As billions around the world gear up for the beautiful game to touch down in not one, but three cultural superpowers, there has been an overriding sense of disgruntlement with North America’s vision of the world’s festival. Restlessness with the tournament, hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico, has grown steadily since the unveiling of its logo nearly three years ago; far from an empty icon, its design reveals an insight into the growing commercialisation tearing fans away from the game they love.
Beset by organisational and political problems, the upcoming FIFA World Cup is not only the most ambitious in the institution’s history but also the most marketed. In fact, this World Cup goes where none other has before in the realm of marketing. From Clarkson’s Farm to Coca-Cola, Lego to Lays, there is seemingly no product to which the World Cup treatment has not been extended. Key to this effort is the marketing power invested in the World Cup logo.
It is difficult to overstate the importance of the World Cup logo for setting the tone of the quadrennial tournament. From the very first World Cup logo at the 1954 Swiss tournament, a stylised ball-like icon incorporating a red Swiss flag turned football pitch in its centre, the World Cup logo has been utilised as a chance to paint a picture of national pride and culture. Through the years, each host has taken up this chance with fresh ideas and new perspectives.
There have been both remarkable successes and notable failures in the history of World Cup logo designs. Mexico’s 1970 World Cup saw what many regard as one of the finest sports logos ever created, its distinctive MEXICO 70 wordmark drawing inspiration from Lance Wyman’s typography for the 1968 Olympic Games. By contrast, England’s 1966 logo lacked both the inspiration and commendation expected for a tournament which brought such iconic moments. Yet, despite their varying levels of success, each of these attempts shared a common goal: they are designed not only to articulate a host nation’s identity but also to communicate its place within an international community brought together by football.
This is what the World Cup is about: drawing football into a global conversation of hope and joy. The World Cup logo is a visual cue for this, stating the organiser’s ambitions for the tournament. The logo for South Africa 2010, for example, was designed around the idea of unity, using sweeping colours that combine to form the African continent while converging on the football. These logos signify cultural moments, and being a part of a cultural moment is what fans seek. It is precisely this sense of shared significance that many fans seem to find absent from the approaching tournament.
The World Cup is not only about culture, it is also a political beast of sizable proportions. In its worst forms, football has proved an effective way of bolstering support for authoritarian regimes and blinding the world to corruption and coercion. The World Cup itself is no stranger to political interference. Whether used to strengthen and unite Fascist Italy in 1934 or ran by a brutish authoritarian regime, the tournament has long struggled to keep a clean face to cover its dark underbelly.
As the symbolic face of the tournament, the World Cup logo has often served as a façade to cover up cultural and political tensions. Decided upon by design committees, consultancy firms, and so-called ‘brand teams’, the World Cup logo is a powerful marketing device aimed at suspending the material, political, and social reality of the tournament, promoting the image of a world unified by the spirit of the game. However, at this year’s 23rd edition of the FIFA World Cup the curtains have been well-and-truly drawn back.
Rather than projecting an image of a tournament defined by sporting merit and excitement, this World Cup’s logo serves as perhaps the most striking testament to its underlying commercial character. Since Sepp Blatter’s 17-year stint as FIFA president, beset with allegations of corruption, fans have felt a growing rot within the game as commercial interests begin to outweigh sporting spirit. The selection of the USA as primary hosts, the foils of dynamic ticket pricing, and the expansion of the tournament to 48 teams, have all contributed to the sense that this World Cup is a pinnacle of the game’s demise. This year’s logo does little to hide this. Its sterile numerical design and photo-realistic representation of the FIFA World Cup trophy bear greater resemblance to Apple campaigns than to tournament logos of old.
While FIFA has adapted this design for the individual host cities, it seems more like a brand template than a thoughtful representation of sport or culture. The brainchild of a Toronto-based creative agency, the logo does little to acknowledge football fan culture, instead becoming just another feature of America’s corporate “logorama”. If the World Cup logo aims to summarise the tone of the games, symbolising the tournament’s message to the world, then this is a message of meaningless corporate greed and soulless commodities. The World Cup logo has been rendered plain and marketable, suiting a tournament that now holds those values at its core.
And yet, this format is here to stay. ‘Johnny’ Infantino, as he is warmly referred to by President Trump, promises that all future tournaments will continue to use this numerical design to provide brand consistency, no matter the extent of fan outcries. Whatever excuse or justification one makes for such a decision, it always comes back to the same logic: business. For fans around the world, World Cups are not remembered for their revenue or marketability, but because of the cultural moment they created. It seems that for Mr. Infantino and motley mob, this is of little importance. FIFA is very much at risk of tearing out the game’s soul in order to grow its brand; once that soul is gone, one must ask what there remains to sell.
Branding the beautiful game: How the World Cup logo signifies the commercialisation of football
Tommy Robinson’s invitation to Oxford Union met with protest: Live updates
Background
Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, who calls himself Tommy Robinson, is due to speak at the Oxford Union at 8:30pm this evening at a debate on the motion “This House believes the West is right to be suspicious of Islam”. The event has drawn condemnation from University societies, local politicians, and local faith leaders.
The debate comes days after Yaxley-Lennon was detained at Heathrow Airport on Saturday evening under the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019, following his return to the UK from Russia. His phones were seized, but no further action has been announced by the Metropolitan Police.
Thames Valley Police (TVP) has confirmed a significant policing operation across Oxford city centre from 3:30pm today. St Michael’s Street, where the Oxford Union is located, has been closed to vehicles and pedestrians since 4pm, and will remain shut until 11pm. Despite earlier statements, it has been confirmed that no other roads will be closed.
