welcome back to headliners. it's your first look at friday's newspapers. we're going to begin this section with friday's independent. and someone has pointed out that having kids can hinder your performance at work. we didn't like to mention that . we didn't like to mention that. >> mish ouch ouch ouch ouch as i have one of my children here. he's here, he's here. he's in the back room. i had to, yeah, gave him hot chocolate. he's got a comic. it's all good. >> hey, this is not a creche. josh. >> yeah? sorry. hey, woody. hope you're behaving yourself. tory mp sparks backlash after claiming leadership. hopeful kemi badenoch is preoccupied with her children. she has three kids. i believe they're youngish. i imagine one of them must be about four. i remember seeing her carrying a baby. >> yes. well, what's wrong with her having kids? >> no , absolutely. and that's >> no, absolutely. and that's what a lot of other mps are going, hey, you can't say she can't do her job because she's can't do herjob because she's got young kids. >> so. so christopher hope has

said that effectively. >> you can't spend all your time with your family. >> well, look, if you're if you're prime minister, it is true that you don't always you're not around much for the family, are you? didn't david cameron leave a child in a toilet or something? yeah, yeah. >> unfortunately, the child was returned to him, so he still had to do the parenting. but yeah, i mean, he wasn't really making a sexist point because he was comparing the two. the two candidates robert jenrick their children. generic's got kids, but he's saying generic's kids are older, so he's going to be spending less time with them. >> oh, so you're saying it's been interpreted as a sexist remark? yeah, but it wasn't. it was just an anti kid remark, think. >> yeah, it was just a, you know, making making the point that, you know, young kids need more. but i fully believe that kemi badenoch is willing to be a terrible, neglectful parent for the sake of this country. >> well, look, this is the thing. like, ultimately, if you're going to be prime minister, the kids are going to be neglected. they just are. i mean, if you watch the west wing, you can see what happens to the president's kids. one of them gets kidnapped and veep as well. veep is another good example. >> it's like a documentary.

>> it's like a documentary. >> but, you know, they're obviously margaret thatcher. she you know, i mean, mark turned out great, but you know what i mean? like, not necessarily everyone else. so i think, you know, it's a reasonable point. it's not necessarily sexist. >> and i think it shows her dedication that she is willing to take on that role as a mum, and she is willing to sacrifice the happiness and wellbeing of her children for, for the greater good. yes. so good for her. >> as long as she doesn't bring them to pmqs, which is what you'd do . you'd do. >> of course i would. yeah. >> of course i would. yeah. >> i mean, look, give him a comic on the front bench, make sure their phone is charged. >> and why not? >> and why not? >> that's unbelievable. mind you, it wouldn't do anything to diminish the intellectual acuity of the house at the moment. no, no, a few four year olds here and there, no one had noticed screaming and crying. anyway, let's move on to this next story. this is the independent now elon musk. what's he up to. >> so x, which is what some people call twitter is finally making a long feared change that enables creeps. so the app has seen a rise in online hate speech since elon musk's takeover. but it's not all good news. he's rolling out this controversial update that will

allow users to view other people's posts, even if they've been blocked, so this is good news for its rivals like bluesky, which nobody's heard of, has said, you know, you can come to us, we've still got the block button, but, you know, people are upset. nobody's really asked for this. nobody's been like, you know, elon does this every now and then. >> he's like, i'm just gonna i'm just gonna change it to x. i'm just gonna change it to x. i'm just gonna change the symbol. i'm going to do this. and i mean, he could do literally anything he wants, but originally he was saying he's going to get rid of the block function, which would have been absolutely crazy. but what he's doing is actually just meaning that people can always view pubuc that people can always view public posts, but they can't interact. the major problem you have with stalkers online is that they bombard you with absolute nonsense, and libel and all sorts of stuff, but they won't be able to do that even with this new system. >> yeah, but i don't want people to see my stuff if i've blocked them, you know what i mean? i don't want to see people's stuff if they've blocked me, they can make a fake account and do it anyway. that's his argument. he says, you know, people can create sockpuppet accounts, but yeah, make them create a sock puppet account, make them do that. it's inconvenient. i want them to be inconvenient. i don't

mind people seeing my stuff if they've been inconvenienced in some way. >> and there is actually a legitimate question here about women online who are stalked obsessively . and i've seen obsessively. and i've seen evidence of it. you know, some men are crazy and. yeah, well, i didn't have you in mind necessarily. and then, you know, women are saying, well , now women are saying, well, now you're letting my stalker see all my tweets. i mean, that's the point. >> i think this is a bad idea. i don't really understand the point he's trying to make. is it about free speech? like. but it's got nothing to do with free. well, that's why i don't really get. i feel like i think he thinks it's somehow is that i think he's just he gets ideas in his head and runs with it. >> maybe. yeah, maybe he's got good legitimate reasons for doing it. i just don't think he's got an ex—girlfriend that he's got an ex—girlfriend that he wants to see. >> what? see what she's posting. >> what? see what she's posting. >> yeah. and he can't work out how to do a sock puppet thing. >> yeah, but in a way, it's quite fun, isn't it? because when you block someone, they get really annoyed. and then now you'll be able to you know, say why you blocked them on your post and you know, they'll see it. >> and you can say the most awful things about you, but you get penalised for blocking, i believe on twitter, like if you

block lots of people, it sort of stifles your account really. like they don't like when you do it. but as you were alluding to, i you know, my if you follow me on x, you'll know that it's just a joy on x, you'll know that it's just a joy full of joy. there's. so the point is, i never have rows on x. no, exactly. but i want to. i don't want people to share in my love of the world and get all the benefit of my wisdom. no, like i'm denying them access to the purity of me. yeah, and i don't want to be getting that. you're such a philanthropist. >> well, exactly. >> well, exactly. >> but but you you you cross me. yes. no, no. josh howie for you. now. they're going to get it now. no, they're still going to get it. >> well, you know, i don't think it's as bad as it was going to be. i mean, i think getting rid of the block function would have been a silly thing to do in a disastrous thing to do, but just preventing people from interacting that will annoy them all the more. and i'm more than happy with that. yeah, yeah, you don't block many people though, don't block many people though, do you? >> yeah, i do block loads of people. just sometimes if i see somebody moaning that they've been blocked by somebody, i'll block them. oh yeah. i do that to annoy them more. yeah, i know i'm not asking for it. >> aren't i blocked a lot more

people over the last year? weirdly, yeah, i wonder why. >> okay. let's move on now. this is the telegraph, england and wales cricket board is protecting women's sports. well, some of it. >> yeah. this is blast from the past. in terms of well so. well i just in that we thought i thought we were past this. i thought we were past this. i thought we were really really not evolved as a society. but no we have an english cricket to ban transgender players at elite level but not in community games. so basically no one's happy here. this makes no sense whatsoever, because if you're banning athletes at elite level, then you're acknowledging that there is an unfairness of biological men being in a female sport. but to allow it at the, at the sort of rubbish levels. >> you mean kids at the sort of rubbish