losers

Celebrity Traitors’ real winners and losers revealed – from mega-money deals to damage control

EXCLUSIVE: With the Celebrity Traitors final just hours away, a PR expert has revealed which stars are coming out to TV opportunities – and which have been left worse off

The Celebrity Traitors airs its huge finale tonight on BBC One – and while fans are asking whether the Traitors or Faithful will win the game, others are wondering what’s next for its viral stars. Tonight’s episode will see finalists Alan Carr, Cat Burns, David Olusoga, Nick Mohammed and Joe Marler compete for the chance to win up to £100,000 for their chosen charities.

However, celebrity PR specialist Kayley Cornelius has revealed who the real winners from the BBC One series are – as well as who hasn’t come of as well as they had hoped. One of those coming out on top is ex rugby player Joe Marler, who is rumoured to be taking on a big presenting role with the BBC after the show.

Speaking on behalf of Online Casino provider Slingo, Kayley said that Joe has gained a whole new fanbase thanks to the Celebrity Traitors. “He has a lot to gain from this show – he’s recently retired from his sporting career and stepped into this new chapter of his life,” she said.

“Celebrity Traitors was his first bash at giving a reality career a try and he’s going to attract a lot of new listeners to his podcast. People have been so impressed with how clever he’s been throughout the process. He’s proven himself as being entertaining, clever, he comes across very well on screen.

“I can see him being lined up for every show under the sun – he’s probably going to be on Strictly next. He would be perfect for the glitz and glam. He’s such a good team player and he’s from sport so has discipline. He’s going to be a very booked and busy man.”

However, he’s not the only finalist who’ll be going on to bigger and better things – Kayley reveals that Cat Burns’ brand awareness has shot up thanks to the show. “She entered as this quiet underdog among line-up of really well known names. This show was a great opportunity for brand awareness for her,” she said.

“She’s just had to push back her tour but I have no doubt that it is going to sell out in no time. She’ll be able to headline bigger stages, do more arena-based shows. She might get a support slot on a stadium tour. It’s an exciting time where she’s going to be in demand.”

Kayley added that Cat could also go into fashion after showing off her style on Celebrity Traitors. “Some of her looks from the show, she came across as like quite cool, quite grungy and I think that aesthetic from an editorial sense, she’ll probably make thousands off the back of that.”

While there are rumours that the treacherous Alan Carr could become the next host of Strictly Come Dancing, Kayley doesn’t think it would be the right fit for the standout star. “When I think about what he will realistically do next, I can’t imagine it being Strictly,” she said.

“I think with the position that Strictly Come Dancing is in at the moment, as they’re recovering from these scandals, I think they want to keep two female presenters so I don’t know if I can quite see him taking Strictly on, even though it would be brilliant.

“I suppose for Alan, he’s just made a nation fall in love with him again and there’s chats of Chatty Man being revived – I can see it.”

As for the stars who haven’t found success from the show, YouTube star Niko Omilana is one of them thanks to his early banishment. The influencer was the first person to be accused of being a Traitor on the show and left in episode two.

“Niko unfortunately has lost out on quite a lot from doing this show,” Kayley said. “This is the kind of move that should have been a massive career break for Niko as he goes from online reality star into a mainstream celebrity. Like what we’re witnessing with George Clarke on Strictly at the moment.

“Unfortunately, with him being on the show for such a short amount of time, he wasn’t in there long enough to make much of an impact on this new audience.”

Another is Paloma Faith, who was the first to be killed by the Celebrity Traitors – and ‘threw a wobbly’ after being murdered by pal Alan, a source told The Mirror.

“I think Paloma might have some damage control to do,” Kayley says. “She’s quite angry with Alan Carr and how the game panned out. People might see her as a bit petty and a bit pathetic. Originally, the public said, ‘We need Paloma back – she was done so dirty.’ They’re now turning on her and saying she’s been a sore loser.

“From that perspective, she just needs to be a bit cautious and careful about how she speaks about her experience on the show and there might be more behind the scenes than we’re being let on to know at the minute, but I think if she is going to be a bad loser about this situation, it’s not going to go down well with viewers at home.”

Join The Mirror’s WhatsApp Community or follow us on Google News , Flipboard , Apple News, TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads – or visit The Mirror homepage.



Source link

Trump’s tariffs leave a lot of losers, from Laos to Brazil. And there were no real winners

President Trump’s tariff onslaught this week left a lot of losers — from small, poor countries such as Laos and Algeria to wealthy U.S. trading partners such as Canada and Switzerland. They’re now facing especially hefty export taxes — tariffs — on the products they export to the U.S. starting Thursday.

