M el-Saadani
Apr 1, 1989; 30:627-630
Articles

M. Burstein
Nov 1, 1970; 11:583-595
Articles

Deplatforming Trump puts big tech under fresh scrutiny Expert comment NCapeling 22 January 2021

The response of digital platforms to the US Capitol riots raises questions about online content governance. The EU and UK are starting to come up with answers.

The ‘deplatforming’ of Donald Trump – including Twitter’s announcement that it has permanently banned him due to ‘the risk of further incitement of violence’ after the riots in the US – shows once more not only the sheer power of online platforms but also the lack of a coherent and consistent framework for online content governance.

Taking the megaphone away from Trump during the Capitol riots seems sensible, but was it necessary or proportionate to ban him from the platform permanently? Or consistent with the treatment of other ‘strongmen’ world leaders such as Modi, Duterte and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who have overseen nationalistic violence but whose accounts remain intact?

Such complex decisions on online expression should not made unilaterally by powerful and unregulated tech actors, but instead should be subject to democratic oversight and grounded in the obligations of states and responsibilities of companies under international human rights law.

The speed and scale of digital information has left governments across the world struggling with how to tackle online harms such as hate speech, extremist content and disinformation since the emergence of mass social media 15 years ago.

The US’s hallowed approach to the First Amendment, under which speech on public issues – even hate speech – occupies the highest rank and is entitled to special protection, has contributed to a reluctance to regulate Silicon Valley’s digital platforms. But the irony is that by not regulating them, the government harmed freedom of expression by leaving complex speech decisions in the hands of private actors.

Meanwhile at the other extreme is the growing number of illiberal and authoritarian governments using a combination of vague laws, censorship, propaganda, and internet blackouts to severely restrict online freedom of expression, control the narrative and, in some cases, incite atrocities.

Regulation is on the way

The happy medium – flexible online content regulation providing clarity, predictability, transparency, and accountability – has until now been elusive. But even before the deplatforming of Trump, 2021 was set to be the year when this approach finally gained some traction, at least in Europe.

The EU’s recently-published draft Digital Services Act puts obligations on dominant social media platforms to manage ‘systemic risks’, for example through requirements for greater transparency about their content decisions, algorithms used for recommendations, and online advertising systems.

The UK will shortly publish its Online Safety Bill, which will establish a new regulatory framework for tackling online harms, including the imposition of a duty of care and codes of conduct on Big Tech, to be overseen by an independent regulator (Ofcom).

Both proposals are based on a ‘co-regulatory’ model under which the regulator sets out a framework substantiated with rules by the private sector, with the regulator performing a monitoring function to ensure the rules are complied with.

Both also draw on international human rights standards and the work of civil society in applying these standards in relation to the online public square, with the aim of increasing control for users over what they see online, requiring transparency about tech companies’ policies in a number of areas, and strengthening the accountability of platforms when they fall foul of the regulation.

The procedure for both proposals has also been inclusive, involving extensive multi-stakeholder consultations with civil society organizations and Big Tech, and the proposals will be subject to scrutiny in 2021, notably from the EU and UK parliaments.

Both proposals are at an early stage, and it remains to be seen whether they go far enough – or indeed will have a chilling effect on online platforms. But as an attempt to initiate a dialogue on globally coherent principles, they are positive first steps. They also provide food for thought for the new Joe Biden administration in the US as it turns its attention to the regulation of Big Tech.

For some time civil society – most prominently David Kaye, the former UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression and opinion – have called for content regulation to be informed by universal international human rights law standards.

The EU and UK are peculiarly well-placed to take the lead in this area because European countries have for decades been on the receiving end of judgments from the European Court of Human Rights on the appropriate limits to freedom of expression in cases brought under the European Convention on Human Rights.

In deciding these cases, the court has to balance the right to freedom of expression against the restrictions imposed – for example in the context of incitement to violence, political debate, and satire. Deciding where to draw the line on what can and cannot be expressed in a civilised society which prizes freedom of expression is inevitably a difficult exercise.

International human rights law provides a methodology that inquires whether the interference to freedom of expression was prescribed by law and pursues a legitimate aim, and also whether it was necessary in a democratic society to achieve those aims – including whether the interference was necessary and proportionate (as for example in Delfi AS v Estonia, which involved a news portal failing to take down unlawful hate speech).

