned $111-billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery appeared to be on the glide path to completion.

The deal, which would be the largest merger in Hollywood history, had won approval from several foreign governments and, on June 12, Justice Department antitrust regulators.

The Justice Department’s assent looked to be a major step toward fulfilling the ambitions of David Ellison, the son of multibillionaire tech tycoon Larry Ellison, to bring together Paramount and Warners, which owns CNN and CBS among other properties, under one roof.

The Justice Department’s action ignited suspicions that the Ellisons had profited from their support of President Trump. But it has turned out not to be the last word on the deal. The very next day, California and 11 other states filed a motion to block the merger, stepping in where the Justice Department chose not to tread.

“I will not let Warner Bros. and Paramount merge without a fight,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in announcing the states’ action. A hearing on the motion is scheduled for Friday in San Francisco federal court.

There’s more to this development than an effort to block Ellison’s attempt to repave the entertainment landscape for his own benefit, even though, as my colleague Meg James reports, the states’ motion “poses a major headache” for Ellison. It’s also a pointer toward a major restructuring of antitrust enforcement in the United States.

Customarily, state regulators have piggybacked on antitrust cases brought and managed by the federal government. The feds generally have greater resources than most individual states to conduct the investigations that can lead to antitrust lawsuits. States often have relied on the government to craft consistent and coherent theories of antitrust law to undergird their lawsuits.

But the Trump administration’s apparent pullback from aggressive legal pursuit of allegedly anti-competitive mergers has left a vacuum that states have moved to fill. That’s what’s driving their motion to block the Paramount-Warner Bros. deal.

Dating back to the first Trump term, California and other states have enacted new laws resembling federal statutes requiring merger proponents to provide detailed information about planned deals.

States also have filed their own lawsuits to challenge anticompetitive conduct by pharmacy benefit managers and algorithmic pricing that has driven up housing rents via alleged collusion.

States may have an advantage over the federal government in that their regulators can move faster on complex cases than the feds. That’s what happened in the fight against the proposed 2023 merger of supermarket companies Kroger and Albertsons, something that was widely feared to presage higher prices at the shelf.

Although the Federal Trade Commission moved to block the merger, so too did Oregon, Washington and nine other states in court. The companies called off the merger after a state court in Washington and a federal court in Oregon, ruling on that state’s lawsuit, simultaneously enjoined the merger on Dec. 10, 2024. One day later, Albertsons dropped the proposal.

Some supporters of effective antitrust enforcement suggest that the states’ involvement in these cases could be an effective counterweight to the mercurial approach taken toward enforcement under Trump, which seems to be driven by personal pique, as Paul Glastris, editor of the Washington Monthly, has written.

In 2017, Trump’s Justice Department sued to block AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner, driven by Trump’s irritation over the coverage he received from CNN, which was owned by Time Warner. (I described the lawsuit as Trump’s doing the right thing for the wrong reason.) The merger eventually went through.

The best example of the states’ willingness to supplant the feds as antitrust enforcers in chief is the antitrust case against Live Nation Entertainment. The federal government and 30 states originally filed the case in 2024 in federal court in Manhattan. The lawsuit sought to break up Live Nation, which has controlled scores of top concert venues, in part by forcing it to divest Ticketmaster, the leading entertainment ticketing firm.

A few days after the trial began this spring, the Justice Department reached a settlement with Live Nation. The settlement led to accusations that the White House interfered in the Justice Department’s work on the case, including that Trump himself personally pushed for a settlement and that the deal was reached without the participation or even the knowledge of the Justice Department lawyers handling the case or of the state attorneys general who were participating. The White House referred my request for comment on these accusations to the Justice Department, which didn’t respond.

The states, asserting that the settlement wouldn’t cure Live Nation’s alleged violations of antitrust law, took over the lawsuit — and won. In mid-April, a federal jury found that Live Nation had maintained a monopoly over the live events business, exposing the company to the states’ claims of as much as $700 million in damages and a possible order that it sell Ticketmaster. The company says it will appeal.