The closest thing to winners may be the countries that succumbed to Trump’s demands — and avoided even more pain. But it’s unclear whether anyone will be able to claim victory in the long run — even the United States, the intended beneficiary of Trump’s protectionist policies.

“In many respects, everybody’s a loser here,’’ said Barry Appleton, co-director of the Center for International Law at the New York Law School.

Barely six months after he returned to the White House, Trump has demolished the old global economic order. Gone is one built on agreed-upon rules. In its place is a system in which Trump himself sets the rules, using America’s enormous economic power to punish countries that won’t agree to one-sided trade deals and extracting huge concessions from the ones that do.

“The biggest winner is Trump,” said Alan Wolff, a former U.S. trade official and deputy director-general at the World Trade Organization. “He bet that he could get other countries to the table on the basis of threats, and he succeeded — dramatically.’’

Everything goes back to what Trump calls “Liberation Day’’ — April 2 — when the president announced “reciprocal’’ taxes of up to 50% on imports from countries with which the United States ran trade deficits and 10% “baseline’’ taxes on almost everyone else.

He invoked a 1977 law to declare the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his sweeping import taxes. That allowed him to bypass Congress, which traditionally has had authority over taxes, including tariffs — all of which is now being challenged in court.

‘Winners’ still paying higher tariffs

Trump retreated temporarily after April announcement triggered a rout in financial markets and suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to give countries a chance to negotiate.

Eventually some of them did, acceding to Trump’s demands to pay what four months ago would have seemed unthinkably high tariffs to maintain their ability to sell to the vast American market.

The United Kingdom agreed to 10% tariffs on its exports to the United States — up from 1.3% before Trump amped up his trade war with the world. The U.S. demanded concessions even though it had run a trade surplus, not a deficit, with the U.K. for 19 straight years.

The European Union and Japan accepted U.S. tariffs of 15%. Those are much higher than the low-single-digit rates they paid last year, but lower than the tariffs he was threatening — 30% on the EU and 25% on Japan.

Also cutting deals with Trump and agreeing to hefty tariffs were Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Even countries that saw their tariffs lowered from April without reaching a deal are still paying much higher tariffs than before Trump took office. Angola’s tariff, for instance, dropped to 15% from 32% in April, but in 2022 it was less than 1.5%.

And while the Trump administration cut Taiwan’s tariff to 20% from 32% in April, the pain will still be felt by a U.S. ally that China claims as its territory.

“Twenty percent from the beginning has not been our goal. We hope that in further negotiations we will get a more beneficial and more reasonable tax rate,” Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te told reporters in Taipei on Friday.

Trump also agreed to reduce the tariff on the tiny southern African kingdom of Lesotho to 15% from the 50% he’d announced in April, but the damage may already have been done there.

Brazil, Canada, Switzerland

Countries that didn’t knuckle under — and those that found other ways to incur Trump’s wrath — got hit harder.

Even some of the poor were not spared. Laos’ annual economic output comes to $2,100 per person and Algeria’s $5,600 — versus America’s $75,000. Nonetheless, Laos got rocked with a 40% tariff and Algeria with a 30% levy.

Trump slammed Brazil with a 50% import tax largely because he didn’t like the way it was treating former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a close Trump ally who is facing trial for trying to overturn his electoral loss and inspiring a riot in the capital in 2023 — recalling Trump’s role in the Jan. 6. insurrection two years earlier at the U.S. Capitol.

Never mind that the U.S. has exported more to Brazil than it’s imported every year since 2007.

Trump’s decision to plaster a 35% tariff on long-standing U.S. ally Canada was partly designed to threaten Ottawa for saying it would recognize a Palestinian state in light of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. Trump is a staunch supporter of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Switzerland was clobbered with a 39% import tax — even higher than the 31% Trump announced on April 2.

“The Swiss probably wish that they had camped in Washington’’ to make a deal, said Wolff, now a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. “They’re clearly not at all happy.’’

Fortunes may change if Trump’s tariffs are upended in court. Five American businesses and 12 states are suing the president, arguing that his April 2 tariffs exceeded his authority under the 1977 law.

In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade, a specialized court in New York, agreed and blocked the tariffs, although the government was allowed to continue collecting them while its appeal wends its way through the legal system, and may end up at the Supreme Court. In a hearing Thursday, the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sounded skeptical about Trump’s justifications for the tariffs.

“If [the tariffs] get struck down, then maybe Brazil’s a winner and not a loser,’’ Appleton said.

$2,400 bill for U.S. households

Trump portrays his tariffs as a tax on foreign countries. But they are actually paid by import companies in the U.S. who typically pass along the cost to their customers via higher prices. True, tariffs can hurt other countries by forcing their exporters to cut prices and sacrifice profits — or risk losing market share in the United States.

