Wages in the United Kingdom grew 7.8% in the three months to June, the fastest annual rate since records began, the Office for National Statistics said Tuesday.

Billionaire Elon Musk rebranded Twitter this week and replaced the iconic blue bird logo with a black X, in his latest effort to overhaul the social media giant. The redesign ties in with Musk’s plans to build an “everything” platform –like China’s WeChat or PayTm in India – as he encouraged users to reimagine the “whole concept” of the app formerly known as Twitter. On 24 July, the Tesla founder tweeted a picture of the new logo cast on the Twitter headquarters building in San Francisco, as workers were seen taking down the bird logo that has defined the platform since it was launched in 2006. Musk also redirected the website x.com to twitter.com, and announced that Twitter will soon only be available in dark mode. But it wasn’t an entirely smooth rollout, as it was later revealed Twitter had failed to secure the required permits to change the building signage. Trademark experts also warned Musk could face legal action over his use of X, since rivals Meta and Microsoft both own intellectual property (IP) rights for the letter. The site was reportedly blocked in Indonesia after Mr Musk unveiled the X logo because of the country’s laws on online pornography and gambling. User reactions were also mixed. “The X logo looks like it’s for one of those ridiculous fragile masculinity subscription box services that would send you like an axe, a bottle of hot sauce, small batch coffee, and some beard oil every month in 2019,” one tweet – or is it an X – read. As Twitter moves into a new era, on the heels of a controversial revamp, we look back on seven marketing fails: Royal Mail to Consignia In 2001 the Royal Mail was rebranded as Consignia, but it did not last long. “The new name describes the full scope of what the Post Office does in a way that the words ‘post’ and ‘office’ cannot,” Royal Mail’s then-chief John Roberts unveiled the results of a £2m rebrand, adding that the “modern, meaningful and entirely appropriate” name was suited to the company’s aspirations of becoming an international postal operator. The public did not agree and just 16 months later Consignia was renamed Royal Mail plc, reversing what is considered one of the most disastrous corporate rebranding efforts in recent history. The strategist who led the Consignia rebrand later defended it in an interview with the BBC, explaining why the name was chosen. Keith Wells, who was the director of Dragon Brands, said: “It’s got consign in it. It’s got a link with insignia, so there is this kind of royalty-ish thing in the back of one’s mind. And there’s this lovely dictionary definition of consign which is ‘to entrust to the care of’. That goes right back to sustaining trust, which was very important.” Coke to New Coke “New Coke” remains the benchmark for bad product launches, nearly 40 years after the Coca-Cola company infamously decided to change its secret recipe to gain a competitive advantage over then-up-and-coming Pepsi Co during the cola wars of the Eighties. The decision backfired, as passionate Coke drinkers were devastated by the new taste of the beverage – even launching grassroots campaigns across the United States to bring back the old Coke. “It was the people against the corporation – only in America,” CBS News reporter Bob Simon said in 1985. “Coke said it was committed, so were the people. In California they collected signatures, in Seattle they set up a hotline.” Delighted by their rival’s blunder, Pepsi released an advertisement featuring a girl who asked: “Somebody out there tell me why Coke did it? Why did Coke change?” Coca-Cola eventually buckled under the pressure and announced it would bring back the original taste of Coke, with the company’s then-president saying: “The simple fact is that all of the time and money and skill poured into consumer research on a new Coca-Cola could not measure or reveal the depth and abiding emotional attachment to original Coca-Cola felt by so many people.” Facebook to Meta Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook became Meta in October 2021 to signal its future as a “metaverse company”. A metaverse is defined as “a digital reality that combines aspects of social media, online gaming, augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and cryptocurrencies to allow users to interact virtually.” While the tech billionaire insisted the rebrand had nothing to do with the PR crisis during what is now remembered as Meta’s worst year ever. From claims the US Capitol riots were organised on the social media platform to