The history of antitrust enforcement in the U.S. generally resembles the complaisant stance taken under Trump. Since the enactment of America’s first antitrust statute, the 1890 Sherman Act, industry has generally benefited from lax enforcement, in part because antitrust theory has been ever-changing. During the New Deal, President Franklin Roosevelt suspended antitrust enforcement so his National Recovery Administration could pursue its mandate to suppress industrial competition, which was thought to drive up prices and thereby foster the Great Depression.

The Supreme Court overturned the National Recovery Administration in 1935, though it had already lost credibility. Roosevelt responded in 1938 by appointing Thurman Arnold, a critic of existing antitrust theory, as the Justice Department’s antitrust chief. In his writings, Arnold implied that antitrust law as then interpreted was a fraud aimed at acclimating consumers to ever-larger business combinations through the pretense that “unfair” or “immoral” deals would be barred.

Arnold’s appointment marked what may have been the most productive period in antitrust enforcement. By the time he departed for a federal judgeship in 1943, he had brought more than 50% of all the cases brought under the Sherman Act in its half-century of existence. He broke the auto industry’s stranglehold on consumer auto lending, and started a case that concluded with the Hollywood studios’ forced divestment of their theater chains.

Since then, there have been a few notable antitrust successes, including the 1982 breakup of AT&T. That resulted from a Justice Department antitrust lawsuit launched in 1974. But the consolidation of major industries into fewer and fewer participants, especially in entertainment, has continued with very few roadblocks.

Occasionally, an aggressive enforcer comes into office. That happened under Lina Khan, whom President Biden appointed as chair of the Federal Trade Commission. (The FTC shares antitrust oversight with the Justice Department.)

Khan’s published academic work had taken aim at what she called the lax antitrust treatment of companies such as Amazon. Her argument was that antitrust enforcers’ focus on whether a monopolizing company brought consumers lower prices overlooked the longer-term consequences of giving companies the unfettered right to build market share at the expense of competitors and the free market.

Amazon “has evaded government scrutiny in part through fervently devoting its business strategy and rhetoric to reducing prices for consumers,” Khan wrote in a key article. Once it reached a critical mass, she argued, nothing would stop Amazon from extracting monopoly rents from consumers.

Khan’s aggressive stance on antitrust law earned her the enmity of targets such as Amazon and Facebook, which tried to force her to recuse herself from FTC cases against them. She refused, but due to corporate distaste for her policies, Trump replaced her as FTC chairman on his inauguration day last year.

The Paramount-Warner Bros. deal could be a key test of states’ authority and willingness to take over antitrust enforcement from the federal government. That’s because they’ll be fighting not only resistance from the merger partners, but the government’s conclusion that the deal poses no threat to consumers.

On the other hand, their case at least will be free of the suspicion that the government’s approval owed more to Trump’s friendship with the Ellison family than to sober, painstaking analysis of how reducing the number of big entertainment companies from five to four would be good for the rest of us.

Iran’s top negotiator, Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf, has declared that the country’s armed forces have “complete freedom of action” against the “enemy’s aggression”, after a day of attacks by the United States killed seven Iranian troops.

The attacks on Wednesday were the latest in days of escalating hostilities between Washington and Tehran that appear to have doomed an interim peace deal they agreed to on June 17.

The US announced several rounds of air strikes on Iran overnight on Tuesday and again on Wednesday, saying its forces hit military targets in Iranian coastal areas near the Strait of Hormuz and on the Greater Tunb island.

Iran’s army said one attack struck a barracks in Bampour in the country’s southeast, killing seven personnel from the 388th Brigade and injuring several others. It pledged to deliver “a decisive response… at the appropriate time”.

Iranian media also reported that an overnight US attack hit a wheat storage facility in the  western Khuzestan province, which the US military denied.

The US announced its latest wave of strikes on Wednesday had begun at 10:30pm Iranian time (19:00 GMT), as Iranian media reported explosions in or near Bandar Abbas, Chabahar and Ahvaz.

Earlier, the US military also said it had redirected two commercial vessels as part of a renewed blockade on Iranian ports, which it began enforcing the night before.