Businesses in the city centre have also been closing early: The White Rabbit pub announced in advance it would shut from 3:30pm, citing safety concerns and solidarity with other independent businesses. The Handlebar Kitchen on St Michael’s Street closed at 3pm – their pavement licence was revoked for the day. Activate Learning, which runs further education colleges in the area, has also written to parents and carers advising students to avoid large gatherings and allow extra time for journeys through the city centre.
In a statement, Oxford City Council Leader Susan Brown has raised the question of the cost of the large-scale security operation. She wrote that the Oxford Union “must meet the full costs of staging their event, rather than leaving Oxford’s taxpayers to pick up the bill”. The Oxford Green Party has also issued a statement, demanding that the Oxford Union “cover the entire cost of the security operation it is requiring” and that “compensation be paid by the society to local businesses forced to board up their windows and close”. Cherwell has previously reported that the Oxford Union is just years away from insolvency.
The Oxford University Islamic Society issued a formal statement warning that the invitation posed a direct threat to Muslim students’ safety, arguing that “extending a platform to individuals whose reputations are built upon targeting minority communities is not without consequence”. A group of Oxfordshire Liberal Democrat politicians, including MP for Oxford West and Abingdon Layla Moran, have also called on the Union to reflect on whether proceeding “was consistent with “the values of respect, inclusion, and community cohesion that Oxfordshire strives to uphold”.
Individual colleges at the University of Oxford have announced that they will remain closed to the public this afternoon, and have reached out to remind their students to take the requisite precautions. Wadham College, for example, urged students to “please act responsibly, stay safe and vigilant and take the disruption into account when planning your afternoon and evening”.
The debate is due to feature Laurence Fox and Jonathon Sacerdoti (alongside Yaxley-Lennon) on the proposition, and Jacob Rees-Mogg, Abdullah Al-Andalusi, and Michael Doward on the opposition.
Defending her decision to invite Yaxley-Lennon in an article in The Telegraph, Elrayess wrote: “For more than 200 years, the Oxford Union has existed to host debates – not to platform views uncritically, but to subject them to the most rigorous scrutiny. You do not invite a speaker to endorse them: you invite them so that their ideas can be examined, and their claims tested.”
A spokesperson for the Oxford Union previously told Cherwell that the Union gives “members the opportunity to challenge…a broad range of speakers” and “only host[s] speakers who agree to be challenged”.
The University of Oxford has shared a reminder that “welfare services are available to support all students”.
Updates at 5:15pm:
A white van was seen entering the Union from New Inn Hall Road, prior to the arrival of any protesters.
Updates at 5:45pm:
Despite intense police presence, around 60 people started to gather on St Michael’s Street, as growing crowds surrounded the entrance to the Oxford Union around Cornmarket Street. Organisers from Oxford Stand Up to Racism were seen handing out leaflets and signs to passersby.
A spokesperson for Oxford Stand Up to Racism told Cherwell: “I expect a lot of people to come out for this protest, and we’re going to take back the streets for unity and for the safety of all our people.
“Tommy Robinson is not here for political debate, and it’s wrong to legitimise his views that he’ll be espousing as political ideas. By the strength of our numbers, we can prevent this horrible debate, which is a televised pantomime to whip up racism.”
Protesters carrying placards continued to arrive, with chants amplified through megaphones including: “This isn’t debate, you’re spreading hate”, and “Nazi scum, off our streets!”. Thames Valley Police remained at the scene and prevented people from entering the area.
At the junction of New Inn Hall Road and St Michael’s Street, another group of anti-fascists assembled, in a demonstration organised by Oxford Resists in collaboration with societies including Oxford Action for Palestine, Oxford Students Palestine Solidarity, and Oxford DIY Pride. The majority of these protesters appeared to be students.
A first-year Oxford student, when asked about their reasons for attending the protest, told Cherwell: “One of my friends expressed concern for their safety, off the back of Tommy Robinson speaking at the Union, and all the demonstrations, particularly the far right demonstrations, I know she can’t even come today at all, and I’m in a position to be here safely.
“With exams going on and with such a busy time [in Oxford], the presence of Tommy Robinson and his supporters in Oxford has really scared some people.”
A member of Oxford Students Palestine Solidarity told Cherwell: “We’re here to fight against fascism, and we’re here to fight for our Muslim brothers and sisters. The entire idea of this debate is to oppress the Muslims in this city and everywhere… this is extremely dangerous for Muslims across Oxford and across the world.”
Updates at 6:15pm:
Numerous protesters attempted to push past the barricades blocking access to St Michael’s Street, and were met by security forces preventing entry. This altercation formed a focal point of the protest, and continued throughout the evening.
On nearby George Street, one man was seen by onlookers to have climbed the scaffolding of a building, in what appeared to be an attempt to get closer to the Union itself.
At this point, the number of anti-racist protesters seemed to outnumber pro-Robinson protesters around five to one, with repeated cries of “Oxford is anti-fascist” emerging from the crowds. Representatives from multiple different groups could be seen joining Stand Up to Racism, including Oxford Green Party, the National Education Union, and Oxfordshire NASUWT.
A second year student among the anti-fascist protesters told Cherwell: “I’m here at this protest, along with 700 other people, proud anti-racist, anti-fascists, to show the Oxford Union that they cannot divide our city, they cannot divide our university, they cannot divide our community by platform of hate. Free speech is different to hateful language.”
Meanwhile, a small group of Communist activists gathered with flags outside the Weston Library, slightly removed from the chaotic action on Cornmarket Street.
In Bonn Square, a group of counter-protesters began to assemble, including the Oxfordshire Patriots. Within a short time, they started to move towards both New Inn Hall Street and Cornmarket Street.