To be effective, online content regulation has to bite on tech companies, which is a challenge given the internet is global but domestic law normally applies territorially. The EU’s proposals have an extraterritorial element as they apply to any online platforms providing services in the EU regardless of where the platform is headquartered.

Further, both the EU and UK want to give the regulator strong enforcement powers – it is proposed for example that Ofcom will have powers to fine platforms up to ten per cent of their turnover for breaches.

Although the proposals would not apply directly to the deplatforming of Trump which occurred in the US, the philosophy behind the EU and UK approach is likely to have an impact beyond European shores in promoting a co-regulatory model that some of the bigger tech companies have been inviting for some time, reluctant as they are to ‘play God’ on content moderation decisions without reference to any regulatory framework.

In the absence of regulation, the standards of tech platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have already evolved over time in response to pressure from civil rights groups, users, and advertisers, including updated policies on protecting civic conversation and hate speech.

Facebook has also set up an independent Oversight Board, whose members include leading human rights lawyers, to review decisions on content including – at its own request – the decision to indefinitely suspend Trump from Facebook and Instagram. Decisions on the Board’s first tranche of cases are expected imminently.

Gatekeeper status is key

Online content regulation also needs to address the role of Big Tech as the ‘digital gatekeepers’, because their monopoly power extends not just to editorial control of the news and information we consume, but also to market access.

The decision of Apple, Google, and Amazon to stop hosting right-wing social network Parler after it refused to combat calls for violence during the US Capitol riots was understandable in the circumstances, but also underlined the unilateral ability of Big Tech to decide the rules of the market.

Again, it is Europe where efforts are underway to tackle this issue: the EU’s draft Digital Market Act imposes obligations on online gatekeepers to avoid certain unfair practices, and the UK’s new Digital Markets Unit will have powers to write and enforce a new code of practice on those technology companies with ‘substantial and enduring’ market power.

In the US, Biden’s team will be following these developments with interest, given the growing bipartisan support for strengthening US antitrust rules and reviving antitrust enforcement. The EU’s recently published proposals for an EU-US tech agenda include a transatlantic dialogue on the responsibility of tech platforms and strengthened cooperation between antitrust authorities on digital markets.

Ultimately a consistent – and global – approach to online content is needed instead of fragmented approaches by different companies and governments. It is also important the framework is flexible so that it is capable of applying not only to major democracies but also to countries where too often sweeping state regulation has been used as a pretext to curtail online expression online.

The pursuit of a pluralistic framework tailored to different political and cultural contexts is challenging, and international human rights law cannot provide all the answers but, as a universal framework, it is a good place to start. The raft of regulatory measures from the EU and UK means that, regardless of whether Trump regains his online megaphone, 2021 is set to be a year of reckoning for Big Tech.

Facebook's power under scrutiny as Trump ban upheld Expert comment NCapeling 6 May 2021

Keeping Donald Trump’s Facebook ban in place shows the vast power social media platforms hold, raising questions of whether that power is appropriately used.

Kate Jones

From a human rights perspective, the Oversight Board’s decision is a strong one, and not at all surprising. The board decided Facebook was right to suspend the former president’s access to post content on Facebook and Instagram, but not indefinitely.

It found Donald Trump’s posts violated Facebook’s community standards because they amounted to praise or support of people engaged in violence and that, applying a human rights assessment, Facebook’s suspension of Trump was a necessary and proportionate restriction of his right to freedom of expression.

However the board also found Trump’s indefinite suspension was neither in conformity with a clear Facebook procedure nor consistent with its commitment to respect human rights. Its decision requires Facebook to make a new decision on the future of Donald Trump’s account, grounded in its rules.

While opinions on this result will differ, the increased call for clear and accessible rules and respect for human rights in their implementation that the Oversight Board brings to Facebook’s operations is welcome.

But the Oversight Board’s powers are limited to content moderation – Facebook declined to answer the board’s questions about amplification of Trump’s posts through the platform’s design decisions and algorithms. This limitation on the board’s role should be lifted. It is in content amplification, not just content moderation, that Facebook should face scrutiny and accountability for the sake of the human rights of its users.

Fundamentally, human rights is not a veneer which can mask or legitimize underlying power dynamics or public policy – those still fall to be assessed for themselves.

