making

IF you’re wondering where the next big holiday trend is coming from, I can save you some time.

It’s not a brand new destination, and it’s not somewhere “undiscovered”.

It’s the places your parents went in the 90s.

I spend most of my time looking at holiday booking data, and this one trend keeps jumping out.

A whole wave of classic British package holiday resorts are making a serious comeback in 2026.

And the reason is simple: they’re still ridiculously good value.

From Europe to Africa, here are my top 10 cheap holiday spots that are booming again… and the deals you can get right now.

10. Skanes, Tunisia

Skanes is a proper throwback to 90s package holidays – big beachfront hotels, short transfers, and everything centred around the resort.

And now, it’s having one of the biggest comebacks I’ve seen in the data, with bookings to Tunisia up massively again heading into 2026.

I found a really strong all-inclusive deal here – 7 nights at the 4* Hotel Liberty Resort, flying from London Southend (16–23 Aug 2026), from £535pp for a family of four. That’s roughly £76pp per night, and crucially, it’s all-inclusive.

What makes this one work is how family-friendly it is – big pool areas, loads going on for kids, and everything included, so you’re not constantly spending.

And the reason it’s this cheap is simple. Tunisia is still rebuilding demand, so hotels are pricing low to win Brits back. Which means right now, you’re getting proper beachfront value for a fraction of what you’d pay elsewhere.

9. Calpe, Costa Blanca, Spain

Calpe was huge with British tourists in the 80s and early 90s – classic Spanish seaside, big beaches and that iconic rock backdrop.

Now it’s trending again in 2026, as people look for more relaxed, less chaotic alternatives to bigger resorts.

I found a great-value summer deal – 7 nights at the 4* AR Diamante Beach, flying from Bournemouth (3–10 Aug 2026), from £588pp for a family of four. That’s about £84pp per night, on a bed & breakfast basis.

This hotel stands out because it feels a bit more premium than your typical Costa Blanca stay – big modern rooms, great pool area, and close to the beach without being chaotic.

It’s cheaper because it’s not trying to be flashy or all-inclusive heavy. And for families, that works – because you can eat out cheaply and control your spending instead.

8. Hurghada, Egypt

Hurghada was unbelievably popular in the 2000s all-inclusive boom, thanks to massive resorts, guaranteed heat and loads included in the price.

And now it’s properly back again, with bookings climbing fast into 2026.

This one’s properly eye-opening – 7 nights at the 4* Royal Lagoons Aqua Park Resort & Spa, flying from Belfast (22–29 Aug 2026), from £668pp for a family of four. That’s around £95pp per night, and it’s all-inclusive.

What makes it great for families is the waterpark setup with slides, multiple pools and enough going on to keep kids busy all week without leaving the hotel.

This is why Egypt is flying with Brits right now, despite its proximity to the Iran conflict. Because once you arrive, everything’s covered.

Flights are longer, which keeps demand slightly lower, but for families, that means ridiculous value for what you get.

7. Hammamet, Tunisia

Hammamet was one of the classic British beach holidays of the 90s – long sandy beaches, big hotels and loads of all-inclusive resorts.

Just like Skanes, it’s seeing a massive resurgence heading into 2026.

I spotted this while digging through peak summer prices – 7 nights at the 4* Houda Yasmine Hammamet, flying from London Southend (23–30 Aug 2026), from £553pp for a family of four. That’s about £79pp per night, and it’s all-inclusive.

It’s a proper classic family hotel with a massive pool, entertainment, and everything geared around easy, no-stress holidays.

Again, the price comes down to perception catching up with reality.

The hotels are good, the weather’s great – but demand hasn’t fully returned yet. So you’re benefiting from that gap.

6. Salou, Costa Dorada, Spain

Salou was massive with British families in the 90s and early 2000s with beaches, family hotels and PortAventura right next door.

And now it’s flying back again in 2026 as families rediscover how easy it is.

I couldn’t ignore this deal – 7 nights at the 4* 4R Playa Park, flying from Birmingham (21–28 Aug 2026), from £408pp for a family of four. That’s just £58pp per night, on a bed & breakfast basis.

This is exactly what Salou does well: simple, well-located hotels with good pools and easy access to everything – and at a really great price too.

And it’s such great value because you’re not paying for extras upfront.

But in Salou, that’s ideal – everything locally is affordable, so you can build your own budget holiday.

5. Torremolinos, Costa del Sol, Spain

Torremolinos is where the British package holiday basically started back in the 60s and 70s.

And in 2026, it’s trending hard again thanks to how easy and reliable it is.

I found a really solid summer option here – 7 nights at the 4* Hotel Apartamentos Bajondillo, flying from Bournemouth (22–29 Aug 2026), from £518pp for a family of four. That’s about £74pp per night, on a self-catering basis.

What makes this one great is the location, as it sits right on the beachfront, with loads nearby, and perfect if you want flexibility with food and spending.

It’s not the cheapest on the list, but you’re paying for convenience – short transfer, loads to do, and no surprises.

4. Benidorm, Costa Blanca, Spain

Benidorm was the capital of British holidays in the 80s and 90s, and now a whole new generation is discovering it.

Bookings are up again in 2026, especially with younger families and couples.

I found this cracking value deal – 7 nights at the 3* Terralta Apartments, flying from Dublin (23–30 Aug 2026), from £403pp for a family of four. That’s roughly £58pp per night, on a self-catering basis.

It’s ideal for families too, as it’s home to spacious apartments, a big pool, and a quieter location just outside the main strip.

And this one’s cheap simply because Benidorm is built for volume: loads of apartments, loads of competition – which keeps prices low.

Best part is, once you’re there, everything else is cheap too.

3. Sousse, Tunisia

Sousse has always been one of Tunisia’s most popular beach resorts – big hotels, great beaches and loads of all-inclusive options.

And just like the rest of Tunisia, it’s seeing a huge comeback into 2026.

One of the best-value all-inclusive deals I found – 7 nights at the 4* El Ksar Resort & Thalasso, flying from London Southend (16–23 Aug 2026), from £583pp for a family of four. That’s about £83pp per night, and it’s all-inclusive.