Speaking to Cherwell, Aiden Noble, head of the Oxfordshire Patriots, said his group had attended the protest to support the Oxford Union’s decision to host Tommy Robinson. Noble told Cherwell: “Just because Tommy’s got his views, we shouldn’t be silencing him, we should be allowing him to speak what he wants to speak, whether it’s right or wrong, or somewhere in the middle.
“Sometimes I listen to him and I think ‘You’re an idiot, mate’, do you know what I mean? But a lot of the things he’s been saying recently, people are seeing it.”
Updates at 6:45pm:
Increasing numbers of demonstrators bearing Union Jack flags continued to arrive on New Inn Hall Street. Police established a large cordon separating the protesting groups, with officers maintaining a visible presence as crowds grew on both sides.
Confrontations between protesters started to arise on New Inn Hall Street as police tried to stop demonstrators’ attempts to get closer to St Michael’s Street. As this took place, Aiden Noble was seen shouting for his fellow protestors to pull back.
Shortly after this, balloted members of the Oxford Union also arrived on New Inn Hall Street, but were unable to get to the entrance of the event on account of the amount of overcrowding.
Soon after, a large police wall formed on Cornmarket Street in an attempt to separate the opposing protest groups. While this operation took place, police presence on the corner of Market Street continued to increase, as two more lines of police arrived to shut down rising confrontations between the opposing groups of protesters.
Updates at 7:45pm:
As the entrance on St Michael’s Street continued to be blocked, a human wall began to form around the entrance to Plush nightclub, as some attempted to enter the Union from this direction. More police subsequently arrived at the scene, as the police cordon on Cornmarket remained unbroken despite the mounting pressures from demonstrators.
By this point, anti-fascist numbers appeared to have increased to around 500, still significantly outnumbering their pro-Robinson counterparts.
Tensions persisted at the barrier blocking the end of St Michael’s Street, where sporadic confrontations continued as still the police prevented the public from entering. At this point, it remained largely unclear how many people had made it inside the chamber for the debate itself, beginning at 8:30pm.
At approximately 8:32pm, an anonymous Union committee member confirmed to Cherwell that the debate was still going ahead as planned.
Very shortly afterwards, another anonymous committee member told Cherwell that there were “believed to be around 20–30 people in the building in total”, with only “single digits” having made it through the blockades. The source added that this included junior officers who were “being prevented from entering”.
A former Junior Officer in the Union, when talking to Cherwell, condemned the conduct of the Union Committee throughout the lead-up to the event: “The concerns of members have been completely ignored. The concerns of minority communities have been ignored. The safety of members has been ignored. Despite pleas from the council, the police, faith leaders, it was all ignored by a group of people who, I think pushed this debate for more ideological purposes… I say that not only is the event a disgrace, but the conduct of the current leadership of the Union is disgraceful.”
Shermar Pryce, formerly Chief Advisor to the President who resigned following the invitation to Yaxley-Lennon, spoke to Cherwell about his disappointment with Elrayess: “I think she should genuinely not only be embarrassed, but she should be apologetic to the students of Oxford, the local authorities, and the Oxford Union itself, and all of its members.”
Update at 9pm:
Footage from inside the Union seen by Cherwell revealed that the chamber was largely empty, as members waited for the debate to begin. Individuals who had successfully ballotted, including Union officers, continued to be unable to enter. The Union Treasurer, Milo Donovan, supposed to preside over the debate, was similarly unable to enter.
A former Union Committee member told Cherwell that the mishandling of the situation by the Union is “a very bad look, not just for the Union, but for the city itself, to think that this is the image that we’re putting out there for our city, for our university, for our community.”
In a reply on X to Jacob Rees-Mogg’s appeal to allow people into the Union, Thames Valley Police said: “The decision to suspend entry to the event was taken by the event organisers, not the police.”
Yaxley-Lennon posted a picture of protestors on X, with the caption: “When these lot want me to be quiet. I know I must keep speaking. Louder. Whatever the cost.”
Update at 9:50pm:
The debate finally started, although nearly an hour and a half later than the expected 8:30pm slot. The slightly quieter sound of protest could still be heard from the chamber.
In a recording heard by Cherwell, Yaxley-Lennon argued that Islam lacks “common ground” with other religions in his speech. He cited the death penalty for homosexuality in some countries as his primary example of this, claiming that “four of the five major schools of Islamic law think [homosexuality] should be punished by death.”
Updates at 11.10pm:
Cherwell understands that the final opposition speaker, Laila Nasher, a student, was unable to enter the Union building. Arwa Elrayess stepped in to speak in her place. An anonymous source in the Union told Cherwell that Elrayess pushed against Yaxley-Lennon, accusing him of redirecting anger towards Muslims and minorities.
Update at 1:10am:
The last guests were seen leaving the Union, as St Michael’s Street was reopened to the public and police dispersed.
The results of the debate, posted on the Oxford Union Instagram, show a victory for the opposition, with 33 votes, from members voting with membership cards and 30 votes for the proposition.
Reporting by Beatrix Arnold, Mercedes Haas, Ned Remington, and Hattie Simpson.
Oxford’s prestigious reputation deserves scrutiny
I was very close to rejecting Oxford for Exeter. While this is not why I eventually accepted my offer, I couldn’t stop thinking about the prestige the name ‘Oxford’ connotes. This ‘prestige’, however, was historically incubated through empire, slavery, class hierarchy, and elite political power. For these reasons, especially, I feel that studying here is nothing to boast about at all.
We often ignore the fact that Oxford did not merely exist during the empire, but helped to produce the people and ideas that sustained it. It was this institution, alongside Cambridge, that was tasked with educating generations of colonial administrators who governed the British Empire. Among them are: Cecil Rhodes, Lord Curzon, Lord Alfred Milner, Henry Petty-Fitzmaurice, 5th Marquess of Lansdowne, and Victor Bruce, 9th Earl of Elgin. Additionally, Britain would offer members of foreign elites a place to study at Oxbridge, a practice that some scholars view as a soft power tactic to strengthen British cultural and diplomatic influence abroad. Perhaps unrelated, today, over one quarter of the world’s countries still have a leader who was educated in the UK.
