Bar Crobar

More than 1,200 people arrested since protests began

The protest movement continues unabated and has already claimed the lives of 41 people. It began on 16 September, after the death of a young woman for "wearing inappropriate clothing".

The authorities have arrested 450 new demonstrators in northern Iran, where more than 700 people have already been arrested for taking part in protests against the death of a young woman detained by the morality police, official media reported on Monday.

Protest movement

"During the unrest of recent days, 450 rioters have been arrested in Mazandaran," said the province's attorney general, Mohammad Karimi, quoted by the official Irna agency. On Saturday, the authorities reported that 739 demonstrators had been arrested, including 60 women in Guilan, Mazandaran's neighbouring province in the north of the country.

The demonstrations began on 16 September, the date of the death of Mahsa Amini, who had been arrested three days earlier in Tehran for "wearing inappropriate clothing" in the Islamic Republic, where the dress code for women is strict, in particular the wearing of the Islamic veil.

The protest movement spread to several cities in the country, where demonstrators shouted anti-government slogans, according to local media. "Over the past few days, rioters have attacked government buildings and damaged public property in some parts of Mazandaran under the direction of foreign agents", he said.

No leniency

On Sunday, the head of the judiciary, Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejeï, threatened to show "no leniency" towards the demonstrators and called on the security forces to act "firmly" against "those who undermine security".

According to a non-detailed official report, including demonstrators and police, 41 people have been killed in ten days of protests. But the toll could be higher, with the Oslo-based NGO Iran Human Rights (IHR) reporting that at least 57 demonstrators have been killed.

On Monday, the Tasnim news agency published around 20 photos of demonstrators, including women, in various streets of Qom, an important Shiite holy city around 150 km south of the capital. The military and security institutions published these images of the "riot leaders" and called on residents to "identify them and inform the authorities", the agency added.

Alcaraz disgusted after Federer's retirement announcement

While just a few hours ago, following his triumph at the US Open, he said that he would really like to play Roger Federer at least once before the end of his career, Carlos Alcaraz was dealt a blow when the Swiss announced on Wednesday that he would be playing him.

The youngest world number one in history posted a heartbreaking message on his Twitter account, which says a lot about his state of mind following the Swiss player's decision to retire from professional tennis due in part to a creaking knee.

Text by we love tennis.fr

The new British sovereign takes the name of Charles III

The new British monarch, previously known as Prince Charles, is now known as Charles III. The 73-year-old prince automatically became king on the death of his mother Queen Elizabeth II under the rule that "the king never dies".

His accession to the throne after 70 years of patience, a record in the history of the British monarchy, was immediate on the death of the Queen, in accordance with the ancient Latin maxim "Rex nunquam moritur" (the King never dies).

Charles said in a statement posted on Twitter that his mother's death was "a time of great sorrow". "The death of my much-loved mother, Her Majesty The Queen, is a time of great sorrow for me and my family," the statement read.

Coronation in a few weeks

Her coronation should take place in a few weeks' time at the earliest. Elizabeth II was crowned in June 1953, sixteen months after being proclaimed Queen.

His wife Camilla became Queen Consort, a wish expressed by the Queen last February. The subject remained sensitive among the British. After her marriage to Prince Charles in 2005, Camilla chose not to take the title of Princess of Wales, which was too closely associated with Princess Diana.

Born on 14 November 1948, the eldest son Charles became heir to the crown at the age of three years and three months, in February 1952, when Princess Elizabeth, aged 25, became Queen on the death of her father George VI.

Since his first official engagements in the 1970s, the Prince of Wales's role has been to "support Her Majesty the Queen as a focal point of national pride".

He has welcomed dignitaries to the UK on his behalf, attended state dinners, travelled to a hundred countries, presented thousands of decorations, attended inaugurations, honoured heroes and written or recorded countless messages of encouragement and congratulations.

He was increasingly replacing his mother, who was in declining health. In May, Charles delivered the Speech from the Throne in Parliament for the first time, one of his most important constitutional duties.