Return to negotiations ‘extremely difficult’

Tehran said the repeated waves of US attacks had voided the memorandum of understanding with Washington that had underpinned the fragile ceasefire. Ghalibaf said Iran was “in an essential and existential war with America” and had no reason to continue adhering to the terms of the peace agreement.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Iran had abandoned its commitments under the memorandum because the US had reneged on its side of the deal.

“Our commitments remain in effect only as long as the other side fulfils its pledges,” Baghaei said.

He said Tehran had no plans to engage in further talks with Washington and was focused solely on defending the country.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar said the latest escalation made a return to negotiations “extremely difficult”.

“There’s now a low-intensity war, new sanctions are back on Iran, and there’s a US blockade again,” Serdar said.

However, he said, “if the Americans commit to the articles of the memorandum of understanding, then the Iranians say they’re open to engaging diplomatically”.

Iran renews attacks on Gulf neighbours

On Wednesday morning, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it targeted the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain as part of a “crushing response”. It said it also targeted a major US military logistics hub in Mina Abdullah, Kuwait.

Kuwait’s Ministry of Defence said later on Wednesday that it had downed at least four cruise missiles and 21 drones from Iran throughout the day.

Jordan’s military said it had downed three missiles from Iran.

Gulf Cooperation Council Secretary-General Jasem AlBudaiwi condemned the latest “treacherous” Iranian attacks on Bahrain, Kuwait and Jordan, saying they “reveal Iran’s determination to drag the region into further chaos and instability”.

Zeidon Alkinani, founding director of the Arab Perspectives Institute, said that Iran’s continuing attacks on its neighbours had tested the patience of Gulf states, who oppose the US-Israel war on Iran and have staunchly advocated for diplomacy.

“The patience within the Gulf and the view of Iran may fall apart very soon,” Alkinani told Al Jazeera.

Trump says Iran ‘better behave’

US President Donald Trump warned on Tuesday that US attacks against Iran would intensify if the country’s leaders did not return to negotiations, even threatening to “knock out” Iran’s power plants and bridges.

But Trump declined to give Iran a firm deadline when asked on Wednesday, saying: “I don’t ⁠like giving deadlines, but ⁠they pretty ⁠much know; they ⁠know the story… they better ‌behave.”

Ghalibaf said Iran was still balancing diplomacy with military action in pursuit of its national interest.

While Iran has “never welcomed war… we must always be prepared for battle and stand firm to protect our national security and interests”, Ghalibaf said.

“We must also use the tools of diplomacy and negotiation to achieve and solidify our national interests.”

TV station ownership groups may finally get their wish to own more outlets.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr announced Wednesday that the agency will vote next month to end the rule that allows companies to own no more than two TV stations in a single market. The cap also limits the national coverage of any station owner to 39% limit of the U.S.

Carr said the agency will consider a “case by case” review on station merger and acquisition deals that would result in exceeding the current limits. The commission, which has two Republicans and one Democrat, will vote on Aug. 6.

“Previously, the cap operated as a blanket prohibition on any and all deals that would combine stations in [excess] of the 39% limit — regardless of whether it was a good deal or bad deal for the country,” Carr wrote on the right-wing website Breitbart. “Our new proposal would allow the FCC to approve deals that exceed the 39% cap, but only if doing so would promote the public interest.”

TV station owners and its lobbying group the National Assn. of Broadcasters have been clamoring for a change in the rule, citing the changes in technology that have occurred since the ownership limit. The 39% threshold was set in 2004 when streaming video was still a nascent business.

The station groups say the ability of tech companies such as Google and Netflix to reach every consumer in the U.S. puts them at a disadvantage. At the same time, streaming now accounts for more than 40% of all viewing, according to Nielsen, pulling consumers away from traditional TV. TV stations are also seeing their share of carriage fees from cable and satellite companies shrink due to cord-cutting.

The station groups also argue that declining viewership and revenue make it more challenging to support multiple local TV.news operations in a single market.

But proposed changes to the cap limits have been met with push back from consumer groups and state government officials. They have said station consolidation will result in journalist layoffs and fewer voices for the communities they serve.