Oxford further helped intellectually legitimise the empire and colonial hierarchy. Subjects like classics, theology, and my own subject, ‘Oriental studies’ (now Middle East Studies), were historically intertwined with imperial governance. These disciplines provided the ideological justifications and administrative frameworks necessary to establish and manage the British Empire. Even today, I have classmates from ethnic minority backgrounds who have told me about Oxford coursemates and even a tutor who has proudly introduced themselves – to them specifically – as the grand or great-grandchild of the governor of areas in Bangladesh, India, and so on.
Oxford has also benefited from wealth derived from colonial exploitation. The Codrington Library at All Souls College was funded by Christopher Codrington. His fortune was accumulated from Caribbean sugar plantations where enslaved Africans were put to work. When Oxford has wished not to associate with its donors, they have renamed libraries. The Ferdowsi Library in Wadham College was initially the Ashraf Pahlavi Library, as it was funded by the last Shah of Iran’s sister in 1977. Just two years later, when the Shah was overthrown, the College didn’t hesitate to rename the library. The Codrington Library, however, still bears a slave-owner’s name.
Looking back at the last three years, Oxford students organised encampments calling on Oxford to divest from companies linked to the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, and criticised the University for insufficient transparency regarding its investments. Oxford was quick to ban and dismantle the encampments. In January 2025, as many students may remember, abseiling police officers were seen scaling the Radcliffe Camera to arrest protesters from Oxford Action 4 Palestine. Would the University’s response have been so harsh if students were protesting a different humanitarian catastrophe?
Another cause of personal discomfort for me is every single time I have to wear my sub-fusc. The same sub-fusc that was worn by Leo Amery and Lord Alfred Milner, who, along with Arthur Balfour, drafted and authorised the Balfour Declaration.
These ongoing and past injustices are easily traced back to Oxford’s alumni and donors. Apart from these alumni and Oxford’s current polemical financial investments, having played a role in fuelling injustice in current ongoing international conflicts, its links to past atrocities can still be seen in its landscape. The relationship between Oriel College and British imperialist and white supremacist Cecil Rhodes (the founder of the colonies of North and South Rhodesia) is perhaps the most high-profile example. Rhodes left a financial bequest to the college, which funded the construction of the building that still bears his name, and his statue remains prominent in Oriel. Again, in the past, Oxford has renamed buildings and can easily do so again. For instance, the Faculty of Asian and Middle East Studies was previously the Oriental Institute – while the name has officially changed, the ‘Oriental Institute’ sign remains.
In 2015, the University of Cape Town, after immense pressure from its student body, removed the statue of Cecil Rhodes from their campus. Our students continue to campaign for the same, especially after the “Black Lives Matter” movement, but the Rhodes statue remains. The global “Rhodes Must Fall” movement has argued that Oxford glorifies the Empire while marginalising those harmed by it. At times, our student body has done the same, like in 2015, when the Oxford Union named one of their cocktail drinks: “Colonial Comeback”.
It is public knowledge that up until that year, academics from Worcester College were drinking from a 225-year-old skull, thought to have belonged to an enslaved woman, and gifted to them by an alumnus. Why did that alumnus feel that human remains, which were passed down in his own family, were the best gift to present to his college? Why did he assume it would not raise any questions? Why did multiple Oxford academics even think to use it for such a purpose, and comfortably do so for years? Even after it was damaged, they used this human skull to store chocolate. All this alone reveals so much.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was some Oxford academics (Julian Huxley, John R. Baker, and E. B. Ford) who were among the elite who perpetuated eugenic theories, and played a role in legitimising racial hierarchy under the guise of ‘scientific research’. In recent times, other Oxford academics, like Nigel Biggar, Emeritus Regius Professor of Moral Theology, have defended certain aspects of colonialism, as can be seen in his article for The Times in 2017. As for Oxford donors whose names are ingrained in stone in the buildings we study in, their names are also found in the Epstein files. If not for word-count sake, this list would go on, all raising questions about the kind of institution I feel I really belong to.
And yet, instead, for reasons I cannot fathom, Oxford is somehow considered by so many to be a source of moral and intellectual authority. In a clothed expression of classism, a former sixth-form teacher of mine even went as far as to describe Oxford students as “the peak of civilisation” to explain why he was shocked that Oxford has one of the highest statistics among UK universities for cases of sexual assault on university grounds.
I will never belittle all that Oxford has given me, including my Oxford education, and I suffered greatly for my place here. However, pride in this institution – in where I study and who has studied here before me – will always be impossible for me.
We cannot pick and choose. We cannot believe that we are inheriting a millennium of intellectual achievement, and also dismiss the moral weight that comes with it. We cannot falsify, erase, or deny history, and a large part of Oxford’s history is shamefully one of empire, elite political power, and built with slavery-linked wealth. Students have every right to question what that legacy means today. If anything, doing so reflects the very critical thinking and values that Oxford claims it champions.
Home Office proposes doubling of Campsfield capacity
The Home Office has proposed a second phase of development to the Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre (IRC), increasing its capacity from 160 to 400 beds. This expansion to the facility – whose reopening in 2025 has been followed by regular protests – would progress through the Crown Development approval process, bypassing the Cherwell District Council.
Located north of Kidlington, Campsfield holds detainees whose custodial sentence has ended and who are awaiting deportation, and those who do not have a legal right to remain in the UK. The facility was previously closed in 2018 following significant backlash for its treatment of prisoners and staff, with 41% of Campsfield detainees in 2018 reporting that they felt unsafe.