Green dandy

The British know him best for the wreckage of his marriage to Princess Diana, which did him considerable harm in the 1990s, and his remarriage to Camilla.

A man of passions, Charles has made the most of this very long wait, an early advocate of the environment, a lover of alternative medicine, a passionate advocate of sustainable urban planning and an inspired gardener who talks to his trees. Since 2007, he has published his "ecological footprint" (total 3133 tonnes of CO2 in 2020 compared with 5070 in 2019).

In total, he is chairman or benefactor of more than 420 charities, the largest of which, the Prince's Trust, has helped more than a million young people in difficulty since it was founded in 1976.

But this dandyish old aristocrat who loves double-breasted suits is far less popular than his mother, who has been totally devoted to her role for 70 years, and is absolutely neutral.

Text by rts.ch afp/cab

Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp: a risk of backlash post #metoo?

Broadcast live on television, Johnny Depp's libel suit against Amber Heard unleashed a torrent of hate speech against the actress. Five years after #metoo, these reactions point to a backlash against victims who dare to speak out. Feminists and organisations fighting domestic violence are worried.

1 June 2022: the jurors in Fairfax District Court, near Washington, USA, deliver their verdict at the end of six weeks of legal wrangling between the defence of actress Amber Heard and the lawyers for her ex-husband, actor Johnny Depp. Both accused each other of violence and defamation.

Broadcast live on television and on the Internet, the trial turned into a grand unpacking of the couple's private life in full view of the general public. The extracts relayed on social networks gave rise to torrents of insults against Amber Heard and misogynistic messages that went viral, while Johnny Depp, who is 22 years older than his ex, benefited from a wave of "love". himpathy - a phenomenon that the Australian philosopher Kate Manne describes it as " the inappropriate and disproportionate sympathy shown to men of power in cases of sexual assault, domestic violence, homicide and other misogynistic behaviour".

Did the 36-year-old actress defame her ex-husband in her column published in 2018 in the Washington Postin which she presented herself as " a public figure embodying domestic violence" without explicitly mentioning Johnny Depp's name? That was the question the jury answered, finding her guilty of "defamation with actual malice" against Johnny Depp. Amber Heard was ordered to pay him $10 million, plus $5 million in damages. The jury also ordered Johnny Depp to pay $2 million in damages, considering that he had also defamed his ex-wife in the Daily Mail.

Settling scores

The legal and media war between the two ex-spouses dates back to 2016. Amber Heard filed for divorce, accused Johnny Depp of violence and obtained a restraining order - charges that were extinguished by a financial settlement. In 2020, the actor filed his first libel suit against the British newspaper The Sunwhich published comments made by Amber Heard accusing her of violence. The courts ruled that the actress' accusations were well-founded, even though Johnny Depp had also accused his ex-wife of violence. This was followed by an article by the young woman in the Washington Post leading up to the trial, which closes on 1 June.

On the one hand: Amber Heard presents evidence of bruises and scenes of violence, insults and threats, generally under the influence of alcohol, by Johnny Depp. On the other: the actor produced recordings of Amber Heard admitting to hitting him, and proof that she had already been arrested in 2009 for domestic violence against her ex, Tasya Van Ree. In the end, Johnny Depp claims that he accidentally headbutted Amber Heard while trying to stop her from attacking him. She justifies the violence she may have indulged in by describing it as self-defence.

Beyond the merciless settling of scores between the two parties of a toxic couple, the Fairfax trial, because it was delivered live to the public's vindictiveness, gave rise to a wave of hateful comments against Amber Heard, the woman who caused the scandal. And in turn against all victims of domestic violence who dare to speak out. Amber Heard put it this way when she expressed her disappointment at the verdict: " I am devastated that the mountain of evidence was not enough to stand up to the far greater power, influence and clout of my ex-husband.she said after the sentence was read out. I'm even more disappointed by what this verdict means for other women. It is a setback. It calls into question the idea that violence against women should be taken seriously." .