The Trump/Facebook saga does highlight the vast power Facebook and other major social media platforms have over political discussion and persuasion. Through granting or denying, or through amplifying or quietening the voices of political figures, Facebook has the power to shape politics, electorates, and democratic processes. Improving content moderation through the Oversight Board, although important, does little to constrain that power.

Facebook itself, unlike a government, has no accountability to the general public, and the Oversight Board must not distract us from the need for a full conversation about the extent to which Facebook’s power is appropriately held and properly wielded.

Emily Taylor

This decision marks a coming of age for Facebook’s content moderation process. For years, decisions to take down content or ban users have been opaque, conducted by a human workforce that Facebook and other platforms have been hesitant to acknowledge. The platforms have also been worried that being seen to exercise an editorial function might put at risk the legal protections which prevent the platforms being held responsible for user-generated content.

When the Oversight Board was first posited, observers questioned whether a body funded by Facebook could properly exercise a legitimate appeals function. Now there is a reasoned decision which partly supports the decision to de-platform a serving president, but also takes issue with the indefinite nature of the ban.

Facebook specifically asked the Oversight Board to consider specific challenges involved when the person involved is a political leader. The board concluded that Trump’s ‘status as head of state with a high position of trust not only imbued his words with greater force and credibility but also created risks that his followers would understand they could act with impunity’. The storming of the US Capitol and role President Trump played in stirring up the violence underlined that political leaders’ words can motivate others to take harmful actions.

Just as the events of January 6 remain shocking, it remains shocking that private platforms have exercised the power to curb the speech of a US president. It also remains shocking that the platforms sat back and took no action over the previous four years, but waited until the final days of the transition.

The board’s decision is an evolution in private-sector content moderation, with a diverse board giving a reasoned opinion on a Facebook decision. But to fully comply with the principles of open justice, board decisions should include more detail on the individuals who have made the decision – at present, it appears all members of the board review the decision but it is not clear which individuals were involved in its drafting, or that they were clear from conflicts. If the process is to gain respect as a truly independent oversight on the platform’s decisions, greater transparency over the identity of decision-makers will be needed.

Mark Zuckerberg expressed concern about Facebook becoming an arbiter of truth or free speech and, overall, the difficulty of having private companies managing the application of fundamental rights on their platforms has not been solved. Just because companies have the financial resources to do it, does not mean they necessarily should.

Yet no other international governance or arbitration system has emerged to handle the complexities of platform power over speech. In the context of that vacuum, the Oversight Board’s decision is a welcome step.

Undercurrents: The Oversight Board's Trump decision, and Merkel's legacy Audio bhorton.drupal 25 June 2021

Was Facebook right to suspend Trump? And how will Merkel be remembered?

In the wake of the storming of Capitol Hill on 6 January 2021, social media platforms took steps to remove former President Donald Trump from their websites for infringing community standards. This step was welcomed by many, but also raised serious questions about the power of social media companies to limit free speech and censor elected officials. The suspension of President Trump from Facebook was referred to the Oversight Board, an independent body of experts set up to scrutinise the platform’s content moderation decisions.  

In this episode, Ben speaks to Thomas Hughes and Kate Jones about the outcome of the Oversight Board’s inquiry into the Trump suspension, and the wider implications for content moderation on social media.  

Then Lara is joined by Hans Kundnani to assess the political outlook in Germany and reflect on the legacy of outgoing Chancellor Angela Merkel.  

Expert

Expert

Expert

Expert

Fossil Fuels Expert Roundtable: Forecasting Forum 2018 12 February 2018 — 2:00PM TO 5:30PM Anonymous (not verified) 18 December 2017 Chatham House, London

This forum will present the latest thinking from senior researchers on the dynamics that will affect fossil fuels investment and markets in the year ahead. The first session will assess the various factors keeping oil and gas prices from bouncing back and will consider conditions and political developments that could influence markets in the year ahead. The second session will assess the future of the power sector and what this means for the fossil fuels industry.

Attendance at this event is by invitation only.