This is exactly what families want – beachfront setting, slides, big pool areas and everything included from day one.

This is where the value really shows.

Because when everything’s included, you’re not constantly spending – which makes it one of the easiest holidays to budget for.

2. El Arenal, Majorca, Spain

El Arenal was massive in the charter flight era – big beach, loads of hotels and right next to Palma.

And now Majorca, and El Arenal in particular, is firmly back on the rise again in 2026.

I found a peak summer Majorca deal that really stood out – 7 nights at the 3* BLUESEA Costa Verde, flying from Bournemouth (19–26 Aug 2026), from £580pp for a family of four. That’s about £83pp per night, and it’s all-inclusive.

What makes this one work is simplicity – good pool, food included, and a no-frills base in a super easy destination.

It’s slightly pricier because Majorca never really goes out of demand.

But you’re paying for ease – short flight, reliable weather and a destination that just works.

1. Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt

Sharm El Sheikh was one of the BIGGEST British holiday hotspots of the 2000s.

And now it’s making the biggest comeback of all destinations worldwide heading into 2026.

And this is where the value really hits home – 7 nights at the 4* Xperience Saint George Homestay, flying from London Luton (5–12 Aug 2026), from £650pp for a family of four. That’s around £93pp per night, and it’s all-inclusive, in great hotel, with guaranteed heat.

This hotel is built for proper relaxation with multiple pools, loads of food options and everything set up so you barely need to leave. Just turn up, pay for nothing, and leave rested, relaxed and tanned.

And the reason it’s such good value, even in the summer holidays, is simple.

Flights have only relatively recently come back at scale, so demand is still catching up. But the hotels are still world-class.

Which means right now, you’re getting proper 4* all-inclusive… for less than most self-catering holidays in Europe.

If I had a nickel for every time an editor has sent me an SFGate story and asked me to match it, I’d be at least a couple dollars richer. The San Francisco-based news website provides solid coverage of California public lands, especially our national parks.

So when my colleague Jaclyn Cosgrove told me the National Park Service had reportedly blacklisted SFGate, I wasn’t exactly shocked.

Recent SFGate stories have revealed efforts to limit which public lands employees can share information with the public, quoted critics of the Department of the Interior’s decision to end reservation systems at popular parks and detailed a litany of items that were previously offered at the parks but are now being reviewed for possible removal, thanks to an executive order to “restore truth and sanity” to American history, including books about Indigenous culture and educational materials for children.

But over the past month, the National Park Service essentially stopped responding to inquiries sent by SFGate reporters on dozens of subjects, national parks bureau chief Ashley Harrell wrote last week. The outlet spoke with sources, reviewed internal communications and learned that an Interior Department spokesperson had instructed the National Park Service to ignore SFGate reporters, Harrell wrote. The blacklisting was apparently prompted by a Feb. 10 article on the Interior Department’s efforts to centralize control of park service communications.

I emailed the National Park Service to learn more. “Unfortunately, SFGate has distorted the facts and has caused confusion with their reporting with the mainstream media,” a spokesperson replied. “This has caused the Department to spend countless hours correcting their false narrative with other media outlets.”

Although the statement came from a park service email address, the wording is identical to a statement provided to SFGate by an Interior Department spokesperson.

I’ve also noticed changes in how the park service handles media requests over the past year or so. Some L.A. Times inquiries — about a coyote swimming to Alcatraz and a man charged with BASE jumping in Yosemite, for instance — received prompt replies.

But others — like questions about whether the park service is relying more heavily on seasonal employees amid a decline in permanent staff — went unreturned. And some — like an inquiry for a previous edition of a Boiling Point newsletter about an interpretive exhibit under scrutiny at Death Valley National Park — were fielded by a spokesperson for the Interior Department , rather than the park itself.

I’m not alone. When our wildlife and outdoors reporter Lila Seidman wrote about a wildfire that ripped through Joshua Tree National Park during last year’s government shutdown, she received responses from the Interior Department, but emails to the park service went unreturned.

Jack Dolan, an investigative reporter who often covers public lands, said he hasn’t received meaningful responses from the National Park Service since early last year.

And Cosgrove, who writes The Wild newsletter, said that park rangers remain friendly and helpful, but any communication involves a demand for all questions in writing.

Park service sources and advocates describe all this as part of a broader effort to centralize communications from sub-agencies to the Department of the Interior. Since last year, roughly 230 communications employees have been moved from the National Park Service to the Department of the Interior — part of a broader push in which more than 5,700 employees at the 11 agencies the Interior Department oversees were shifted from the agencies to the department, according to figures provided by the National Parks Conservation Assn., a nonprofit that advocates for the park system.

What’s more, the Interior Department must now approve many park service communications that were once left up to the parks themselves, said John Garder, senior director of budget and appropriations for the National Parks Conservation Assn. That includes exhibits, news releases, website updates and even social media posts, said a source within the park service who asked to remain anonymous over fears of retaliation.

The consolidation “creates significant inefficiencies and removes a layer of accountability to the parks themselves,” Garder said. “It makes it difficult for parks to act nimbly using their professional discretion to make decisions about informing the public about developments in the park,” like a closed road, wildlife hazard or natural disaster.

In an email to The Times, the park service accused National Parks Conservation Assn. employees of donating to Democratic political campaigns and pointed out the nonprofit’s X account follows progressive politicians and groups. “Our parks are nonpartisan, but the NPCA isn’t and they are using you to further raise money off of our parks while never giving those funds to our parks,” a spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement.

National Parks Conservation Assn.’s X account follows over 55,000 users of the platform, including both Democratic and Republican lawmakers and organizations. Garder also noted that the association’s longstanding role has been to advocate for national parks, rather than to raise money directly for them.

The park service email confirmed that officials are “modernizing” the Department of the Interior so that it “will share one voice when communicating the priorities of the Department.”