Toxic media coverage

Judge Penney Azcarate had decided to authorise the television broadcast of the hearings in this high-profile case, one of the most closely watched in the world, despite the opposition of Amber Heard's lawyers. It was " the worst court decision in decades for victims" says Michele Dauber, a law professor at Stanford University in California and campaigner against sexual assault on campus. A decision that reveals " a profound ignorance of sexual violence on the part of judges" .

Amber Heard had to " describing her alleged rape in graphic detail on television. It's shocking and should offend all women and victims, whether they agree with the verdict or not....", explains Michele Dauber. In fact, the trial has fascinated a global audience unaccustomed to watching allegations of sexual assault within a couple, since the last time a rape victim had to testify publicly was in 1983..

Whatever the opinions on the verdict, it's a problem: " I don't think our society yet understands the dynamics of domestic violence." Ruth Glenn, President of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV), told AFP. This context was not sufficiently explored during the court proceedings, she believes. For her, there is "no doubt" about the types of abuse that were revealed at the trial. " You have to make sure that the people present understand it. But until they do, don't show this sort of thing on television." .

Denigration, insults, mockery

"Every time Amber Heard has spoken out to detail the domestic violence of which she accuses Johnny Depp, her words, relayed on social networks, have immediately provoked mockery, sexist remarks and denigration, which have an undeniably disastrous effect on the objective of encouraging women to lodge complaints against violent spouses or public figures," writes women's rights activist Fatima-Ezzahra Benomar on Facebook. As is often the case in cases of sexist and sexual violence," she deplored, "the actress has been accused of acting when she cries, or on the contrary of not doing enough when she doesn't cry.... "

From now on " every victim will think twice before coming forward and applying for a restraining order or telling anyone about the abuse they have sufferedlaments teacher and activist Michele Dauber. Women are at risk of being injured or even killed because they did not call for help. This case is a complete disaster. It is potentially catastrophic" she concludes.

Misogyny in full force

The law professor also notes that public opinion was supportive of Johnny Depp, while his ex was the target of insults and jeers". openly misogynistic "on social networks. Amber Heard suffered " the metaphorical ordeal of tar and feathers" she asserted, while the ruling was welcomed by the American right. Her comments triggered an outcry of hate speech against Michele Dauber - slut, slag, criminal, shrew, etc. - to the point where one of her Twitter accounts was blocked.

Backlash after #metoo?

The media coverage of the Heard vs Depp affair raises the question of the future of the #MeToo movement, which since 2017 has encouraged women to denounce the perpetrators of sexual harassment and assault. Five years on, the irresistible tidal wave is marking time. " It's impossible not to see this as a backlash against #MeToo - women have gone too far. Ladies, we've listened to you and condemned a few men. Don't be too greedy" wrote one user on Reddit.

Others, like NCADV's Ruth Glenn, see it as a reminder of the work still to be done. For Tarana Burke, founder of #MeToo, "the movement is very much alive. It's the system that's corrupt". The instigator of #MeToo calls on us to focus on the courage of the millions of women who have denounced violence rather than on the legal battles, won or lost.

Tarana Burke's words are echoed by those of Anne-Cécile Mailfert, President of the Fondation des femmes en France, who reacted to the thousands, if not millions of insults from tiktokeurs who are making Amber Heard pay for having damaged the image of Johnny Depp, the "perfect male". For her, this backlash will not stop the movement, because "#metoo cannot be summed up in just one trial and is resonating around the world: there is no stopping it a movement whose time has come" .

Following the trial, Amber Heard's lawyer said that her client "absolutely cannot" pay the more than 10 million dollars in damages that she has been ordered to pay to her ex-husband. Believing that the actress had been "demonised" by the opposing party, she said she would appeal against the jury's decision.

Text by Terriennes Liliane Charrier

Liverpool - Real Madrid: Confidence, talent, luck... But why do Real always win in the end?

FOOTBALL Buoyed by Thibaut Courtois in the final and Karim Benzema in the previous rounds, Real Madrid have carried the success of the Champions League all season long.