Forecasting Forum 2019 29 January 2019 — 2:00PM TO 5:30PM Anonymous (not verified) 17 December 2018 Chatham House | 10 St James's Square | London | SW1Y 4LE

This annual forum, previously held as part of the Fossil Fuels Expert Roundtable but now re-branded under the Energy Transitions Roundtable, presents the latest thinking from the Energy, Environment and Research Department’s senior research team on the dynamics that will affect fossil fuels investment and markets in the year ahead. This year, the forum will have three sessions:

Session 1 | 14:05 - 15:00 | Climate Trends

In December, a ‘playbook’ to implement the 2015 Paris Agreement was agreed by 196 countries at the UN’s COP24 in Poland. Despite this success, challenges surrounding common reporting requirements, degree-pathways to pursue, increasing ambition and the implementation of NDCs still remain. In this session, Pete Betts, former Head of International Climate and Energy at the UK Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy, will reflect on developments in the climate agenda and what action should be taken both in the UK and internationally against the backdrop of Brexit.

Session 2 | 15:15 - 16:15 | An Outlook for Oil in 2019

The future of crude oil prices for 2019 is perhaps more uncertain than it has been for several years. Following a period between 2014-17 when over-supply banished geopolitics from influencing the oil price, the market appears to be struggling to price political risk. Recently the OPEC Plus agreement was renewed in an effort to curtail production and defend prices but its effectiveness is in question as the shale technology revolution in the US continues to add to global supply - but for how long? Meanwhile, US relations with Saudi Arabia remain uncertain in the aftermath of the murder of Jamal Khashoggi: how might Saudi oil policy unfold? Similarly, how might Iran respond to President Trump’s unilateral abrogation of the JCPOA agreement? In this session, Paul Stevens looks at the geopolitical factors that might influence crude oil prices in 2019.

Session 3 | 16:30 - 17:30 | An Outlook for Coal

The rapid phase-out of coal-fired power stations is crucial to the delivery of the goals of the Paris Agreement and to the safeguarding of clean air and water and public health. Some policy and economic developments show that the coal sector is in structural decline, and there is growing international momentum behind coal phase-out. At the same time, many of the largest coal trading countries and companies continue to argue the short-term profitability of the sector but at what cost? This session will explore the national and international risks that continued investment in coal present and the developments that could change this in the year ahead.

Attendance at this event is by invitation only.

Forecasting Forum 2020 17 February 2020 — 2:00PM TO 5:00PM Anonymous (not verified) 15 January 2020 Chatham House | 10 St James's Square | London | SW1Y 4LE

The Forecasting Forum 2020 will present the latest thinking from the Chatham House Energy, Environment and Resources Department’s senior research team on the dynamics that will affect fossil fuel and energy investments and markets in the year ahead.

14:00 - 14:30 | Introduction and Climate Risks Outlook

In the last decade, following the financial crisis, the literature on systemic risks has grown. Systemic risks occur when complex, non-linear, interconnected systems fail, often through relatively small perturbations, as their impacts cascade and amplify across the system. Within this context, climate change is a ‘threat multiplier’ with the risks increasing in scale, frequency and magnitude. Just as complex systems can pass thresholds and tip from a functional state to a non-functional state, so can societies and people’s attitudes. Together risk cascades or systemic risks and attitudinal tipping points have the potential to rapidly change the way the world works.

Professor Tim Benton will open the Forecasting Forum 2020 with reflections on what this might mean for the pace and linearity of the fossil fuel transition.

14:30 - 15:30 | Session 1: An Outlook on Oil Prices in 2020

In this session, Professor Paul Stevens will argue that the recent events associated with the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani have exacerbated the sensitivity of oil markets to political events and brought ‘geopolitics’ back into global oil prices. Up to 2014, geopolitics played a key role in determining oil prices in the paper markets where perceptions and expectations ruled. By 2014, the world was so oversupplied with real oil barrels that the oil price collapsed and little attention was given to geopolitical events as geopolitics became marginalized in the determination of crude oil prices. However, recent events in the Middle East suggest that prices will become increasingly volatile but, at the same time, benefit from a rising geopolitical premium.

15:45 - 16:45 | Session 2: An Outlook for Energy in 2020

Recent years have brought significant disruption to the European power sector. Not only are many of Europe’s major utilities restructuring their businesses in light of decarbonization and technological developments but Brexit has distracted - and detracted from - efforts to create more systemic energy linkages between the UK and the rest of Europe. During his presentation, Antony Froggatt will draw on his ongoing research to outline what he believes are the prevailing challenges and opportunities for the European power sector over the coming year while highlighting some of the most significant global trends.

Please note, attendance at this event is by invitation only.

Forecasting forum 2021 28 January 2021 — 12:30PM TO 2:00PM Anonymous (not verified) 21 January 2021 Online

Speakers explore the dynamics that will likely affect fossil fuel demand, energy investments and markets in the year ahead.