The proposed expansion would see an additional 240 beds, 176 staff members, and 10,840m2 of floorspace as part of a broader strategy to increase national detention capacity to 3,500 by 2030. The Home Office has justified both the expansion and the choice to pursue the Crown Development route by referencing its policy goals. In a Statement of National Importance included in its planning application, the Home Office argued that “insufficient detention capacity is a critical bottleneck in the immigration system” and that “both the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary have confirmed that tackling illegal migration remains a top government priority”.
According to the Home Office, Campsfield plays an important role in government immigration policy, with Phase 2 of construction labelled a “nationally significant development”. They have also acknowledged the controversial nature of the proposal, saying, “Phase 2 is significantly larger [than Phase 1, which reopened the facility] and is expected to attract greater public interest, making the local planning route less appropriate”.
Advocacy groups have already criticised the planned development, with Oxfordshire charity Asylum Welcome Joint-CEO Hari Reed writing in a press release: “We are concerned by proposals to increase Campsfield’s capacity from 160 to 400 and would encourage people to engage with the consultation process.”
In a leaflet shared with Cherwell, the Oxfordshire-based Coalition to Close Campsfield (CCC) claims that the reopening occurred “despite the opposition of the parish, district and county councils” and that the Crown Development route for expansion “is expressly designed to override the wishes of local people and the local planning authority”. The CCC has also criticised the expansion for its proximity to the Oxford Technology Park and disputed the Home Office’s assertion that the expansion is “value for money”, calling for a public inquiry “in view of the issue’s importance and contentiousness”.
A recent Cherwell investigation found that at least 9 Oxford colleges indirectly invest in Mitie Group Plc, whose subsidiary runs Campsfield. The University restricts investments against certain types of arms production companies, tobacco companies, fossil fuel exploration and extraction companies, and funds which invest in these types of companies, but does not limit investment in companies involved in the border industry.
Mitie told Cherwell, “Our colleagues are committed to upholding the highest standards of dignity, safety, and respect for those in our care.”
Public consultation on the proposal is open until 24th July, 2026.
New Oxford campaign seeks to demystify genetic and neurological conditions using animations
A new educational campaign developed by the Department of Paediatrics at the University of Oxford aims to make neurodevelopmental disorders easier to understand through a series of animated videos.
The “Genes, Brains, and Breakthroughs” initiative was developed in collaboration with families, researchers, and international patient advocacy organisations. to improve public understanding of genetic and neurological conditions. The campaign covers conditions including Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and Trisomy 21 (more commonly referred to as Down syndrome), through simplified explanations of genetic mutations and chromosomal differences.
As part of the project, 16 animated videos have been created to explain conditions affecting children’s brain development in an accessible and visually engaging way. The videos explore topics including neurodevelopment, genetic diagnoses, and emerging therapeutic approaches, including gene therapy.
Each animation is inspired by questions and experiences shared by parents and carers seeking to better understand the science behind these conditions. According to the project team, this collaborative approach combines scientific expertise with lived experience and reflects the campaign’s mission to “involve families directly in shaping public engagement with health communication initiatives”.
Dr Narjes Rohani, the lead researcher behind the animations, said the campaign responds to a growing need for trustworthy and accessible information about neurodevelopmental disorders among families, educators, healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the wider public. This project comes after a recent investigation by The Guardian regarding concerns of false health advice being popularised online by AI-generated videos.
The educational resources will be shared widely across digital platforms, healthcare settings, schools, and community networks to support greater awareness and inclusion for people living with neurodevelopmental disorders and their communities.
The project is hosted by Oxford University’s Department of Paediatrics. The videos were developed by an international team of scientists, doctors, patient groups, and industry specialists working to improve treatments for rare diseases.
Funding for the initiative was provided by the Public and Community Engagement with Research (PCER) Fund at the University of Oxford and the National Centre of Research Excellence (CoRE) in Therapeutic Genomics. Both organisations support public-facing projects designed to translate scientific discovery into practical outcomes, including improving diagnosis and treatment for genetic conditions.
How to Start a Career in Photography
When an inexperienced but enthusiastic person wonders how to become a photographer, they often don’t take it seriously. There is a stereotype that to earn a name in the photography realm, one needs expensive gear and inborn talent, but it’s not true. Having a talent for photography is great, but it fades away if you don’t practice constantly.
What you actually need is a unique creative vision, dedication, practice, and consistency. This article is a recommended roadmap for turning interest into income. We will help you pick a starter niche that fits your life, build a small portfolio that looks hireable, and develop habits that make clients feel safe choosing you.
Choose a Starter Lane You Can Grow Into
Understanding how to get into photography requires defining your concept and style. Experiment with different genres, but don’t expect to be equally good in each of them. Choose a starter lane you can practice regularly (at least once a week) and monitor your progress. It can be portraits for friends, small events, simple product photos for local shops, or social content for creators.
The lane should match your current life, not your dream studio. If you already attend community events, you have built-in practice and networking. Give yourself 30 days with one focus.
Build a Portfolio
Once you have decided on your creative path, learning how to be a photographer means understanding how to present your vision effectively. Newbies often create big portfolios, gathering all the shots they have ever taken. This approach is mistaken because it overwhelms viewers and gives them no clear idea of why they should hire you.
Instead, build a small set that shows one lane, one mood, and one level of quality you can repeat. Luminar Neo presets can help you create a consistent visual style across multiple images in a few clicks. Customize your presets as your skills evolve.