employee-turned-whistleblower Frances Haugen’s allegations, Facebook’s reputation took a severe beating in 2021. And the new name didn’t help. According to a report from The Harris Poll, public trust in Zuckerberg’s company significantly dropped after the announcement that it was going to be known as Meta. PR experts also told Insider Meta would have to do “fundamental work” to win back this trust. PwC to Monday One of the Big Four accounting firms, PricewaterhouseCoopers confusingly changed the name of its consulting arm to Monday in what is widely considered a big branding blunder. “Monday is a new identity on which to build our company’s future, and it will have meaning and stand for something,” the company’s then-CEO Greg Brenneman said, announcing the new name that, apparently, conjures images of “fresh thinking, doughnuts, hot coffee”. However, the brand name was a flop as it failed to capture the essence of PwC’s work, and caused widespread confusion – and derision – from members of the public as well as the press. “The day of the week formerly known as Monday would like to announce its name change to distance itself from PWC Consulting. Forthwith it will be known as Tuesday Eve,” one person quipped. Reporting on PwC’s new name, CNN Money said a spokesperson from Wolff Olins, the agency that led the $110m rebrand, “could not immediately be reached Monday—the day, that is.” The rebrand was eventually rolled back. Hershey’s new logo The well-known chocolate company in 2014 unveiled a logo that resembled a “steaming pile of s***” as the abandoned design continues to amuse TikTok users nine years later. When Hershey’s set about trying to create a fresh and modern interpretation of its beloved Kisses icon, it replaced a photograph of their silver Hershey’s Kiss with an animated, brown version and a gray curlicue to represent its packaging. “The new branding will impact all visual aspects of how The Hershey Company presents itself,” the company said in a statement at the time, “from consumer communications to websites to the interior design of its office spaces and the look of its retail stores.” Amused customers were quick to point out the logo had ended up looking like a poop emoji instead, an unsavoury association to make with a chocolate brand. @zacharywinterton Once you see it you cant unsee it. This design is proof that not all logos are created equal ? #logodesign #designfail ♬ original sound - Zachary Winterton Sunny Delight The orange soft beverage launched in the UK in 1998 was once considered a threat to Pepsi and Coke. However, a poorly-timed advertisement amid regulatory scrutiny brought grey storms for Sunny Delight, as the drinks sales fell from a record high of £160m to a measly £6.8m by 2010. The Food Commission launched a campaign against Sunny Delight, claiming it was bad for children after it was reported that one child in Wales turned yellow from drinking 1.5 litres of the drink. “This is excessive consumption and consumption on that scale would lead to a yellowing of the skin because of the beta carotene, in the same way as drinking too much carrot juice or orange juice would,” a spokeswoman for the company said at the time. The girl’s condition, caused by betacarotene which gives the drink it’s colour, emerged at the same time as Sunny Delight was running an ad campaign featuring a pair of snowmen turning orange. Consequently, the popularity of Sunny Delight reportedly halved, as consumers lost their appetite for the bright yellow, sweet drink. Cardiff City’s football kit In 2012, the club’s then-new owner gave the kit an ill-conceived makeover. He decided to put the team, nicknamed the Bluebirds, in a red kit and changed the logo from a blue bird to a red Welsh dragon. “The change of colour is a radical and some would say revolutionary move which will be met with unease and apprehension by a number of supporters, along with being seen as controversial by many,” ex-chief executive Alan Whiteley said. “To those I would like to say that this was not a decision that has been taken lightly or without a great deal of thought and debate. Fans retaliated and the blue kit was restored, with approval from the club’s owner Vincent Tan. Read More Sinead O’Connor latest: Singer moved to London ‘to feel less lonely’ after son’s death, neighbours say England vs Denmark LIVE: Women’s World Cup result and reaction as Lionesses win but Walsh injured Man in debt after driving motorhome through London’s low emission zone First British passports issued in King’s name unveiled Royal Mail wins contract for collection and delivery of passports Mapped: Ten worst UK hotspots for dog attacks on postal workers