The Forecasting Forum 2021 presents the latest thinking from the Energy, Environment and Resources Programme’s senior research team and colleagues on the dynamics that will likely affect fossil fuel demand, energy investments and markets in the year ahead.

Focus is given to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the first 100 days of the new Biden administration in the US, and the run-up to COP26. The extraordinary developments over the last year have demonstrated the need consider and discuss a wide range of possible futures and the factors that affect them to help improve system resilience and increase stability, whilst achieving sustainability.

For the first time, this annual event was run online and consisted of a panel discussion on what the year ahead might hold.

Forecasting forum 2022 2 February 2022 — 2:00PM TO 3:30PM Anonymous (not verified) 17 January 2022 Online

The Environment and Society Programme’s senior research team will discuss the emerging geopolitical trends that may impact energy markets and investments in 2022.

The Forecasting Forum 2022 presents the latest thinking from the Environment and Society Programme’s senior research team on the dynamics that will likely affect fossil fuel demand, energy investments and markets in the year ahead.

The event will discuss a wide range of emerging geopolitical trends that may impact energy markets and investments in 2022, including continuing uncertainty around COVID-19, fuel price changes, US political direction and progress of President Biden’s climate agenda, and growing shareholder activism within some of the largest energy companies. Moreover, the implications of pledges made at COP26 will start to materialize, ahead of a new climate scenarios report by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the COP27 summit in Egypt. In this respect, the panel will assess whether 2022 could prove to be a decisive year for the energy transition. 

Lasse L. Wolf and Hong-Wei Zhang
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 152 (), 5445-5453.
Abstract, references and article information

12th International Forum on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing 18 May 2020 TO 22 May 2020 — 2:00PM TO 3:30PM Anonymous (not verified) 27 September 2019

Oxygen regulates hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) transcription factors to control cell metabolism, erythrogenesis, and angiogenesis. Whereas much has been elucidated about how oxygen regulates HIF, whether lipids affect HIF activity is un-known. Here, using cultured cells and two animal models, we demonstrate that lipoprotein-derived fatty acids are an independent regulator of HIF. Decreasing extracellular lipid supply inhibited HIF prolyl hydroxylation, leading to accumulation of the HIFα subunit of these heterodimeric transcription factors comparable with hypoxia with activation of downstream target genes. The addition of fatty acids to culture medium suppressed this signal, which required an intact mitochondrial respiratory chain. Mechanistically, fatty acids and oxygen are distinct signals integrated to control HIF activity. Finally, we observed lipid signaling to HIF and changes in target gene expression in developing zebrafish and adult mice, and this pathway operates in cancer cells from a range of tissues. This study identifies fatty acids as a physiological modulator of HIF, defining a mechanism for lipoprotein regulation that functions in parallel to oxygen.

Julia Knöckel
Dec 22, 2020; 0:RA120.002432v1-mcp.RA120.002432
Research

David Durán
Nov 19, 2020; 0:RA120.002276v1-mcp.RA120.002276
Research

Jianhua Wang
Nov 4, 2020; 0:RA120.002375v1-mcp.RA120.002375
Research

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a well-known risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but analysis on Lp(a) and renal dysfunction is scarce. We aimed to investigate prospectively the association of serum Lp(a) with the risk of reduced renal function, and further investigated whether diabetic or hypertensive status modified such association. Six thousand two hundred and fifty-seven Chinese adults aged ≤40 years and free of reduced renal function at baseline were included in the study. Reduced renal function was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m². During a mean follow-up of 4.4 years, 158 participants developed reduced renal function. Each one-unit increase in log₁₀-Lp(a) (milligrams per deciliter) was associated with a 1.99-fold (95% CI 1.15–3.43) increased risk of incident reduced renal function; the multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (OR) for the highest tertile of Lp(a) was 1.61 (95% CI 1.03–2.52) compared with the lowest tertile (P for trend = 0.03). The stratified analysis showed the association of serum Lp(a) and incident reduced renal function was more prominent in participants with prevalent diabetes [OR 4.04, 95% CI (1.42–11.54)] or hypertension [OR 2.18, 95% CI (1.22–3.89)]. A stronger association was observed in the group with diabetes and high Lp(a) (>25 mg/dl), indicating a combined effect of diabetes and high Lp(a) on the reduced renal function risk. An elevated Lp(a) level was independently associated with risk of incident reduced renal function, especially in diabetic or hypertensive patients.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious infection and threating the human lives in the world. The elevation of cytokines in blood is crucial to induce cytokine storm and immunosuppression in the transition of severity in COVID-19 patients. However, the comprehensive changes of serum proteins in COVID-19 patients throughout the SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. In this work, we developed a high-density antibody microarray and performed an in-depth proteomics analysis of serum samples collected from early COVID-19 (n = 15) and influenza (n = 13) patients. We identified a large set of differentially expressed proteins (n = 132) that participate in a landscape of inflammation and immune signaling related to the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Furthermore, the significant correlations of neutrophil and lymphocyte with the CCL2 and CXCL10 mediated cytokine signaling pathways was identified. These information are valuable for the understanding of COVID-19 pathogenesis, identification of biomarkers and development of the optimal anti-inflammation therapy.