Without an extraordinary Thibaut Courtois, Real Madrid would never have beaten Liverpool 1-0 at the Stade de France on Saturday.
The term resilience seems to have been invented for these Merengues, so often tossed about this season in the Champions League, and finally victorious.
Real added a 14th Champions League title to their trophy cabinet, twice as many as second-placed AC Milan.

At the Stade de France

The Liverpool fans, some of whom had had such a hard time getting in, preferred to leave rather than see this after the Reds' 1-0 defeat. So it was to a Stade de France virtually devoid of its red component that Marcelo, Real Madrid's soul on the bench on Saturday evening, held up the Champions League trophy. It was the Spanish club's 14th victory in Europe's most prestigious competition, a record that has now been bettered.

But it is undoubtedly the most incredible, given that the Merengues have often looked fragile this season, and sometimes even inferior to their opponents in the final stages of the Champions League. And yet they have managed to pull off a series of turnarounds that not even the boldest of scriptwriters would have dared suggest to a producer. Behind a smile that seemed forced for once, Jürgen Klopp was clearly wondering how his Reds had failed to beat the Real side they had so badly beaten.

"We took 23 shots, nine of which were on target," explained "OptaJürgen" to the press, before turning his attention to his opponents, whom he was naturally keen to congratulate: "Real only had one shot on target. But it was the right one, from a missed Valverde shot that was tapped in at the far post by Vinicius just before the hour mark...

Courtois, the guardian angel

As is often the case this season, "Saint Thibaut" Courtois dominated the match. The Belgian goalkeeper made a monstrous nine saves to disgust Mohamed Salah, who is cursed to face Real in the final (even when Ramos is no longer there to injure him, as he did in 2018). Courtois, whose ego is as solid as it is assertive, also pulled off a Martian-like save in the 20th minute, deflecting a clever little gem from Sadio Mané onto the post. The 2018 FIFA World Cup semi-finalist finally has the victory he has so longed for, at least since he stumbled on the last step with Atlético in 2014 against... Real.

Speaking to BT Sport, the most agile of double-metre players went for the grandiloquent (but accurate): "Yesterday [Friday], in the press conference, I said that when Madrid played finals, they won them. I was on the right side of history. The White House has only lost three finals, in 1962, 1964 and 1981. Since that last defeat to Liverpool at the Parc des Princes (1-0) at the dawn of the Mitterrand era, they have won eight finals, sometimes easily, sometimes by the skin of their teeth. But won nonetheless...

Ancelotti, a man of records

It's easier to win the Champions League with Real than with any other team," says Carlo Ancelotti. The particular passion of the supporters, the history, the structure of the club... All that makes the club special." The Italian is himself a winner at heart, despite some less brilliant recent seasons at Everton and Napoli: having previously won the title twice as a player, this Saturday he set a new record of four Champions Leagues as a coach, with Milan (2003 and 2007) and Real (2014 and 2022), with just one defeat to Liverpool (2005).

"This team is easy to coach," continues the Mister. The dressing room was calm as we prepared for this match. The players have incredible confidence. That confidence comes with the history of this club. That's rare in football. And even unique. So much so, in fact, that we are more inclined to subscribe to the theory of the winner's DNA than to the 'Carlo's pussy' theory, which is easily defensible this season: not to mention the final, Madrid lost the first leg of the last 16 to PSG, the quarter-final second leg to Chelsea and the semi-final first leg to Manchester City.

"There's no such thing as luck", says Karim Benzema

Each time, Real came close to taking the lead, and each time they slipped through the window to the next round, buoyed by future Ballon d'Or winner Karim Benzema, scorer of 15 C1 goals this season, including 10 in the knockout phase. Benzema's 16th was disallowed late in the first half on Saturday for an offside flag that was confirmed after an interminable VAR call. There's no such thing as luck," the captain of five European Cups, one of the guarantors along with Modric and Marcelo of the group's balance, told Canal+. You can be lucky once, but not every time. We deserve our victory. We made an effort, we came back every time, we never gave up.