Aim for 12–20 photos total. Fewer images with a clear style feel more professional than a huge gallery with mixed results. Include 3 hero images that would make someone stop scrolling. Add 6 solid photos that prove you can deliver reliably. Then add 3 detail shots that show you notice small things. It can be hands, texture, a close-up product angle, or a quiet expression. If you shoot events, include 2–3 “story” frames that connect moments. This structure makes your portfolio feel intentional and complete.
Finally, show your work where it’s easy to view. A simple one-page website, a clean Instagram grid, or a shareable album works. Put your best images first. Add a short line that says what you shoot and where you work.
Practice Like a Future Pro
When you take casual selfies, photography seems fun and joyful, but as soon as you start wondering how to make money as a photographer, this realm becomes more challenging. The question is, how to succeed in it without losing the initial enthusiasm.
First and foremost, develop a stable routing rather than relying on luck. Plan one short session per week, even if it is 30 minutes, and treat it like a real assignment. Choose one goal per session to keep your progress visible. It can be lighting, posing, timing, or whatever bothers you the most; just don’t try to cover everything at once.
Once the shoot is over, collect the feedback. Pick three keepers and write one sentence for each. Specify what worked well and what to change the next time. Then ask one person for specific feedback on one photo. Avoid generic questions like “Do you like it?” Instead, ask the person to point out the exact pros and cons of the particular image they can notice. Collecting this feedback regularly will help you develop a keen eye, and with time, you will notice these nuances automatically.
Protect your energy like you protect your files. Limit editing time, set a finish line, and move on. When practice feels manageable, you will do more of it. It means you will become more skilled and confident about what you are doing.
Price Your First Jobs Without Guessing
A simple pricing package structure keeps you confident and keeps clients from negotiating every detail. Use three starter options that feel easy to understand:
- Mini session (short, specific result, fast delivery).
- Standard session (more variety, more delivered photos).
- Hourly coverage for small events (clear start/end time).
Every quote needs to communicate the same essentials in plain terms: what is being delivered (final images), when they are delivered (delivery date), and how they are delivered (online gallery/download). Add a usage line: personal vs. business, which will help you not price a corporate job like a personal portrait.
Conclusion
Starting a photography business comes with various essential factors aside from gear; you need a defining vision, dedicated practice, and an organized portfolio that showcases your craft in order to make a career out of what you love. Select a specific specialty, practice your craft often, and offer more consistent pricing.
The ‘Obsession’ Obsession
Something unprecedented is happening in the world of cinema this year. In less than a month, a horror film made by a relatively unknown director in his twenties, on a budget of less than $1 million, has grossed over $224 million at the time of writing. It achieved the rare feat of earning more in its second week and third weeks than its first – the first film to do so since E.T. in 1982. It’s the film on everybody’s lips: Obsession.
Without spoiling too much, Obsession follows a music store employee, played by Michael Johnston, who buys a mysterious ‘One-Wish Willow’, which he uses for a seemingly innocuous end: he wants his crush, played by the incredible Inde Navarrette, to love him “more than anyone in the f*cking world”. This wish, however, results in unexpected and horrifying consequences. What follows is an incredibly effective horror film, with plenty of uncomfortable moments and scares – it’s a film I strongly and wholeheartedly recommend everybody reading to see (but maybe not on a first date).
What makes Obsession so effective is that its supernatural premise is only a slight exaggeration of something that is recognisably human. The wish begins as a familiar romantic fantasy: to be wanted completely, unquestioningly, and above everyone else. Obsession twists this into something claustrophobic, and makes you question the ethics of what is being done. Johnston is especially good at making Bear both sympathetic and uncomfortable: he never plays him as a monster, which makes his choices more disturbing. Navarrette, the breakout star of the film, has the hard task of playing Nikki as charming, frightening, and pitiable all at once, which she does masterfully.
The film was directed by Curry Barker, a 26-year-old known for his sketch comedy on YouTube and TikTok. He made his feature-length directorial debut in Milk and Serial in 2024, an extremely underrated horror film, available to watch for free on YouTube. That it was made with a budget of only $800 is remarkable. Considering Barker’s comedy background and relative lack of experience in the director’s chair, Obsession is a surprisingly well-made horror movie, with great acting, great pacing, great cinematography, and great writing. Most mainstream horror films tend to be lacking in at least one of these departments, but Obsession succeeds at what it sets out to do – it made me uneasy, and it lingered in my head long after I watched it. So many details only made sense to me after the film had finished, and I found myself continually recognising just how clever this film was days after I had watched it. Soon, I found my Instagram Reels had been taken over by Obsession content – interviews, memes, clips, theories – and I completely fell down the rabbit hole.
I don’t seem to be the only one taken over by Obsession obsession. The film’s continual growth in popularity can be largely attributed, it seems, to word of mouth, since there was a very limited amount of promotion done for it. Everyone I’ve spoken to about it has either seen it and loved it, or heard about it and wanted to see it. It didn’t try to get a Super Bowl ad, or a brand tie-in, but instead relied on its quality to gain the interest of potential viewers. This was one of my favourite qualities about it: it is a film which inherently creates discussion, without being designed for virality. This is done through the ambiguity of some of its themes, which have left people on the internet divided. For those about to see it, I have some questions for you to consider: Is Bear a good person? What really happened to the cat? What would you wish for?
Its success also speaks to a wider hunger for original filmmaking. Obsession does not have a pre-sold cinematic universe behind it, nor any big names. It has spread because people want to talk about it. Its premise is clean, but its moral questions are not, and its ending leaves enough unresolved to send viewers back through the film for clues. That is exactly the kind of engagement Hollywood often tries to manufacture through marketing. Here, it has happened organically.
What I hope Hollywood learns from this unexpected smash hit is to take more risks on young, passionate filmmakers. Audiences have been missing original stories and fresh voices, and Obsession provides both. We do not need another $100-million-budget Star Wars or Avengers spin-off. We do not need another remake, sequel, or nostalgic cash-grab. We need creative risks, and the hope that it is possible for creative young people to break into this industry without needing to use a One-Wish Willow themselves.