Malaria elimination is still pending on the development of novel tools that rely on a deep understanding of parasite biology. Proteins of all living cells undergo a myriad number of posttranslational modifications (PTMs) that are critical to multifarious life processes. An extensive proteome-wide dissection revealed a fine PTM map of most proteins in both Plasmodium falciparum, the causative agent of severe malaria, and the infected red blood cells. More than two-thirds of proteins of the parasite and its host cell underwent extensive and dynamic modification throughout the erythrocytic developmental stage. PTMs critically modulate the virulence factors involved in the host-parasite interaction and pathogenesis. Furthermore, P. falciparum stabilized the supporting proteins of erythrocyte origin by selective de-modification. Collectively, our multiple omic analyses, apart from having furthered a deep understanding of the systems biology of P. falciparum and malaria pathogenesis, provide a valuable resource for mining new antimalarial targets.

The Rhizobium-legume symbiosis is a beneficial interaction in which the bacterium converts atmospheric nitrogen into ammonia and delivers it to the plant in exchange for carbon compounds. This symbiosis implies the adaptation of bacteria to live inside host plant cells. In this work we apply RP-LC-MS/MS and  iTRAQ techniques to study the proteomic profile of endosymbiotic cells (bacteroids) induced by Rhizobium leguminosarum bv viciae strain UPM791 in legume nodules. Nitrogenase subunits, tricarboxylic acid cycle enzymes, and stress response proteins are amongst the most abundant from over one thousand rhizobial proteins identified in pea (Pisum sativum) bacteroids. Comparative analysis of bacteroids induced in pea and in lentil (Lens culinaris)nodules revealed the existence of a significant host-specific differential response affecting dozens of bacterial proteins, including stress-related proteins, transcriptional regulators, and proteins involved in the carbon and nitrogen metabolisms. A mutant affected in one of these proteins, homologous to a GntR-like transcriptional regulator, showed a symbiotic performance significantly  impaired in symbiosis with pea, but not with lentil plants. Analysis of the proteomes of bacteroids isolated from both hosts also revealed the presence of different sets of plant-derived nodule-specific cysteine rich (NCR) peptides, indicating that the endosymbiotic bacteria find a host-specific cocktail of chemical stressors inside the nodule. By studying variations of the bacterial response to different plant cell environments we will be able to identify specific limitations imposed by the host that might give us clues for the improvement of rhizobial performance.

Sporozoites are a motile form of malaria-causing Plasmodium falciparum parasites that migrate from the site of transmission in the dermis through the bloodstream to invade hepatocytes. Sporozoites interact with many cells within the host, but the molecular identity of these interactions and their role in the pathology of malaria is poorly understood. Parasite proteins that are secreted and embedded within membranes are known to be important for these interactions, but our understanding of how they interact with each other to form functional complexes is largely unknown. Here, we compile a library of recombinant proteins representing the repertoire of cell surface and secreted proteins from the P. falciparum sporozoite and use an assay designed to detect extracellular interactions to systematically identify complexes. We identify three protein complexes including an interaction between two components of the p24 complex that is involved in the trafficking of glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored proteins through the secretory pathway. Plasmodium parasites lacking either gene are strongly inhibited in the establishment of liver stage infections. These findings reveal an important role for the p24 complex in malaria pathogenesis and show that the library of recombinant proteins represents a valuable resource to investigate P. falciparum sporozoite biology.