“The unification of the communication functions will allow for a more collaborative, creative and hands-on approach to Department communications,” the statement said, “and will modernize the federal government by providing a product that is not only better for the American taxpayer but also showcases the state-of-the-art communications capabilities of the United States of America.”

I asked whether I should attribute the statement to a spokesperson for the park service or the Interior Department. The spokesperson replied that I could attribute it to either.

A quick announcement

If you’re a Southern California local, you are probably familiar with PBS SoCal. On April 22, the public media organization is premiering the seventh season of the award-winning program “Earth Focus,” which will be followed by the eighth season in May. We’re excited for the eighth season in particular, because we collaborated with the PBS SoCal team on a few stories about the complexities of rebuilding Los Angeles. You can stream the show for free at pbssocal.org/earthfocus.

More recent land news

Karen Budd-Falen, the third highest-ranking official at the Department of the Interior, has been granted an ethics waiver to work on grazing issues despite potential conflicts of interests that prompted her to recuse herself from such matters during the first Trump presidency, according to Chris D’Angelo of Public Domain.

A pair of Republican senators have officially moved to overturn the management plan for Utah’s Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument, casting uncertainty on its future and raising new questions about the future of public lands management, Caroline Llanes of Rocky Mountain Community Radio reports.

The Trump administration is aggressively expanding the border wall through ecologically sensitive public lands, with a portion planned for Big Bend National Park emerging as a political flash point, Arelis R. Hernández, Jake Spring, John Muyskens and Thomas Simonetti write in this Washington Post deep dive.

The Interior Department has officially pulled back more than 80% of its regulations tied to implementing the National Environmental Policy Act in a bid to streamline the environmental review process for major projects on federal public lands. Conservation groups say the changes will block public input and violate federal law, according to Hannah Northey and Scott Streater of E&E News by Politico.

The Trump administration is taking the final steps to undo the Public Lands Rule, which elevated conservation to an official use of Bureau of Land Management lands, Streater also reports. The rule allowed conservation groups to obtain leases for restoration work, similar to how the Bureau of Land Management awards leases to private contractors for extraction and development, points out Sage Marshall of Field & Stream.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Forest Service is expected to soon release an updated proposal for the rescission of the Roadless Rule, which blocked new road building and commercial logging on some 58 million acres of backcountry. The rollback would strike a big blow to hunting and fishing opportunities, according to a report from Trout Unlimited.

A few last things in climate news

Amid a global energy crisis that’s seen oil prices skyrocket, California has been particularly hard-hit due to a dearth of refineries and higher taxes and fees, all of which have left politicians, consumer groups and business interests arguing over who’s to blame, write Ivan Penn and Kurtis Lee for the New York Times.

In the latest maneuver in its campaign against renewable energy, the Trump administration will pay a French company $1 billion to walk away from two U.S. offshore wind leases, according to Jennifer McDermott of the Associated Press.

Southern California’s most destructive wildfires, wettest holiday season and hottest March heat wave have all taken place in the last 15 months, and there’s one clear through line connecting them all, scientists told my colleague Clara Harter.

Mosquitoes have gone year-round in Los Angeles, but business owners have indicated they’re not willing to pay to expand a promising effort to help control their numbers, my buddy Lila Seidman reports.

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.

For more land news, follow @phila_lex on X and alex-wigglesworth.bsky.social on Bluesky.

This is the April 21, 2021, edition of the Essential Politics newsletter. Like what you’re reading? Sign up to get it in your inbox three times a week.

Outgoing presidents often leave decisions for their successors to take on.

Over the last two decades, and four presidents, how to end America’s longest war — in Afghanistan — has been among the largest open questions. President Biden inherited it from President Trump, who inherited it from President Obama, who took it from President George W. Bush. Unpopular, seemingly unending and unwinnable, the war is a case study in how the choices of one administration echo into the next.

Last week, Biden formally announced a deadline of Sept. 11 — the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks that provoked the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan — to end military involvement in the country.

“War in Afghanistan was never meant to be a multigenerational undertaking,” he said.

The prospective exit also has been years in the works. Obama promised to scale back U.S. involvement, but first he sent a surge of troops. Trump vowed several times to withdraw all troops, making chaotic progress that stopped short of a full exit. Biden is now the third president to make a similar commitment.

Whether he will follow through remains to be seen. My colleagues David S. Cloud and Tracy Wilkinson have extensively covered the American involvement in Afghanistan, from Trump’s growing tensions with the Pentagon over withdrawal to the lives of Afghanistan’s youngest generation, which was born into U.S. occupation.

Taken together, their work over the last few years reveals the deep roots of Biden’s promise, and the complicated history that will color his path forward.

The long path to leaving

January 2017: A president who promised peace leaves office after eight years of war

During his first presidential campaign, Obama pledged to end the war in Afghanistan, as well as in Iraq. He ended his presidency as the first two-term president to see U.S. forces at war for all eight years.

Experts saw his legacy as mixed. He did reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan, cutting their ranks to 8,400, and his administration reduced American deaths — if not Afghanis’ — by relying on diplomacy and on drones to launch airstrikes. Yet intelligence officials said the U.S. faced more threats in more places than the country had seen since the Cold War. “We’re now wrapped up in all these different conflicts, at a low level and with no end in sight,” one expert told The Times.

August 2017: Trump presides over a stalemate and negotiated settlement

Trump the candidate ran as a tough-on-the-Taliban leader, promising a hard-fought and fast victory to end U.S. engagement. But Trump the president softened when it came time to reveal formal plans, Cloud and Wilkinson wrote with former Times reporter W.J. Hennigan. Fighting continued — to show U.S. forces could not be pushed out — while Trump promised that the 16-year war might end “some day” in a negotiated settlement. It was an acknowledgment that victory would elude a president who loved to win and refused to concede defeat.

“This entire effort is intended to put pressure on the Taliban, to have the Taliban understand you will not win a battlefield victory,” then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said. “We may not win one, but neither will you. So at some point, we have to come to the negotiating table and find a way to bring this to an end.”

By February 2018, the Trump administration proposed a defense budget that increased spending in Afghanistan by almost $2 billion, for a total of $48.9 billion in the next fiscal year.