Obsession is a taste of what the next generation of filmmakers looks like. Not only is it a great movie, but it is evidence that it is possible for Hollywood to change.
Twelve Oxford Scientists receive prestigious Royal Society Fellowship
Twelve University of Oxford researchers have been elected as fellows to the Royal Society, the UK’s national academy of sciences. They join a cohort of 90 scientific researchers elected this year from around the world who specialise in fields ranging from “astronomy and cancer research to mathematics and biotechnology”.
The election is considered “one of the highest honours in the scientific world, awarded to individuals who have made impactful contributions to knowledge”.
Sir Paul Nurse, who is the President of the Royal Society, said in an article on the organisation’s website: “I am delighted to welcome this newest group of exceptional scientists to the Fellowship …. Their contributions reflect the highest standards of scientific endeavour. Whether advancing our understanding of vaccines or exploring the transformative potential of mathematics and computation, their work exemplifies the enduring value of curiosity, creativity and rigorous inquiry.”
Tim Coulson, Professorial Fellow in Zoology and Environmental Sustainability Fellow in Jesus College, was among the Oxford researchers elected to the Royal Society. Coulson told Cherwell that his initial reaction to his election was a combination of joy and shock. He added: “I could never have got this without all the remarkable students and postdocs I have collaborated [with] … Being awarded [this honour] for doing something I enjoy seems almost unbelievable.”
Paul Riley, a Professor of Regenerative Medicine at the British Heart Foundation and Professorial Fellow in Medicine at Jesus College, echoed Coulson’s sentiment of disbelief. Riley told Cherwell that he was “initially surprised and somewhat shocked” by his election, “having gone through the application process for several rounds”. He also told Cherwell that “becoming a fellow of The Royal Society is a huge personal honour, but importantly one that recognises the quality and impact of my group’s science over the years … One agency described becoming a member of the Fellowship as the scientific equivalent of a lifetime achievement Oscar; so it feels like the culmination of a career in research for which I feel very humble but with a huge sense of pride and satisfaction”.
Stuart West, a Professor of Evolutionary Biology and Nicholas Kurti Senior Research Fellow at Brasenose College who researches genetic adaptation and social behaviours across various species, highlighted the significance of his team in his election. He told Cherwell: “My election reflects on the team that I have been lucky enough to work with over the years … Obviously, I cannot have all the skills needed to carry out this diversity of work, and so our progress often relies on the expertise of my group members or our collaborators.” He added that the “Department of Biology provides an exceptionally supportive and interactive environment.”
Professor of Genetics in the Department of Biochemistry at Keble College, Rob Klose, also told Cherwell that “the fellowship is a wonderful recognition of the dedication, creativity, and ingenuity of the members of my lab, who consistently amaze me with their discoveries.” Professor of Neurology and Cognitive Neuroscience Masud Husain added that “it’s a wonderful recognition for 30 years of research dedicated to understanding the mechanisms that underpin human attention, memory and motivation and how it can go wrong in people with brain disorders”.
‘Physics is a zero-bullshit zone’: Jessica James on Commerzbank, Christ Church, and the joy of shifting from STEM to finance
Sporting knee-length hair tied into a bun with a colourful scarf and married to a flame juggler, Jessica James isn’t your typical quant trader. A Christ Church PhD Physics alum and now Managing Director at Commerzbank, James speaks with levity and self-assuredness, a rare duality in the finance sector.
While many from my cohort are making the jump from physics to finance, it was more than unconventional for James in ‘94: “It was absolutely weird of me to do so. I was trying to write up my thesis and thinking I was unemployable, and my supervisor, Patrick Sanders, came into the office.” He had received this “funny letter”, anticipating James’ potential interest. It was from the First National Bank of Chicago, who were moving into the area of financial derivatives and looking for PhD Maths or Physics students. She was called onto the trading floor to explain her research to various traders and salespeople, before being flown to Chicago for another interview. “Business class!”, she whispers in mock awe.
Physics and finance may share certain mathematical foundations, but there are clear differences between the two worlds. “Physics is about studying the foundations of the universe. Finance is about studying a man-made system that doesn’t always behave how you think it will. I’ve always enjoyed it. It’s fun. It’s fast-moving.”
Ambiguity in jargon is another key difference. When somebody in science uses the term force, its meaning is generally agreed upon. When someone talks about yield or convexity in finance, they could be defined in very different ways, depending on the context and the speaker. “The big change is the lack of precision of the vocabulary. It’s easy to think you understand something in finance, but when terms are ill-defined, you might not. Physics is mostly a zero-bullshit zone”, she says.
“Finance tends to focus on the future and the now, and data is, fundamentally, historical. Yet it’s a gold mine – especially today, when sophisticated analysis is increasingly used to uncover trends and behaviours – however, it’s often deleted, forgotten, or ignored.” It’s always a red flag when someone says “but this time it’s different”, be it an ex-partner or a teetotal friend, James explains that this is particularly true in finance. “It’s like the climate”, she tells me. “The climate can fluctuate in unexpected ways, and so can the market, right? Just because there hasn’t been an ice age recently doesn’t mean they won’t return in their time.”
While at school, James was the only one doing Physics and Chemistry: “15 years in a convent school put me off God forever. But I understand why science and religion are often so conflated”, she says, explaining that she views both as trying to better understand the rules of the universe. As the sole woman in many rooms, including a weekend away as the Managing Director at Citibank, James has never minded being the odd one out: “I don’t care if they think I’m different. I was smarter than most of them.” I fully believe her. “It is tricky being a woman in finance. How many technical disciplines are there where you could say that women are equal? And, you shouldn’t have to be tough and immune to remarks that shouldn’t be made. But, it never really bothered me.”