By David Lawder and Ann Saphir SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) -U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Monday said negotiations on the

World number two Iga Swiatek said Saturday she felt relieved of the "baggage" of defending the top ranking and was looking to switch up her game ahead...

Inter Miami held New York City FC to a 1-1 draw at DRV PNK Stadium on Saturday night as Lionel Messi and Jordi Alba once again watched from the sidelines while recovering from injuries.

Mauricio Pochettino said Chelsea’s victory at Tottenham on Monday proved he has matured as a manager in the years since his first spell in England. A frenetic 4-1 win in north London came amid two red cards for the hosts as emotions threatened to spill over in a manner reminiscent of the so-called ‘Battle of Stamford Bridge’, when Pochettino’s Spurs lost their discipline and a two-goal lead to concede the 2015-16 Premier League title. After that game, which confirmed Leicester as champions, Pochettino was criticised for allowing his players to lose control of the match and let slip the chance of claiming a first league title since 1961. Yet on Monday it was his former side whose discipline failed them, with Spurs losing Cristian Romero and Destiny Udogie either side of half-time before Chelsea capitalised with a late hat-trick from striker Nicolas Jackson to seal a third straight away win in the league. Pochettino has previously said he believes he is calmer now than when he was appointed at Southampton in 2013, and that composure was evident amongst his players as they kept their heads on a wild night at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. “I learned a lot from the ‘Battle of the Bridge’ seven years ago,” he said ahead of his side’s home meeting with Manchester City on Sunday. “I got criticised a lot after this game. Too many people said it was may fault because I didn’t give or teach the players how to behave and to control emotion in a game like this. I learned a lot. “What I can say is the type of game (on Monday) is about tactics, it’s about form, it’s about the approach of the game and how you prepare. Also, it’s about how you control emotions. “One thing we can say my players managed really well is the control of emotions. We played 10-12 minutes not in a good way, not how we wanted. When we conceded the goal it was a big hit for us, we were in shock. “After this moment we started to control the game. At 11 v 11 we created chances, had a goal disallowed. Then we forced them to make mistakes. We played 120 minutes. I think we deserved to win. It was crazy but fair.” The game was notable for its total of 21 added minutes after there were nine VAR checks, which led to both red cards being shown as well as a penalty for Chelsea and five disallowed goals. Pochettino defended the role of the video referee and said that Spurs could have no complaints about the result. “Tell me one (VAR) decision that was not fair,” he said. “There was even I think a few decisions more when Tottenham were lucky. You cannot say VAR was (unfair) for us. When you watch the game again, Tottenham were very lucky to finish with only two less than us. “When there is emotion on the pitch, it’s difficult to control from the outside (as a coach). I was guilty seven years ago. But Ange (Postecoglou) wasn’t guilty (on Monday). “I learned. I watched the game again. It’s important to see how the players keep calm in a tough moment and to force (Tottenham) to make a mistake, then to win the game. That was the option.” Chelsea will be looking for their fourth win in six games in the league when they face Pep Guardiola’s champions on Sunday. Pochettino added: “Chelsea are never underdogs. The feeling is always that you are Chelsea. When you say Chelsea, it’s impossible (to feel the underdog). The history is there. We cannot go and say we are the victim of the day. We need to try to be protagonists with our personality, with our character. “We went to Tottenham and finished the game 4-1. It shows that we have character and talent to compete and to fight with the best clubs in England. Now it’s about building that confidence that for sure will help us to be more competitive.” Read More John Stones out of Chelsea clash but injury not as bad as feared Andy Murray and coach Ivan Lendl split for a third time Mikel Arteta warns Aaron Ramsdale not to rush decision over Arsenal future Dawid Malan: I want to play on but I don’t know what my England future holds Evan Ferguson signs new Brighton contract until 2029 Football rumours: Tottenham identify Lloyd Kelly as January transfer target

In his most recent start Sunday night vs the Los Angeles Dodgers, Eduardo Rodriguez suffered an unknown injury which could complicate his future with the Detroit Tigers.

The man was airlifted to Jackson South Medical Center by Miami-Dade Fire Rescue personnel

Springboks prop Ox Nche was called "the most destructive loosehead in the world" and "a human wrecking ball" on Sunday after the last-gasp Rugby World...