December 2018: Trump presses for peace talks and announces a withdrawal of half of troops

That month, a series of announcements signaled Trump’s growing dissatisfaction with involvement in Afghanistan. Increased Taliban attacks had caused hundreds of Afghan civilian and military casualties a month, prompting Trump administration officials to press for a cease-fire agreement, but with dim prospects, Cloud wrote.

Less than two weeks later, administration officials announced a drastic plan: withdraw up to half of the 14,000 American troops serving in Afghanistan, potentially by summer. The backlash was swift from U.S. lawmakers, allies and even the Pentagon. Defense Secretary James N. Mattis was so furious that Trump would abandon allies in Syria and Afghanistan that he resigned in protest, as Cloud reported.

February-May 2020: A truce and a landmark agreement to withdraw

With 12,000 troops still in Afghanistan, the Trump administration brokered a temporary deal with the Taliban to reduce violence for a week in February, Wilkinson reported. The test was a success, and on Feb. 29, U.S. and Taliban officials signed an accord to end the war. The Taliban would prevent Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups from using Afghan territory to threaten the U.S., without renouncing its terrorist ties. In return, the U.S. would withdraw its troops within 14 months, setting a deadline of May 1, 2021.

The plan again drew backlash, from former Trump and Obama administration officials, who warned a complete withdrawal could backfire, Cloud, Wilkinson and Stefanie Glinksi reported. Even as conflict continued between the Taliban and the Afghan government into May, the Trump administration remained committed to removing troops.

November 2020: Hopes of exiting before the election dashed

Trump, hoping that a full exit in 2020 would boost his reelection prospects, made clear to advisors that he cared little about conditions in Afghanistan, Cloud and Wilkinson reported. He wanted out, period. By July, the number of troops on the ground had shrunk to 8,600.

But as the peace talks the U.S. hoped to broker struggled to get off the ground, administration officials said about 4,000 troops would have to remain into November. The Pentagon said too rapid a withdrawal would doom the talks, invite violence and cause American forces to have to abandon valuable equipment. Trump said he wanted a withdrawal by the end of his term in January, and in November — as he refused to concede his loss to Biden — he ordered troop levels reduced in Iraq and Afghanistan, to 2,500 in each country.

Trump’s relationship with Congress further deteriorated in December, in part over the bipartisan pushback to his withdrawal plans. It was among the reasons he cited in vetoing the annual National Defense Authorization Act, Cloud and Jennifer Haberkorn wrote.

April 2021: Biden says it’s “time to end the forever war.”

When Biden took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2,500 troops remained in Afghanistan. But the new president faced the decision of whether to honor Trump’s May 1 deadline for withdrawing them — the final exit from the war, Cloud wrote. Once again, Defense Department officials pressured the president to delay a full withdrawal as the deadline the Trump administration negotiated with the Taliban approached.

On April 14, Biden made his decision public: The drawdown would proceed, but not so quickly. The U.S. would fully exit by Sept. 11, Cloud and David Lauter wrote.

“I am now the fourth United States president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan. Two Republicans. Two Democrats,” Biden said. “I will not pass this responsibility onto a fifth.”

The top half of the front page of the Los Angeles Times on Oct. 9, 2001.

(Los Angeles Times)

Policing, policy and the Minneapolis verdict

— The conviction of former Police Officer Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd reenergized a push for sweeping criminal justice reform by President Biden and leading Democrats, who said Tuesday’s verdict was just the first step on the path to national healing, report Evan Halper, Eli Stokols and Sarah D. Wire.

— Anticipating an uproar, Facebook said it would crack down on violent content, hate speech and harassment ahead of the Chauvin verdict. But as Brian Contreras reports, critics are wondering why the platform doesn’t take those precautions all the time.

The latest on the environment

— China, Japan and South Korea are the world’s biggest funders of coal-fired power plants around the globe — and the Biden administration is looking to win their agreement to deep cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions by the end of the decade, write Anna M. Phillips and Wilkinson.

— Biden will convene leaders from around the world on Thursday and Friday as he marks the United States’ return to the global fight against climate change, Chris Megerian writes. Three people with knowledge of the White House plans say Biden will pledge to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions at least in half by 2030.

— Solar panels, wind turbines and electric cars will go far in helping California and the Biden administration meet their aggressive climate goals — but not far enough. As time runs short, scientists and government officials say the moment to break out the giant vacuums has arrived, Halper writes.

More from Washington

— Vice President Kamala Harris traveled to North Carolina on Monday to talk about economic opportunities and electric school buses as part of the Biden administration’s efforts to promote its roughly $2-trillion infrastructure, clean energy and jobs plan, Noah Bierman writes.

— The Supreme Court is weighing whether immigrants granted temporary protected status can get green cards — and if the Biden administration will make that decision, David G. Savage reports.

— The Justice Department has brought charges against hundreds of people who stormed the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot, but one of its most pivotal potential cases involves a man who never set foot inside the building, writes Del Quentin Wilber.

— After Jan. 6, many of the nation’s largest corporations pledged that they would suspend donations to elected officials who opposed the certification of Joe Biden’s victory, hindered the peaceful transfer of power or incited violence. The vast majority kept their word, report Seema Mehta, Maloy Moore and Matt Stiles.

— What is there left to say about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Plenty, it turns out. In a new biography, Pelosi dishes on chiding Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and using the nickname “Moscow Mitch,” writes Wire.

Former Chelsea and Arsenal player Jorginho may be best known as a defensive midfielder – but he has gone viral on social media for his attack on pop singer Chappell Roan, alleging her security guard reduced his 11-year-old daughter to tears.

The 34-year-old Italy international, who has dual Brazilian citizenship and now plays for Flamengo in Rio de Janeiro, claimed in a post on Instagram, external that his family suffered the “very upsetting situation” over breakfast at a hotel in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

The former Premier League midfielder said his daughter was a big Chappell Roan fan and had made a sign to take to the Lollapalooza music festival in Sao Paulo, which the singer was headlining.