But economists at Goldman Sachs estimate that overseas exporters have absorbed just one-fifth of the rising costs from tariffs, while Americans and U.S. businesses have picked up the most of the tab.

Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Ford, Best Buy, Adidas, Nike, Mattel and Stanley Black & Decker have all raised prices due to U.S. tariffs.

“This is a consumption tax, so it disproportionately affects those who have lower incomes,” Appleton said. “Sneakers, knapsacks … your appliances are going to go up. Your TV and electronics are going to go up. Your video game devices, consoles are going to up because none of those are made in America.’’

Trump’s trade war has pushed the average U.S. tariff from 2.5% at the start of 2025 to 18.3% now, the highest since 1934, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. And that will impose a $2,400 cost on the average household, the lab estimates.

“The U.S. consumer’s a big loser,″ Wolff said.

Wiseman writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Christopher Rugaber contributed to this report.

Source link

Elton John brands government ‘absolute losers’ over AI copyright plans

BBC Sir Elton John speaking to Laura Kuenssberg, who is behind the camera. He has ginger hair and blue eyes. He is wearing a black t-shirt, black blazer, and thick, square, black-rimmed glasses.BBC

Sir Elton John described the government as “absolute losers” and said he feels “incredibly betrayed” over plans to exempt technology firms from copyright laws.

Speaking exclusively to Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, he said if ministers go ahead with plans to allow AI firms to use artists’ content without paying, they would be “committing theft, thievery on a high scale”.

This week the government rejected proposals from the House of Lords to force AI companies to disclose what material they were using to develop their programmes.

A government spokesperson said that “no changes” to copyright laws would be “considered unless we are completely satisfied they work for creators”.

Generative AI programmes mine, or learn, from vast amounts of data like text, images, or music online to generate new content which feels like it has been made by a human.

Sir Elton said the “danger” is that, for young artists, “they haven’t got the resources … to fight big tech [firms]”.

“It’s criminal, in that I feel incredibly betrayed,” he added.

“The House of Lords did a vote, and it was more than two to one in our favour,” he said. “The government just looked at it as if to say, ‘Hmm, well the old people … like me can afford it.'”

On Monday, the House of Lords voted by a 147 majority to amend the Data (Use and Access) Bill to add transparency requirements, which aim to ensure copyright holders have to give permission for their work to be used.

But on Wednesday MPs in the House of Commons voted to reject this change, meaning the bill will continue to go back and forth between the two Houses until they reach an agreement on it.

Sir Elton warned the government was on course to “rob young people of their legacy and their income”, adding that he thought the government was “just being absolute losers, and I’m very angry about it”.

The singer said that Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer needed to “wise up” and described Technology Secretary Peter Kyle as “a bit of a moron”.

He said if the government does not change its plans, he would be ready to take ministers to court, saying that “we’ll fight it all the way”.

Sir Elton John and James Graham speak to Laura Kuenssberg.

Sir Elton John spoke to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg alongside playwright James Graham

Speaking alongside the 78-year-old, playwright James Graham said ministers “do understand the value of creativity… but what’s frustrating is either the complacency or the willingness to let Silicon Valley tech bros get it all their own way”.

The chief executive of UK music, Tom Kiehl, told the BBC that the government is “on the brink” of offering up the country’s music industry “as a sacrificial lamb in its efforts to cosy up to American-based tech giants”.

He added that the prime minister “must not sell” the next generation of singers, songwriters, musicians, and music creators “down the river and allow all that talent to be crushed by letting soulless AI bots plunder their work”.

Ahead of the vote in the House of Lords, Sir Elton joined more than 400 British musicians, writers, and artists in signing a letter calling on the prime minister to update copyright laws in a way that protects them from artificial intelligence.

Beatles singer Sir Paul McCartney, who also signed the letter, previously told the BBC there was a risk AI would create a “Wild West” in which artists’ copyright was not properly protected.

A government spokesperson said it wants the UK’s creative industries and AI companies to “flourish, which is why we’re consulting on a package of measures that we hope will work for both sectors”.

The spokesperson said it was “vital” the government worked through responses to a consultation on proposals to allow developers to use creators’ content unless rights holders elected to “opt out”.

They added that it was “equally important that we put in the groundwork now as we consider the next steps”.

“That is why we have committed to publishing a report and economic impact assessment – exploring the broad range of issues and options on all sides of the debate.”

The full interview with Sir Elton John will be on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday 18 January at 09:00 BST.

Thin, red banner promoting the Off Air with Laura K newsletter with text saying, “Insider stories in your inbox every week". There is also an image of presenter Laura Kuenssberg and an illustration of the Houses of Parliament in the background.

Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg’s expert political insight and insider stories every Thursday.

Source link