On Saturday night, two fighters who embody the word heavyweight – every sense of it – will clash in Saudi Arabia. In one corner will be the reigning WBC champion, one of the biggest names in boxing, Tyson Fury. In the other will be the former UFC champion, a man deemed the hardest hitter in combat-sports history, Francis Ngannou. This crossover bout has its detractors yet still holds an air of intrigue, all based on the ‘what if’: What if Ngannou can land on Fury? What if one of those monstrous hands touches the Briton’s chin with the velocity and malicious intent that have come to define Ngannou’s fighting career, and which carried the Cameroonian to the UFC heavyweight title? For all his evasive guile, Fury, 35, has been put down numerous times, but he has never been beaten – not even by fighters with much greater boxing pedigree than the 37-year-old Ngannou. The experiential gap understandably has most viewers doubting Ngannou’s chances in Riyadh, where he faces Fury in a proper, professional boxing match; but what if? And if Ngannou is to win, how will he? Attacking Fury to the body? Battering him in the clinch? Backing him into a corner? Alex Pattle asked former two-weight world-champion boxer Carl Frampton, and Dan Hardy, an ex-UFC title challenger who now works with the Professional Fighters League – the MMA promotion where Ngannou will fight in 2024. Here’s what they had to say... AP: What was your initial reaction to the fight being announced? DH: “I was shocked. I expected Ngannou to have another fight before Tyson Fury, but I think it’s the wise thing to do to step straight in and keep the element of surprise on your side. If he’d have gone in there and fought someone else, Tyson would’ve been able to get reads before the fight even started. Jumping in at the deep end, even though it’s a bit crazy, increases his chances of winning. That was my first thought: It’s a surprise that it’s happening, but relief that Ngannou is getting it on his first shot.” CF: “Initially I was disappointed, and that’s kind of taming it down a bit. Obviously we were hoping for Fury vs Oleksandr Usyk and that fell through, but now I’ve come round to the idea that this is a huge event. And we’ve got Fury vs Usyk off the back of it. I was always hopeful that fight would come about at some point, and I don’t wanna be talking as if Ngannou is gonna be a complete walkover for Fury, but I’m okay about it [because] the Fury vs Usyk fight has been made for some point in the future. Also, the money the guys are making with this event...” AP: Do fans need to be more understanding of fighters taking ‘money fights’? CF: “Maybe a little bit. Boxing fans in particular are very opinionated, and I understand that they’re frustrated. But if you’re Tyson Fury and someone’s offering you a fight of this magnitude against a boxing debutant, and there are talks of $30m – and $10m for Ngannou – how do you turn that down? It’s almost too good to be true.” DH: “I think it's a bit different for MMA fans, because we’re still in new ground; the changes that Floyd Mayweather vs Conor McGregor made in fighters’ purses and expectations for purses... as a matchmaker, I’m still dealing with the repercussions of that! Fighters want ridiculous amounts of money, but the money is out there to be made by certain superstars. I honestly think it’s easier for a layman fan to understand why fighters would take these fights, because they focus so much more on the money. I think it’s more the purists who go, ‘I’m not interested in these fights!’ [To the layman], the money and pay-per-view buys almost represent the value of the fighter; to the purists, the value of the fighter is based on their technical ability and achievements.” CF: “I hate to use the term ‘casual fan’, but there’s a big difference between the purists and just the casual fan. I think you’ll win back [the purists] with Fury vs Usyk, but it’s all a bit trivial almost, because [most] fans are fickle. I’m expecting Fury to beat Ngannou and then fight Usyk, and it’ll almost be like the talk and criticism of the Ngannou fight will go away.” AP: Do crossover events like Tommy Fury vs KSI and Logan Paul vs Dillon Danis risk putting fans off fights like Fury vs Ngannou? DH: “I personally think it’s all on the same spectrum – just at different points on the spectrum. That Misfits Boxing card... I’ll be honest, I was able to make peace with that whole genre of combat sports much easier after that event, because it’s more like pro wrestling. The audience there, they’re not gonna buy a ticket to see ‘Canelo’ Alvarez; they’re not there for that, they’re there for the drama – for the security getting involved, for the plexiglass cages they put them in at the face-offs. It’s theatre with a combat-sports flavour.” AP: What is Ngannou’s chance of winning – as a percentage – in your opinion? CF: “There’s a lot of boxers who are almost anti-MMA, and I’m not. I understand what this is: I