He says his daughter recognised the star while eating at a nearby table and walked past her, smiled, then went back to her seat without saying anything or asking anything of the Pink Pony Club singer.

“What happened next was completely disproportionate,” he wrote.

“A large security guard came over to their table while they were still having breakfast and began speaking in an extremely aggressive manner to both my wife [Catherine Harding] and my daughter, saying that she shouldn’t allow my daughter to ‘disrespect’ or ‘harass’ other people.”

He added: “He even said he would file a complaint against them with the hotel, while my 11-year-old daughter was sitting there in tears. My daughter was extremely shaken and cried a lot.”

Chappell Roan has not responded to his claims.

Jorginho said he understood well the pressures of public exposure after playing 57 times for Italy – helping them win the European title in 2021 by beating England at Wembley.

He has also played for elite clubs across Europe and Brazil – winning the Champions League and Europa League with Chelsea and silverware in Italy with Napoli.

But he added: “I understand very well what respect and boundaries are. What happened there was not that. It was just a child admiring someone.

“It’s sad to see this kind of treatment coming from those who should understand the importance of fans. At the end of the day, they are the ones who build all of this.

“I sincerely hope this serves as a moment of reflection. No-one should have to go through this, especially not a child.”

Jorginho finished his impassioned post with a direct message to Chappell Roan, written in capital letters: “WITHOUT YOUR FANS, YOU WOULD BE NOTHING. AND TO THE FANS, SHE DOES NOT DESERVE YOUR AFFECTION.”

The “unexpected beef”, as described by some commentators, led to a flood of responses on social media in support of Jorginho and his family – some serious, some tongue-in-cheek.

Rio de Janeiro’s mayor, Eduardo Cavaliere, wrote that he intended to ban Chappell Roan from performing in his city, adding that Jorginho’s daughter would be invited as a guest of honour to the city’s Todo Mundo music festival in May.

Others cited her previous comments about fans’ “creepy” and “stalker-like-behaviour”, external.

Some also poked fun at the Grammy Award winner for lacking the credentials to play in the Premier League.

Heavy social media use has contributed to ‘worrying decline’ in wellbeing in Western countries, World Happiness Report says.

Social media has played a large role in declining happiness among young people in Western countries, a United Nations-backed report has found.

Heavy social media use partly explains a “worrying decline” in the wellbeing of young people in the West, the latest edition of the annual World Happiness Report said on Wednesday.

In total, 15 Western countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, saw significant declines in youth wellbeing over the past two decades, according to the report.

The trend was not observed globally, with young people in regions covering 90 percent of the world’s population reporting higher life satisfaction than before.

“The trends are caused by many factors, which differ between continents. However, the evidence in this report does suggest that heavy social media use, especially in some countries, provides an important part of the explanation,” researchers John F Helliwell, Richard Layard, Jeffrey D Sachs, Jan-Emmanuel De Neve, Lara B Aknin, and Shun Wang said in an executive summary of the report.

“Outside the English-speaking world and Western Europe, the links between social media use and wellbeing are more positive, and they vary between platforms,” the researchers added.

The report, published by the University of Oxford’s Wellbeing Research Centre in partnership with Gallup and the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network, cited data from sources including the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and research by the American social psychologist Jonathan Haidt.

Despite the decline in youth wellbeing, Western countries, particularly in Scandinavia, dominated the overall happiness rankings across age groups.

Finland ranked as the world’s happiest nation for the ninth consecutive year, followed by Iceland, Denmark, Costa Rica, Sweden and Norway.

The Netherlands, Israel and Switzerland also made the top 10.

Middle Eastern and African countries had the lowest happiness scores.

Afghanistan reported the lowest life satisfaction, with Zimbabwe, Malawi, Egypt, Yemen and Lebanon also ranking among the bottom 10 countries.

Social media use among young people has been a growing concern for governments amid reports linking platforms to bullying, sexual exploitation and worsening mental health.

Australia last year introduced the world’s first social media ban for under 16s, with plans for similar restrictions under way in Indonesia, France and Greece.

Nico de Boinville has been cleared of making racist comments towards fellow jockey Declan Queally at the Cheltenham Festival.

De Boinville, 36, had “categorically” denied the accusation he used such language.

Irish amateur jockey Queally had alleged he was racially abused before the Novices’ Hurdle, when it was held up because of a false start on day two of the meeting.

Queally, riding I’ll Sort That, and Englishman De Boinville, on Act Of Innocence, could be seen exchanging words at the start line.

Queally later told ITV Racing he had received abuse and then told the Racing Post some of the abuse was racial in nature – though De Boinville denied this was the case.

The two then appeared on ITV Racing together and shook hands at the entrance of the weight room, where the Irishman said the matter was “all sorted”.

However, a British Horseracing Authority investigation had been opened. It has now concluded and found “no evidence to support the allegation made by Mr Queally of racist comments”.

“It is understood, and accepted, that strong language was used by De Boinville at the start and directed towards Mr Queally,” said a BHA statement.

“It was also stated that a number of riders were also verbally expressing their frustration at the start, away from the incident being enquired into.

“There was no audio evidence or verbal evidence given from any party during the course of the enquiry to corroborate that any language used was of a racist nature.”

While Queally’s complaint was not upheld, De Boinville was reminded of his “obligations and the expectations to ensure he behaves in a professional manner, and this includes when pressure is heightened at the start of high-profile fixtures”.

The brutal episode will plunge viewers into another chilling investigation

A chilling new episode of a harrowing true crime documentary will be released tonight.

Viewers are once again plunged into a race against time as Forensics: The Real CSI’s brand new series continues, giving fans an unprecedented insight into a local police force. Focusing on the forensic evidence gathered in the search for justice, the documentary, now in its sixth series, has been branded the perfect watch for fans of true crime.

Plunging viewers into complex investigations and searches within the West Midlands Police Force, another brand new episode is set to air tonight (March 15) at 9pm on BBC2 with yet another chilling case.

