Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
NEED TO CATCH up? The Journal brings you a round-up of today’s news.
#UK: Mandatory Covid-19 vaccines are to be introduced for frontline NHS and social care workers in England from 1 April next year, UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid announced.
#SINGAPORE: Singapore from next month stop paying coronavirus medical bills of those who are unvaccinated by choice, officials have said, as a fierce outbreak put the city-state’s healthcare system under strain.
#MIX-UP: Two California couples gave birth to each others’ babies after a mix-up at a fertility clinic and spent months raising children that were not theirs before swapping the infants, according to a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles.
ok, I found most the reporting on the 'post a pet plant a tree' story incredibly shallow/lazy, so I went on a bit of a deep dive, and boy is the truth as dumb, wacky, a pathetic as you'd expect. Follow a long if you want!
— Patrick Marlborough (@Cormac_McCafe) November 9, 2021
If you’re on Instagram, you’ve probably seen countless pet photos in recent days thanks to a trend claiming that a tree would be planted for every pet photo shared on the platform.
Journalist Patrick Marlborough has investigated the origin of the viral craze and (surprise, surprise) all is not as it seems.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say