Maikel Franco followed the endless and often mind-numbing speculation the past few months from the Dominican Republic. Franco knows that Manny Machado could show up at Spectrum Field at any moment. The Phillies entertained him at Citizens Bank Park just before Christmas. They have made him at least one contract offer. If the Phillies sign him, Franco also knows he could be traded.

Phillies manager Gabe Kapler has a little advice for the players who could be impacted most if the team signs Bryce Harper or Manny Machado.

Angola Forum 2018: 30th Anniversary of the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale 23 March 2018 — 10:00AM TO 2:30PM Anonymous (not verified) 8 March 2018 Chatham House, London

Reflections on Southern Africa’s Turning Point

23 March 2018 marks the 30th anniversary of the final assault of what became known as the Battle of Cuito Cuanavale.

The confrontation between the Angolan army, supported by Cuba and the Soviet Union, and the armed opposition UNITA, supported by the South African Defence Force, is the largest land battle to have taken place in Africa since World War Two.

The battle was a watershed in Angolan and southern African history, but its significance continues to be contested. Today, although the battlefield has a monument and museum, it remains one of the most landmine-contaminated parts of Angola and this hinders development plans for international tourism.

This event brings together veterans and experts to contribute towards developing a deeper understanding of the battle. Discussions will further focus on the significance of the wider events around the battle, its regional implications, as well as the legacy of the battlefield.

Angola Forum 2021: Policy options to support economic recovery in Angola 7 October 2021 — 2:00PM TO 5:00PM Anonymous (not verified) 22 September 2021 Online

Speakers discuss policy options to support economic recovery in Angola as the country transitions away from a state-led oil economy to a private-sector-led growth model.

The government of Angola has made some progress on a range of policies targeting macroeconomic stability and structural reform. However, the country has been suffering from a recurring economic recession for six consecutive years, with the last positive annual GDP growth rate posted in 2015 at 0.9 per cent.

The national budget remains dependent on oil revenue, leaving the country highly exposed to volatile oil prices particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. While revenues collapsed, increased spending was needed to respond to the health crisis and estimates of Angola’s debt spike range from 130 to 150 per cent of its GDP by the close of 2020.

At this virtual Angola Forum, speakers discuss policy options to support economic recovery in Angola as the country transitions away from a state-led oil economy to a private-sector-led growth model.

The Forum launches the English translation of the Angola Economic Report 2019-20 by the Centro de Estudos de Investigação (CEIC) of the Catholic University of Angola in partnership with the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS), and the findings of Afrobarometer’s first ever survey in Angola, Ovilongwa – Estudos de Opinião Pública, which interviewed 2,400 adult Angolans and sampled individual perceptions on democracy and economic reform in Angola.

This event will be held in English and Portuguese with simultaneous interpretation.

The Forum will also be broadcast live on the Africa Programme Facebook page.

Angola forum 2022: Prospects for Angola's social and economic future 15 December 2022 — 1:00PM TO 4:30PM Anonymous (not verified) 28 November 2022 Online

At this online Angola forum, experts will discuss Angola’s social and economic future, and what to expect from 2023.

At this virtual Angola Forum, speakers will discuss Angola’s social and economic future and what to expect from 2023.

Angola experienced positive economic momentum in 2022 allowing it to exit its six-year recession, with the economy taking centre stage in the August national multiparty elections. Increased oil prices and high levels of production have driven Angola’s economic growth and improved macroeconomic conditions, as well as helping the country to reduce its public debt to 56.5 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (down from 79.7 per cent in 2021).

However, a global economic downturn in 2023, with increased inflation, means Angola’s re-elected MPLA government will need to focus on job creation, greater economic inclusivity and diversifying away from an oil-led economy. It will also require Angola to navigate its international partnerships more effectively in this era of heightened geopolitical rivalries.  

At this online Angola forum, experts will discuss Angola’s social and economic future and what to expect from 2023. Speakers will reflect on the social and economic trends seen in 2021-22 and explore election trends, human rights and international relations.

This Angola Forum is supported by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.

American democracy in 2022: Trump, insurrection, and midterm elections 31 October 2022 — 2:00PM TO 3:00PM Anonymous (not verified) 7 October 2022 Online

How much has Donald Trump changed US politics and democracy, and will Trump and ‘Trumpism’ be more or less significant in the years ahead?