Tonight’s instalment will investigate a harrowing phone call where one teenage girl calls 999 to say her friend has been attacked as his life hangs in the balance.

A BBC synopsis reads: “It’s the early hours of the morning when a frantic teenage girl calls 999 to say that her friend has been attacked and stabbed in a car park. Police rush to the scene, where they find a 16-year-old boy with a life-threatening stab wound to his stomach.

“While his life hangs in the balance, the case is escalated to West Midlands Police’s homicide team, and forensic investigators get to work. They discover two discarded weapons at the scene – a kitchen knife and a machete.”

The episode will also be available to stream on BBC iPlayer shortly after broadcast, with other instalments also available to stream online.

Titled Ambush in the Car Park, the upcoming episode marks the third instalment within the new series, with viewers having to wait every week for new episodes to be released.

Previously, viewers have witnessed a brutal attack in a public phone box with investigators searching for evidence, as well as a young boy who was fatally stabbed on his way home from school with police suspecting a 14 year old, but needing forensic proof.

Viewers claimed the new series has broadcast the “worst” episodes yet, with one saying last week’s instalment was “absolutely shocking”.

Another described the latest series as “unbelievable” as a third said they were “speechless”. A fourth added: “Made me feel sick.”

Spanning across six seasons, the BBC documentary has been branded as the “best ever”, becoming a firm favourite amongst true crime fans.

Taking to TikTok, one true crime fan said the upcoming series was a must watch, adding: “I love this show… they’re really interesting. Some of them are quite brutal what you see.”

One person commented: “Real CSI is my most favourite programme I’ve watched every single series.” Another wrote: “Been waiting so long for a new series.” A third added: “Forensics is one of the best documentaries.”

Forensics: The Real CSI airs tonight at 9pm on BBC Two. For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new **Everything Gossip** website.

When it comes to high school lacrosse, Loyola has one of its best teams this season and that’s reflected in the margins of victories this past week — 29-0 over Sierra Canyon and 28-1 over Crespi.

“It’s very unusual,” coach Jimmy Borell said of the few goals allowed.

Much of the credit goes to the defense and to Andrew Goldman, a junior who handles face-offs. He’s at 92.4% winning face-offs for the 5-1 Cubs, whose only loss came to San Francisco’s St. Ignatius 12-11.

The top goal scorer has been Tripp King, the reigning Southern Section player of the year and North Carolina commit. He has 22 goals and 17 assists Senior Chase Hellie (Tufts commit) and Everett Rolph have been leading the defense, making things easy for goaltenders Will Russo and Garrett Flynn.

Loyola is set to take a trip to Florida and the University of Notre Dame to play top East Coast teams starting Saturday.

This is a daily look at the positive happenings in high school sports. To submit any news, please email eric.sondheimer@latimes.com.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — While the U.S. Senate remains deadlocked over President Trump’s call for strict citizenship voting requirements, Republicans in some states are pressing ahead with their own measures that could require documentary proof of citizenship to join or remain on the voter rolls.

Proof-of-citizenship legislation won final approval this week in South Dakota and Utah, already has passed one chamber in Florida and received a committee hearing in Missouri. In Michigan, supporters of voter citizenship documentation submitted 750,000 petition signatures this week in a bid to get a constitutional amendment on the November ballot.

Federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in U.S. elections, with violators subject to fines, imprisonment and potential deportation.

When people register to vote, they affirm under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens. But Trump contends that’s not enough. He wants prospective voters to show proof of their citizenship.

Democrats and voting rights advocates say the Republican measures amount to voter suppression, as they may prevent many eligible voters from casting ballots. Similar laws have been overturned by courts as an unconstitutional burden on voting rights.

What would the federal legislation do?

The federal Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or SAVE America Act, would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. That could be satisfied with such things as a U.S. passport, citizen naturalization certificate or a combination of a birth certificate and government-issued photo identification.

The federal bill also would require a photo identification to cast a ballot, which some states already mandate. The Republican-led House approved the legislation last month on a mostly party-line vote, but it has stalled in the Senate under a filibuster threat from Democrats.

South Dakota and Utah

Legislation passed in South Dakota and Utah would create a two-tier voting system. People who provide documentation of their citizenship could vote in all elections. Those who don’t could vote only in federal elections for president, U.S. Senate and U.S. House.

The bifurcated voting system is modeled after Arizona, where tens of thousands of voters who have not provided proof of citizenship can cast ballots only in federal elections. Arizona implemented its system after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that the state could not require citizenship documentation for federal elections.

The bills in South Dakota and Utah would take effect upon a governor’s signature, meaning they could be in place for newly registered voters ahead of the November elections.

Utah’s bill also directs election officials to use an online service from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to check the citizenship status of existing voters. Those flagged would be sent notices asking for proof of citizenship to remain eligible to vote in all elections.

Florida and Michigan

Neither the Michigan initiative nor legislation passed by the Florida House would require people to submit proof of citizenship when registering to vote. Instead, the measures would create a behind-the-scenes review that could result in some people being asked for citizenship documentation.

Under the Michigan measure, the secretary of state would review driver’s license records, juror records and federal Homeland Security and Social Security data to determine whether registered voters are citizens. Those flagged would be removed from the voter rolls if they cannot provide proof of citizenship.

The Florida legislation would require election officials to verify the citizenship of all registered voters using the state’s driver’s license database. Anyone whose citizenship could not be verified would be required to submit documentary proof.

Why are some pushing for proof of citizenship?

Trump and some fellow Republicans have complained for years about noncitizens voting in U.S. elections, although evidence of doing so is rare. The few cases found are not nearly enough to affect an election result, studies have shown, and those caught face severe penalty.

In 2024, a student from China was charged with perjury and attempted illegal voting after registering to vote by showing a University of Michigan student ID and signing a document asserting he was a U.S. citizen. He later contacted a local clerk’s office requesting to get his ballot back, and ultimately fled the country.

The case provided part of the impetus for the Michigan ballot initiative, said Paul Jacob, chairman of Americans for Citizen Voting, which is backing the measure.