Wearing a T-shirt bearing the "14" logo that was as eloquent as it was unattractive, Ancelotti added another layer of praise in the Stade de France press room: "At the start of the season, nobody thought we could win this competition. We deserved it. We suffered a lot along the way, but we never lost heart. Even when Kylian Mbappé opted to stay at PSG after a whirlwind telenovela? "Today, Mbappé doesn't exist, there's the Real Madrid party," said president Florentino Perez on Spanish channel Movistar, with the insolence of people who succeed in everything.

Text by Nicolas Stival 20Minutes.fr

Johnny Depp in the court of public opinion

Unlike Amber Heard, the actor enjoys massive support, whether on social networks or outside the courtroom.

The defamation trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard comes to a close at Fairfax Magistrates' Court on Friday, and its outcome remains uncertain, but the "Pirate of the Caribbean" can count on widespread support in the street and on social networks.

The mutual accusations are heavy, however. Johnny Depp claims that his ex-wife ruined his reputation by claiming, in a column published in 2018, that he had been a victim of domestic violence two years earlier. He rejects these allegations and is claiming 50 million in damages.

Amber Heard, 36, has counter-attacked and is demanding double the amount, claiming she suffered years of violence, including a rape in 2015, and accusing her ex-husband of wanting to "ruin her career".

The public for Johnny

Every morning, several hundred people greet the actor outside the courthouse in this small Virginia town near Washington, compared to a handful of placards in favour of Amber Heard. On social networks, the advantage is also clearly in favour of the 58-year-old actor. Passions are running high on Twitter and TikTok, where with 15.3 billion "views" on Tuesday, the hashtag "Justice for Johnny Depp" far outstripped "I'm with Amber Heard" (8.4 million).

"Nothing surprises me about social networks and celebrities", and this case concerns "two major celebrities", Jason Mollica, professor of communications at American University, told AFP. According to Mollica, Johnny Depp is a world-famous actor who has always shunned the mundane and retained the "mysterious side" that fans love.

Amber Heard, on the other hand, is much less well known. Since the beginning of the trial, she has tried to appear "more normal and close to people", according to Mr Mollica, but her former assistant, Kate James, described her personality as "aggressive" and "theatrical".

Internet users "express their opinions without being experts in justice", says the former journalist. This trial has revealed "the flashiest sides of the case, but we may never get to the truth, buried in the muddy waters of social networks".

Hostility towards Amber

Hostility towards Amber Heard, the civil rights organisation ACLU's domestic violence ambassador, has a long history. The actress' career "was on the verge of a meteoric rise" after the global success of "Aquaman" released at the end of 2018, entertainment industry expert Kathryn Arnold said on Monday. But she suffered "a lot of negative publicity" after the op-ed published in the "Washington Post", she added.

The cyberstalking campaigns generally followed statements made by one of Johnny Depp's lawyers and surrounded the actor's first defamation lawsuit in London in 2020, according to Ron Schnell, an expert in social network analysis.

However, a Warner Bros studio executive pointed to the "lack of chemistry" between her and actor Jason Momoa during "Aquaman" to explain her limited appearances in the second opus, filmed in 2021. And in Hollywood, few stars have shown their support for Amber Heard, unlike Johnny Depp.

The future of #MeToo

In an opinion piece, the "New York Times" recently feared that the outcome of the trial, if the jurors did not find in favour of Amber Heard, could mean the "death" of the #MeToo movement against violence against women. "I don't think it will influence victims in their willingness or otherwise to report abuse", says Shana Maier, Professor of Criminal Justice at Widener University.

Similarly, she dismisses the risk of "backlash against victims or women's associations". She stresses that this trial has the merit of "highlighting the issue of domestic violence". "There will always be people who will say of Amber Heard: "Why did she say that if it didn't happen?" agrees Jason Mollica.

A precedent?

However, Mr Mollica believes that this case could influence other celebrity defamation cases, such as the one brought by singer Marilyn Manson, a friend of Johnny Depp, against his ex-girlfriend Evan Rachel Wood.