America’s democracy is divided, polarized and fragmenting. Inequality and internal division have a long history. But Trump’s lasting influence on the Republican party, and politics more broadly, continues to leave a mark. Repeated denials of President Joe Biden’s 2020 election win, wrapped in claims of electoral fraud, have eroded faith in the democratic institutions.

The memories of 6 January are still fresh, reminding all of the dangers posed by such actions. All told, America’s democracy has taken a beating in recent years.

To help make sense of the events over recent years and consequences for the coming mid-terms, Peter Baker and Susan Glasser (authors of The Divider: Trump in the White House 2017–2021) walk through in detail how the American politics of today has been arrived at.

Key questions discussed include:

• What has been learned from the January 6 Committee?

• Is there a likelihood of a similar event in the future?

• When and how will Trump lose his influence over the Republican party? 

• What are the broader ramifications of the Trump era?

• What did the events of 6 January mean for America’s relationships globally?

 As with all Chatham House member events, questions from members drive the conversation.

Read the transcript. 

Polish-British Belvedere Forum 2022 7 July 2022 TO 8 July 2022 — 12:00PM TO 4:00PM Anonymous (not verified) 13 June 2022 Chatham House and Online

The Belvedere Forum is a leading annual British and Polish dialogue that seeks to strengthen the extensive social, economic and political partnership between the two countries.

Please note this event has reached full in-person capacity. You are welcome to join virtually via the Zoom link: https://chathamhouse.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_QFwXsXb0RoSt-1ywkuPjfQ  

The video on this page is of the opening remarks from the Belvedere Forum, with addresses from Sir Robin Niblett KCMG, Dr Sławomir Dębski, Prof Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Sir Malcolm Rifkind KCMG QC, Ambassador Anna Clunes CMG OBE, Lord (Tariq) Ahmad of Wimbledon, Min Marcin Przydacz, and Ambassador Piotr Wilczek.

This and other session videos are available to watch on the Belvedere Forum 2022 playlist on YouTube. Photos by Mateusz Jozwiak, Zuzanna Nowak/PISM.

The Belvedere Forum is a leading annual British and Polish bilateral dialogue bringing together a diverse group of actors from civil society, politics, business, academia and NGOs.

It seeks to strengthen and deepen the extensive partnership between the two countries by exploring political, economic, social and cultural issues through debate and discussion.

The forum is an annual event alternating between the UK and Poland. Originally created in 2017 by the governments of the UK and Poland, the forum is now jointly organized by Chatham House and the Polish Institute of International Affairs (PISM) in Warsaw.

The forum brings together a diverse group of actors to debate and discuss not only current British-Polish relations, but also the British and Polish responses to key European and global challenges.

Trump Media and Technology Group shares rose 15% in value on Tuesday as voters cast ballots on Election Day.

President-elect Donald Trump wants legal authorities to investigate what he said were possibly illegal rumors he is going to sell his majority stock stake in Trump Media. He claims he won't sell.

Private prison stocks soared Monday after President-elect Donald Trump announced immigration hardliner Tom Homan as the nation's next "border czar." GeoGroup jumped 4.5%, while CoreCivic increased 6.3%.

President-elect Donald Trump announced Tuesday that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy will lead his administration's new Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to end "government waste" and "slash excess regulations."

French President Emmanuel Macron was joined in Paris on Monday by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for Armistice Day commemorations after a meeting at which both leaders reaffirmed "unwavering" support for Ukraine.

The U.S. Army is investigating the suspected suicides of three soldiers based at New York's Fort Drum.

President-elect Donald Trump has chosen former Republican Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York to run the Environmental Protection Agency.

Private prison stocks soared Monday after President-elect Donald Trump announced immigration hardliner Tom Homan as the nation's next "border czar." GeoGroup jumped 4.5%, while CoreCivic increased 6.3%.

A New York Supreme Court justice will decide Tuesday if President-elect Donald Trump's sentencing will move forward later this month.

Billionaire financier John Paulson has declined a likely appointment as U.S Treasury Secretary by President-elect Donald Trump, he announced.

President-elect Donald Trump says that he wants ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee to represent America's interests in the troubled Middle East region as U.S. Ambassador to Israel.

President-elect Donald Trump announced his choice Tuesday for CIA Director, tapping his former intelligence chief John Ratcliffe, who he called a "warrior of truth."

President-elect Donald Trump on Monday announced plans to nominate South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem to head the Department of Homeland Security of his incoming administration.