understand that Fury is a lifelong boxer, fighting a guy who’s had to perfect many different styles in MMA, so in that sense Ngnannou doesn’t have much of a chance. But to say that he has zero chance, I think, would be very, very wrong – because he’s a big, athletic man who can punch hard. He has a chance, but it’s very small. I hope I’m not being disrespectful to Francis; if you flip it on its head and do it in a cage, then it’s the same odds but reversed [in his favour]. It’s just, when you try to rationalise it, it’s his boxing debut – and it’s against maybe the best heavyweight boxer on the planet.” DH: “We’re definitely in single digits when it comes to percentages, but it’s the ‘what if’ that we’re tuning in for, right? Even if it’s a 0.1 per cent chance that Ngannou is gonna land that shot, we’re all gonna sit and watch in case that happens. If it does, then he’s got the power to knock Fury out. The reason I feel this is an intriguing fight is because... if you look at Ngannou against the likes of Jairzinho Rozenstruik, who’s got over 80 kickboxing matches and moves with very traditional patterns, Rozenstruik was taken out very, very quickly – and ferociously – because Ngannou flew at him, coming from all kinds of different angles. You just can’t predict those things. “Against Deontay Wilder, Fury was dealing with someone who’s got ferocious punching power but who’s got some basic fundamentals that make him a little bit predictable. If Ngannou starts patient and then starts winging those big shots from weird angles, which Tyson’s probably not anticipating, that elevates his chances – but they’re still incredibly slim." CF: “That’s the thing. High-end boxers often talk about when they spar novice guys, it’s all really unorthodox; they’re not taught to defend against shots that are coming from [certain angles], and it can be a bit awkward at times.” AP: We know that Ngannou needs to knock out Fury to win. But how does he knock out Fury? DH: “If I was trying to solve this problem for Ngannou, I’d say: We’re working with 90-degree corners in a boxing ring, so that’s something I’d like to work towards. It’s gonna be difficult to back Tyson up, of course, and he’s very good at standing on his back foot and making his head feel like it’s a long way away. So, Ngannou has to work to the body and vary his target to potentially bring Fury’s hands down. Ngannou has thunderous punching, so if he lands to the ribs, he might open up an opportunity. If he’s just head-hunting, it’s not gonna happen. Play a little bit of boxing, but when it comes to uncorking those big shots, really commit to them. And ideally put Tyson in a corner, up against the ropes.” CF: “With Ngannou’s MMA background and knowledge of wrestling and grappling, he will have success when they’re in really close quarters and Tyson’s trying to hold on. This might be something that Tyson’s never experienced before, where someone can get out of a clinch rather easily and land a shot. Ngannou can’t stand off and outbox Tyson, that’s not gonna happen.” AP: Ngannou last fought in MMA in January 2022 and has largely been in boxing training since. What kind of MMA fighter will he be when he makes his PFL debut in 2024? DH: “I think we’re gonna see improvements in his footwork and his fundamental boxing. I think that’ll be a byproduct of him doing all these rounds on the pads with Mike Tyson, Dewey Cooper and others. But I don’t think he’s necessarily going to neglect his grappling game, because it was never really the prominent skillset for him anyway. I think he’ll return to working on those things when necessary, because everyone who fights Francis knows that they need to take him down – you don’t wanna be dealing with that power. He knows that whoever he’s fighting is most likely gonna be the one to force the grappling exchanges. Then it’s about who the opponent is gonna be. $2m is a lot of money in MMA, even if you have to fight Francis for it!” Fury v Ngannou will be exclusively live from Riyadh Season, Saudi Arabia on TNT Sports Box Office, Saturday 28 October. For more info: tntsports.co.uk/boxoffice Read More Tyson Fury ‘unhappy’ with Oleksandr Usyk fight announcement Tyson Fury reveals December date for Oleksandr Usyk heavyweight title fight Deontay Wilder calls out Anthony Joshua with update over super-fight Francis Ngannou drops hint over Tyson Fury rematch and Anthony Joshua fight How much money are Fury and Ngannou earning for fight this weekend? How many rounds is Fury vs Ngannou and do knockouts count?

A day after he was named as a co-defendant in the criminal case against Donald Trump for mishandling classified documents, a picture is starting to emerge of Carlos De Oliveira, the little known Mar-a-Lago employee who is accused of trying to delete security camera footage at Trump's Florida resort after the Justice Department issued a subpoena for it last year.

LEGO’s Concorde plane is as sleek as its real-life counterpart.