Jury selection could thus be complicated if one of the rocker's lawyers believes that "the jurors may not know all the facts, but they know the names Depp, Heard and Manson, and that alone prevents them from being impartial", says Jason Mollica. For Shana Maier, on the other hand, the Marilyn Manson trial "will be judged on its own merits".

Text by Le Matin.ch (AFP)

"Partygate: Boris Johnson under fire despite new apology

The British Prime Minister made an "unreserved" apology to Parliament, without convincing the opposition.

UNITED KINGDOM - British Prime Minister Boris Johnson apologised "unreservedly" to Parliament on Tuesday 19 April after being fined for breaching anti-Covid restrictions, without convincing the opposition, which has once again called for his resignation.

Boris Johnson said it "did not occur to him at the time or subsequently" that his attendance at a brief birthday rally in Downing Street in June 2020 "might constitute a breach of the rules" then in force. "That was my mistake and I apologise unreservedly".

Boris Johnson is the first serving British head of government to be fined for breaking the law, and he faces further fines as part of the investigation into "partygate", the name of the scandal surrounding the parties organised in the circles of power during the confinements put in place to combat the pandemic.

The Conservative leader was addressing MPs for the first time since being fined £50 (€60) a week ago for attending the surprise birthday party for his 56th birthday on 19 June 2020. An event lasting "less than 10 minutes", according to him, which also earned his wife Carrie and his finance minister Rishi Sunak a fine.

"I respect the conclusions of the police investigation, which is still ongoing", added the Prime Minister.

On Tuesday, however, he tried to play down the scandal that is infuriating the British people by spending a few minutes talking about the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

"I know many people are angry and disappointed and I feel an even greater obligation to respect British priorities and respond to (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's barbaric attack on Ukraine.

A second wind

For a time on an ejector seat, "BoJo" got his second wind by highlighting his role in the front line of Western sanctions against Russia after the invasion of Ukraine. Many MPs who had called for him to step down now see little point in ousting him from Downing Street in this context.

However, Labour opposition leader Keir Starmer said on Tuesday that the Conservative leader was "dishonest and incapable of change". Boris Johnson is "a man without shame", he said, urging the Conservatives to get rid of their leader and restore "decency, honesty and integrity" to British politics.

The head of government also came in for sharp criticism from within his own camp, with Conservative MP Mark Harper saying he was no longer "fit" to be Prime Minister.

The soap opera seems far from over. The London police, who have already handed out 50 fines, are continuing their investigations and British MPs will be debating on Thursday whether Boris Johnson knowingly misled Parliament - synonymous with resignation under the ministerial code of conduct - by repeating that all the rules had been respected.

The Prime Minister will also have to face up to the conclusions of senior civil servant Sue Gray, who has already criticised "errors of leadership and judgement" in a pre-report. He must also face the verdict of the ballot box in local elections on 5 May.

According to the press, Boris Johnson faces further fines for at least five other festive events.

Downing Street was keen to deny this after new details emerged in the Sunday Timeswho described him serving drinks and giving a speech to mark the departure of his head of communications on 13 November 2020.

According to a survey published on Monday, 72% of those polled had a negative view of the Prime Minister, with the most common term being "liar".

Text by AFP huffingtonpost.fr

Emmanuel Macron is unlikely to visit Kiev before the second round

Volodymyr Zelensky has invited Emmanuel Macron to visit Ukraine. It won't be for a while yet," moderates Clément Beaune.

UKRAINE - Will Emmanuel Macron travel to Ukraine like British Prime Minister Boris Johnson or European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen? "Not in the next few days", replied Clément Beaune on Sud Radio on Monday 18 April.

Although the Head of State has had numerous telephone conversations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, he has not visited Ukraine, unlike some of his European counterparts. But for the Secretary of State for European Affairs, a visit before the second round of the presidential election on Sunday 24 April "would no doubt be misinterpreted".