“We want a system we can have confidence in,” Jacob said. “The way you avoid big problems in elections is to fix the small problems when they rise up and present themselves.”

Voting rights advocates’ concerns

Constitutional amendments limiting voting to “only citizens” have won widespread support when placed on state ballots. But voting rights advocates note that requiring documentary proof can get complicated.

During a recent debate in the Florida House, Democratic state Rep. Ashley Gantt recounted how her aunt was born in a South Carolina home at a time when some hospitals didn’t accept Black patients. As a result, she has no birth certificate and has had difficulty trying to demonstrate her citizenship, Gantt said.

A proof-of-citizenship law “would stop many thousands — if not more — U.S. citizens from voting in Florida,” said Michelle Kanter Cohen, policy director and senior counsel at the nonprofit Fair Elections Center. “It requires documentation that a lot of eligible citizens don’t have, or don’t have access to.”

Nationwide, about 21 million people — 9% of voting-age citizens — lack documentary proof of citizenship or cannot easily obtain it, according to a 2024 report by the Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement at the University of Maryland.

Other states

Legal challenges are common when states pass proof-of-citizenship requirements for voters.

After Kansas adopted a proof-of-citizenship law 15 years ago, more than 31,000 U.S. citizens ended up getting blocked from registering to vote. Federal courts declared the Kansas law an unconstitutional burden on voting rights, and it hasn’t been enforced since 2018.

Two years ago, New Hampshire and Louisiana both passed proof-of-citizenship laws, prompting lawsuits. New Hampshire’s law went to trial last month and is awaiting a ruling. Louisiana’s election commissioner acknowledged in a December court filing that the requirement has not been enforced.

A nonprofit group also filed a legal challenge to a Wyoming proof-of-citizenship law passed last year. But a federal court dismissed that case while ruling the group lacked standing to sue.

Lieb writes for the Associated Press.

It starts with the exclamation point, right there in the title. “The Bride!” is a wild, willfully over-the-top double-barreled reinvigoration of 1935’s “Bride of Frankenstein” that is always doing something a little extra in telling its unpredictable story of identity and the reclamation of the self.

“I probably can’t definitively explain it,” says writer-director Maggie Gyllenhaal about that punctuation. “I think I first just put it there and wondered when someone was going to tell me to take it away. And nobody ever did.”

Set in a dreamscape 1930s — imagine a steampunk-meets-art-deco version of “Bonnie and Clyde” — the film features a title performance by Jessie Buckley in three roles, sometimes in conversation with each other. First, there’s Ida, a Chicago party girl who is killed when she becomes an inconvenience to powerful men. Then there’s “Frankenstein” author Mary Shelley, taking possession of another person’s body and voice.

Finally, there’s the Bride herself, the rebellious, reanimated corpse of Ida brought back to life as a companion to a creature here known as Frank (Christian Bale). The duo sets off on a lovers-on-the-run-style crime spree that captures national attention.

On a February Los Angeles morning, Gyllenhaal moves briskly across the lobby of a low-key-chic hotel, barely breaking stride to ask that, instead of a discreet celeb-friendly indoor corner table, perhaps our interview could take place on an outdoor patio. She would like to take in a bit more California sunshine before returning home to wintry Brooklyn.

Dressed in a baggy suit that is both sharp and casual, Gyllenhaal doesn’t come across as particularly fussy but, rather, as someone certain of what she wants, even if what she wants is to explore the messiness of uncertainty, pushing the edges for herself and her collaborators.

Jessie Buckley in the movie “The Bride!”

(Warner Bros. Pictures)

Take, for example, that exclamation point. What might at first seem a bit of preciousness, and which even Gyllenhaal initially makes seem a bit of a throwaway, reveals itself to have a much deeper meaning.

“It wasn’t that it was careless,” Gyllenhaal says with a calm focus. “If you are Ida or Mary Shelley or many women in the world and you’ve been sort of tamped down and silenced and not able to express everything it is that you wanted or needed to express, it’s like if you’ve had your hand on a geyser. When the geyser finally breaks, it’s going to break with a whole lot of extra energy. And maybe that’s where the exclamation point comes from.”

“The Bride!” is the second feature film as writer and director for Gyllenhaal, 48, following 2021’s “The Lost Daughter.” That movie, a bracing examination of the psychological toll of motherhood, would go on to wide acclaim and awards recognition, including Oscar nominations for actors Buckley and Olivia Colman, as well as for Gyllenhaal’s screenplay (an adaptation of the 2006 novel by Elena Ferrante). Prior to that, Gyllenhaal had been known for emotionally fearless performances in films such as “Secretary,” “The Dark Knight” and “Crazy Heart,” for which she received a supporting actress Oscar nomination.

Deciding how to follow up “The Lost Daughter” wasn’t easy. Gyllenhaal says she went to a party and saw someone with a tattoo on their forearm of Elsa Lancaster‘s intense gaze from “Bride of Frankenstein.” Taken with the image, Gyllenhaal checked out the movie and was surprised to discover Lancaster’s iconic character was only in it for a few minutes. After reading the original novel of “Frankenstein,” she started to wonder whether Mary Shelley had other things on her mind at the time of her debut novel.

“I just had this fantasy,” she says with a slightly conspiratorial air. “I’m not speaking for Mary Shelley, but there must have been some other, naughtier, wilder, more dangerous things that Mary Shelley wanted to say that weren’t said in ‘Frankenstein.’ What else might she have wanted to express?”

Christian Bale and Jessie Buckley in the movie “The Bride!”

(Warner Bros. Pictures)

And so Gyllenhaal set about writing, with her “Lost Daughter” star in mind for the lead, though she initially didn’t tell Buckley. One of Gyllenhaal’s biggest learning curves in directing “The Lost Daughter” was figuring out how to speak to each actor individually to get the most out of them.

“With Jessie, I just spoke to her like I speak to myself,” Gyllenhaal said. “No translation needed.”

Reached via email, the “Hamnet” star evokes a Frida Kahlo painting to convey their closeness.