Earlier this year, a group of attorneys general filed suit to block Nexstar Media Group’s proposed $6.2-billion acquisition of Tegna, arguing it violates a 112-year-old U.S. antitrust law by knocking out a major competitor. The deal would give Irving, Texas-based Nexstar control of 265 television stations across the country, up from 164. And, in dozens of markets, including San Diego and Sacramento, Nexstar would own multiple TV network affiliates.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge Troy L. Nunley issued a preliminary injunction in April that forbids Nexstar — which owns KTLA-TV Channel 5 in Los Angeles — and Tegna, from combining operations. Nexstar is appealing.

Carr’s proposal would largely put the FCC in charge of picking winners and losers on a case-by-case basis.

When faced with a merger proposal, Carr said the commission would consider such issues as commitment to local journalism and “viewpoint diversity.”

Carr has made his name by threatening to pull the over-the-air broadcast licenses of TV stations that irritate President Trump with their coverage and commentary.

In April, the FCC called for an early review of the licenses for Disney’s eight broadcast TV stations, a day after Trump demanded that ABC fire late-night host Jimmy Kimmel over a joke about First Lady Melania Trump.

Carr also questioned whether ABC’s daytime show “The View,” where negative Trump commentary is rampant, should qualify as a bona fide news program that is exempt from giving equal time to qualified candidates.

Carr’s Breitbart column also reiterated his view that large media companies such as Disney and NBCUniversal parent Comcast hold too much sway over their affiliates.

“New York and Hollywood interests have steamrolled those local TV stations and the broader media market in recent years in ways that run directly counter to the regulatory framework that Congress and the FCC put in place,” he wrote. “Their national programs naturally reflect the values of the New York and Hollywood executives that produce them. This power imbalance has contributed to a steady decline in locally produced news — and with it, a weakening of the public’s trust in the media.”

How owning more stations would give groups leverage in their dealings with networks is unclear. The networks control the rights to the NFL — the No. 1 TV ratings attraction for broadcast television by a mile. Stations pay the networks compensation for those games, which they use when negotiating the carriage fees they receive from cable and satellite companies.

Times staff writer Meg James contributed to this report.

The Writers Guild of America sued Paramount on Tuesday, alleging that the company’s planned $111-billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery violates federal antitrust law.
The union said that with fewer competitors, the merged Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery business would be able to lower costs by reducing writers’ wages and work.

“Writers will be paid less and have fewer employment opportunities,” the WGA said in its lawsuit.

The move comes a day after California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta led a coalition of 12 Democratic state attorneys general who filed a federal lawsuit to block Paramount Skydance’s $111-billion merger with Warner Bros. Discovery.

Bonta has separately asked a judge in San Francisco for a temporary restraining order to hold up the deal while his case is pending in court.

“We feel we have a very strong case,” Bonta said Tuesday during a town hall meeting. “This proposed merger will raise prices. It will lower quality. It will reduce output. It will hurt the American people, and it’ll hurt the the economy and competition.”

The writers guild’s missive creates a second line of attack against tech scion David Ellison’s industry-reshaping deal.

Ellison’s proposed merger has been moving closer to the finish line after securing approvals from the U.S. Justice Department and numerous other foreign governments. President Trump, an ally of Ellison’s billionaire father Larry Ellison, favors the deal.

David Ellison wants to close the deal by September to avoid a higher payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

A Paramount spokeswoman said the company is reviewing the lawsuit.

The proposed merger has sparked fears in Hollywood that it would bring thousands of job losses — similar to past consolidations, including Walt Disney Co.’s 2019 takeover of Fox entertainment properties.

“The Writers Guild of America will not stand idly by as Paramount attempts to violate our country’s antitrust laws and deepen the contraction entertainment workers already feel,” said Writers Guild of America East President Tom Fontana in a statement. “This proposed combined entity would be the largest employer of writers, with tremendous power to suppress our wages, eliminate opportunities for emerging writers, cut jobs across the industry, and produce less programming, affecting the range of storytelling. This merger is not inevitable and we are fighting to stop it.”