But Emmanuel Macron is expected to be there. In an interview broadcast on Sunday by CNN, Volodymyr Zelensky said that he had invited his French counterpart to meet him in Ukraine. This invitation follows Emmanuel Macron's reluctance to describe what has been happening in the country since the Russian invasion on 24 February as "genocide".

Emmanuel Macron in Ukraine "if it's useful".

"I told him that I wanted him to understand that this is not a war, that this is nothing other than genocide. I invited him to come when he had the chance," said Volodymyr Zelensky. "He will come, and he will see, and I am sure he will understand."

For his part, Clément Beaune stated that "the President of the Republic, as President of the Republic, has always been very clear: he may go, if it is useful (...) We cannot make a visit that is merely symbolic, it must be a visit that has an impact". In the meantime," says Clément Beaune, "our support is very, very clear, and involves military and humanitarian aid.

Speaking to CNN, the Ukrainian president also said that he would like US President Joe Biden to come to Ukraine, after his surprise claim that Russian forces were committing "genocide". "The decision is his, of course, it depends on the security situation. But I think he is the leader of the United States and for that he should come and see."

Text by Le HuffPost

Meta threatens to shut down Facebook and Instagram in Europe

The social networking giant has reiterated the possibility of shutting down its most important services on the Old Continent if it cannot transfer its users' data to its servers in the United States.

The Meta group is trying to put pressure on Europe. In its annual report to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Facebook's parent company warned once again that it could "probably" no longer offer its "most important products and services", such as Facebook and Instagram, in Europe if a new framework to regulate the transfer of data from users of its services to its servers in the United States is not adopted or if the company is no longer authorised to use the current agreements "or alternatives", reports the City A.M. media.

"Sharing data between countries or regions of the world is crucial to offering our services and targeted advertising", the company insists. It wishes to process users' personal data on US soil, outside the protection framework provided by the EU with the stricter RGPD.

The group previously used the transatlantic transfer framework known as Privacy Shield, but this treaty was annulled by the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2020, due to data protection violations. The EU, which believes that people's data is less protected across the Atlantic, and the US have since been working on a new version of the treaty. Facebook, whose revenues and users are in decline, is currently under investigation by the Irish data protection regulator.

Text by 20minutes.ch (man)

Rafael Nadal beats Daniil Medvedev in the Australian Open final

The Spaniard won his 21st Grand Slam tournament, one more than Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic.

TENNIS - Has he become the famous "GOAT", the greatest tennis player of all time? In any case, it will be increasingly difficult to deny Rafael Nadal this symbolic title. Because on Sunday 30 January, the Spaniard wrote a new page in his legend and in that of the sport.

Trailing two sets to nil, the current world number 6 finally toppled Daniil Medvedev to win in five sets and over five hours (2-6, 6-7, 6-4, 6-4, 7-5) in the final of the Australian Open.

This second title in Melbourne (he won the first in 2009) is not just another victory for Rafa. Above all, at 35, it is his 21st Grand Slam title. That's no mean feat, as it's one more than Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic, both of whom rival him for the famous nickname of GOAT. Both reacted to their rival's victory. On Instagram, the Swiss praised the "incredible work ethic, commitment and fighting spirit" of his "friend", while on Twitter the Serb hailed his rival's "impressive fighting spirit".

Impossible is not Nadal

Having arrived in Australia after several months' absence through injury, Rafael Nadal also contracted Covid just before his departure for Melbourne. This relieved him of the pressure that had gripped Djokovic in the final of the US Open last September, when he had the chance to win the Grand Slam.

After two easy opening rounds, the Mallorca native gradually came into his own in the tournament. But we were still wondering how he would react in long five-set matches. He provided the first clue in the quarter-finals, getting the better of Denis Shapovalov. However, in this final, when he was 2-0 down and had three break points to save in the 3rd set, it was hard to imagine him reversing the situation.

But impossible is definitely not in his vocabulary. And in a breathtaking end to the match, Rafael Nadal concluded on his first match point to become the greatest (at least in the Grand Slam).

Text by Alexandre Boudet huffingtonpost.fr