“We share two beating hearts,” Buckley says. “Maggie has absolutely been instrumental to waking me up to a part of myself I needed to know — and I think vice versa. We share a similar language and curiosity.”

Moving from the intimate scale of “The Lost Daughter” to the expanded scope of “The Bride!” was exciting for them both.

“I loved seeing her in a bigger sandpit,” Buckley says. “From ‘The Lost Daughter’ it was clear that Maggie had something to say as an artist. But where do we grow? What’s the scarier place? What are the questions we might whisper to ourselves? And what happens if we put those whispers into the ether?”

Gyllenhaal’s new film is unafraid to risk being too much. One extravagant party turns into a musical sequence that finds Bale’s creature singing and dancing to “Puttin’ on the Ritz” — a wink to a whole other self-aware frame of reference and Mel Brooks’ satirical 1974 “Young Frankenstein.”

“Sometimes it was too much too much — that’s the line I was trying to walk,” Gyllenhaal says. “I think so many women are told that we’re too much, over and over again, from the moment we get here. And so I’m used to that.

“But I think that scene is sort of about that. It’s about a kind of explosion of life and humanity. So much of the movie is about these people who cannot fit into their box. This is where they celebrate their bigness, their too-muchness, their monstrousness. That’s the monster mash: ‘I am who I am.’”

“Sometimes it was too much too much — that’s the line I was trying to walk,” Gyllenhaal says. “I think so many women are told that we’re too much, over and over again, from the moment we get here. And so I’m used to that.”

(David Urbanke / For The Times)

Making a purposefully idiosyncratic retelling of a classic tale came with its own challenges. “The Bride!” was originally scheduled to be released by Warner Bros. last fall, on the date that would eventually go to “One Battle After Another.” When a rescheduled March 2026 opening was announced, there were reports — “Beware ‘reports,’ ” Gyllenhaal tells me, wryly — of behind-the-scenes clashes between the director and the studio.

Gyllenhaal doesn’t deny that, to find the final version of the movie, she worked closely with Pam Abdy, who, along with Mike De Luca, is co-chair and co-chief executive of Warner Bros. Motion Picture Group. This time the stakes were higher, the filmmaker says, and being left to her own devices, as she had been on “The Lost Daughter,” wasn’t always the best solution.

“If I make a big, hot roller coaster of a movie and remain totally honest in what I’m trying to explore and think about inside it, will people respond? That was my question,” she says. “And then I cut it in a way that was entirely my expression. And I have to say in particular, Pam, who was my point person on this and also has become a friend, she really took me to task on that and said, ‘You want many people to respond and understand this. You have to clarify here and here.’ ”

Though Gyllenhaal admits there were moments of “friction” and that Abdy “has a slightly different agenda than I do,” she now sees the merit in the process. “Something really alive was born, and I think the movie is better for the work that she and I did together,” Gyllenhaal says. “I know that’s an unusual thing to say. I know that you have lots of people saying like, ‘Ah, the studio f— my movie up.’ That is not my experience. It’s really not.”

In a phone interview, Abdy says, “Listen, she tasks me with challenging her, and I task her with challenging us. We’re all in the service of making the best movie we can possibly make for the audience. And we, privately, all of us — studios, directors, filmmakers — we go through a process. It’s unfortunate that certain people choose to assume they know what’s happening in those rooms. But they don’t.”

Abdy describes their collaboration as a healthy and normal one. “You test the movie, you get information, you make adjustments,” she says. “And we needed the time and space to do that.”

Maggie Gyllenhaal, right, on set with Jessie Buckley and Christian Bale while making “The Bride!”

(Warner Bros. Pictures)

The courage Gyllenhaal once exhibited as a performer now seems to be serving her as a filmmaker. The last feature Gyllenhaal appeared in as an actor was 2018’s “The Kindergarten Teacher,” playing an overzealous mentor to a young poetry prodigy. She also appeared in three seasons of the HBO series “The Deuce” from 2017 to 2019, in which she played an adult film performer struggling to move behind the camera into directing.

As to whether she will return to acting, Gyllenhaal says, “I don’t know. I really prefer directing. This is a better job for me.”

Better how? “I felt as an actress, to be honest, like I always would hit up against a wall of how much I was able to participate or express,” she says. “And I thought for a long time, OK, this is the gig, and what I have to do is learn how to protect self-expression, even if that means I just need a tiny bit of space around me where I have the real estate to do what I need to do as an actress.

“And then when I moved into writing and directing, I didn’t have to play that game anymore,” she says. “And also I could create an environment where nobody had to play that game. Anyone could explore and express the things that were interesting to them. It was ultimately up to me to decide if I wanted to use them or not. So why not let people explore and surprise me?”

Gyllenhaal’s “The Bride!” may catch the same current wave of pop-inflected Gothic-style romances as Emerald Fennell’s “Wuthering Heights” and Guillermo del Toro’s “Frankenstein.” A catchphrase that emerges in the film is “brain attack,” the Bride becoming a folk hero to women around the country who emulate her distinctive look: Jean Harlow by way of Courtney Love with an inky smear of makeup across the face.

There is something intuitively catchy about brain attack, even if it’s also a little bewildering.

Gyllenhaal remembers an “aspect of terror” about stepping into a bigger studio release. “So do most things that require that you really grow and learn in order to do them. But I’m interested in terror and so I guess I was playing around with the idea of heart attack, panic attack. And I think in order to really do that, some brain attacks are required.”

Gyllenhaal tells me how a few days earlier she had been wearing a hat with the phrase on it while reading by the hotel pool and three 20-something women, maybe a little day drunk, began asking her about it. Two of them seemed puzzled by the phrase, struggling to parse out its meaning, while the third instinctively got it. She just knew. So Gyllenhaal gave her the hat.

“I guess ‘brain attack’ is a phrase you might have to feel,” Gyllenhaal offers, her mouth widening into a smile.

So too, perhaps, with Gyllenhaal’s telling of “The Bride!” with its visions of reckless abandon and personal reclamation — exclamation point and all. It will become a movie waiting for those who need it.