While traditional routes into banking are competitive, James stresses the importance of getting into the right place and avoiding a mundane job. Her advice? Get in early via the internship-turned-graduate-scheme pathway. “Oxford and Physics give you the ability to think critically and believe in your own opinion and your own knowledge”, she says. “This helped me to thoughtfully reflect on challenges and gave me the courage to recognise that if something felt off, it probably was – and it didn’t mean I lacked ability.” This mindset has been the cornerstone of James’ career.
“But, the one thing that is the hardest, but the most important, is to understand where you fit into the organisation.” She tells me that when fixing code, processing data, or completing spreadsheets, we should be asking: why? Where is your organisation making money, and why does your job exist? It’s important to not be stuck in a bubble, James stresses, not just in finance but in any job. This understanding will push you to find originality in the way that you work, and perhaps do it better than other organisations: “Knowledge is power, and often the knowledge that is the most powerful in an organisation is who does what and why.” She believes in keeping a foot in more than one world, and, thereby, tapping into more opportunities.
“I had never seen five o’clock from the front before, only from behind.” The crazy hours in finance aren’t a recent development, although James prioritised her hours off work just as much as those she spent on the trading floor. Her secret was to not break stride and make no eye contact with anybody as she got off work. She quickly realised that “you’ve got to set boundaries, you’ve got to set limits”.
James has been a pioneer in finding probability-weighted foreign exchange market trading strategies. She has launched products based on trading signals, which she explained as buying the trading rules that came from looking at historical data. Amidst the global turmoil of the 2008 financial crisis, these instruments performed better than many others.
She also coined the term rollercoaster bonds: long-term bonds that become highly sensitive to changes in interest rates, similar to the way rollercoasters must consider forces other than velocity and acceleration. Here, rising interest rates can significantly impact the value of century (100-year) bonds, like some sold by Oxford University. While century bonds sound reliable and safe, she showed they would lose much of their value if interest rates rose out of the near-zero range of the pre-COVID world – and they did.
Penning several financial maths texts is yet another achievement of James’ career. She is quick to warn, however, against getting her confused with an author of the same name who writes, apparently, racy novels as opposed to those about the stock market.
Talking to James, it is clear that she enjoys devoting her time to finance and academia. After all, she is a pension trustee at Citibank and Commerzbank, on the Institute of Physics council and a Visiting Professor at Oxford and University College London. However, reflecting on her time as an Oxford undergraduate, she reminisces on her fun side. She recalls her first encounter with Professor Kurti: a pioneer in the art of gastronomy. He was about to give a lecture at Manchester University titled The Joy of Cooking, but was startled to realise as he entered the lecture theatre that someone had amended the title on the chalk board to The Joy of Sex. James bumped into him years later in the Clarendon laboratory and confessed, luckily being met with laughter.
She notes the same Brasenose dinner between exams and results as one of her favourite memories of Oxford, where “everything was possible. Nobody’s wave function had collapsed”. Her message to students? Love every minute of Oxford for how fantastic it is. But also: “Take pride in yourself. Take pride in your accomplishments. You got here, you stuck it [out]. Not many people can do that.”
Oxford summer schools ranked among the fastest-growing companies in Europe
Oxford Royale Academy and Oxford Summer Courses have been ranked among Europe’s fastest-growing companies, according to the 2026 Financial Times’ FT Top 1000: Europe’s Fastest-Growing Companies. The annual ranking, which is compiled in partnership with Statista, lists the companies with the highest compound annual growth rate between 2021 and 2024. Oxford Summer Courses came in at 151st place, closely followed by Oxford Royale, which ranked 156th, securing them places in the top 16% of the fastest-growing companies on the continent, alongside companies like Bio&Me, Moneybox, Popeyes, and Healf.
Founded in 2010 by Oxford graduates Robert Phipps and Harry Horton, Oxford Summer Courses offer two-week residential courses for 12- to 18-year-olds, priced just shy of £8,000. The courses on offer range from architecture to creative writing, with small class sizes of up to 15 students advertised.
Oxford Royale Academy was founded by Oxford graduate William Humphreys in 2004, and has since attracted more than 50,000 students to its courses. Initially exclusive to Oxford, the company now offers students insight into a range of universities, including Imperial College London, Cambridge, Yale, and Columbia, and is currently gauging interest for a Dubai programme set to begin in 2027. Charging £6,995 for a two-week Oxford residential programme, Oxford Royale offers students talks from exclusive guest speakers, which have previously included Chancellor William Hague and Professor Brian Cox. The company has also launched an AI education programme this summer, which was developed by MIT’s Responsible AI for Social Empowerment and Education (RAISE) initiative. The two-week residential course is based in Oxford, costing £9,995.
In October 2025, Oxford Royale Academy featured as one of FT’s Europe’s Long-Term Growth Champions, recognising its sustained revenue growth between 2014 and 2024.
The summer course company was previously taken to court by the University of Oxford in a ‘name battle’ in 2023. The University asserted that it had suffered substantial damage because of the word ‘Oxford’ in the company’s title and was seeking a High Court injunction which would have forced Oxford Royale to change its name.
Both companies market their programmes in part on the promise of an admissions advantage. Oxford Royale’s website tells prospective students its courses offer “a clear advantage for university applications”, while Oxford Summer Courses presents its certificate and letter of recommendation as evidence that will support future applications. The University makes no reference to external summer schools in their guidance for strong applications. The University has previously stated, regarding Varsity Education, that it does not “endorse any commercial operations or publications offering advice or training on our admissions process, nor do we guarantee the accuracy of any such company’s information”.
