SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Instead of bending over backwards to appease Trump in an attempt to avoid his tariff bullying, it’s time for Starmer to show real leadership and stand up to him," said one campaigner.
Critics of the artificial intelligence pact signed Thursday by US President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned that the deal sacrifices the climate, data privacy, creators' copyrights, and British sovereignty on the altar of Silicon Valley profits.
Speaking at Chequers—the Buckinghamshire country estate of UK prime ministers in Buckinghamshire—Trump said that "we're taking the next logical step with a historic agreement on science and technology partnerships, and this will create new government, academic, and private sector cooperation in areas such as AI, which is taking over the world."
Laughing, Trump turned to tech bosses gathered for the event and—singling out Jensen Huang, CEO of chip-maker Nvidia—said: "And I'm looking at you guys. You're taking over the world, Jensen. I don't know what you're doing here. I hope you're right."
Along with Huang—who heads the world's largest publicly traded company—the CEOs of Apple, and ChatGPT creator OpenAI joined Trump on his UK trip.
Starmer said the deal involves more than $200 billion in total US investments and will create 15,000 jobs over the next decade. The prime minister named US companies including Amazon, Blackstone, Boeing, Citigroup, and Microsoft, and UK firms like AstraZeneca, BP, GSK, and Rolls Royce as being part of the deal.
Other companies involved in the agreement include Google and its AI laboratory DeepMind, OpenAI, Oracle, Salesforce, and ScaleAI in the United States and AI Pathfinder, DataVita, NScale, and Sage in Britain.
DeSmog UK deputy director Sam Bright reported Thursday that the investment bank led by Warren Stephens, Trump's ambassador to London, owns hundreds of millions of dollars in shares of tech companies involved in the AI deal, including Google parent company Alphabet, Microsoft, and Nvidia.
Like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Nvidia, Stephens—who is a billionaire—made a seven-figure donation to Trump's inauguration fund.
Prominent critics of the agreement include former UK Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who is also Meta's former president of global affairs. Speaking Wednesday at a Royal Television Society conference in Cambridge, Clegg said the deal leaves Britain with "sloppy seconds from Silicon Valley" and "is just another version of the United Kingdom holding on to Uncle Sam’s coattails."
Opposition to the tech deal was also widespread Wednesday at a central London protest against Trump's visit organized by the Stop Trump Coalition.
Nick Dearden, director of the campaign group Global Justice Now and a spokesperson for the Stop Trump Coalition, noted in an interview with Wired senior business editor Natasha Bernal that the details of the pact have not been made public.
"We have not seen the text of the deal. We don’t know what we have given away," Dearden said. "We know that some of the tech barons accompanying Trump want us to drop parts of our regulation, want us to drop the digital services tax, want us to make it easier for them to acquire and merge with each other to become even bigger monopolies, so we are worried about that.”
So Trump swept into the UK to be wined and dined by the King.Big Tech bosses came too, bearing pledges of huge UK investments (mostly for data centres).Our govt, desperate for good economic news, is boosting this as a win for the UK.But the *point* of US Big Tech is to monopolise the data.
[image or embed]
— Critical Takes on Corporate Power (@criticaltakes.bsky.social) September 18, 2025 at 5:14 AM
Gobal Justice Now trade campaigner Seema Syeda said in a statement:
This toxic technology pact that favors the interests of US tech bros and rich corporations over ordinary people must be opposed at all costs. It’s a democratic scandal that the public and Parliament have been left in the dark as to its contents to date, but what we do know should ring alarm bells. Instead of bending over backwards to appease Trump in an attempt to avoid his tariff bullying, it’s time for Starmer to show real leadership and stand up to him. We can’t let an egomaniac like Trump hold our rights and democracy hostage.
Clive Teague—who was at the London rally supporting Extinction Rebellion Waverley and Borders in Surrey—told Bernal that he does not oppose AI if it is powered by renewable energy.
"We can’t keep burning fossil fuels to keep feeding into these data centers, because it’ll swamp the requirements for the rest of the world," Teague said.
Global Justice Now also warned that the tech deal could expose National Health Service (NHS) patient data to exploitation, wweaken digital privacy protections, thwart regulation of AI, and limit the government's taxation options.
Also sounding the alarm on the US-UK AI deal are scores of creators and creative groups including Elton John, Paul McCartney, and the Writers' Guild of Great Britain, who decried what they say is the Starmer government's failure to adequately protect copyrighted works from unauthorized use by AI companies.
As the Prime Minister prepares to meet President Trump during the state visit, WGGB has joined over 70 of the UK’s leading creators + creative orgs in signing an open letter demanding the Government explains its failure to protect the rights of UK copyright holderswritersguild.org.uk/creators-ai/
[image or embed]
— Writers' Guild of Great Britain (@writersguildgb.bsky.social) September 16, 2025 at 2:44 AM
"Artificial intelligence companies have ingested millions of copyright works without permission or payment, in total disregard for the UK’s legal protections," they said in an open letter. "The first duty of any government is to protect its citizens—not to promote corporate interests, particularly where they are primarily based abroad."
"Just one authoritarian thing after another."
US President Donald Trump's White House has reportedly created a scorecard that rates American corporations and trade groups based on how fervently they have promoted Trump's agenda, a move that critics described as part of the president's authoritarian approach to governing and dealing with private businesses.
Axios, which first reported on the White House scorecard Friday, explained that the document "rates 553 companies and trade associations on how hard they worked to support and promote President Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill,'" which includes massive corporate tax breaks and unprecedented cuts to safety net programs.
"Factors in the rating include social media posts, press releases, video testimonials, ads, attendance at White House events, and other engagement related to 'OB3,' as the megabill is known internally," the outlet reported. "The organizations' support is ranked as strong, moderate, or low. Axios has learned that 'examples of good partners' on the White House list include Uber, DoorDash, United, Delta, AT&T, Cisco, Airlines for America, and the Steel Manufacturers Association."
The spreadsheet is reportedly being circulated to senior White House staffers and is expected to evolve to gauge companies' support for other aspects of the president's agenda. Corporations that decline to praise Trump's policies—or dare to criticize them—could face government retribution.
"Just one authoritarian thing after another," Rachel Barnhart, a Democratic member of the Monroe County, New York Legislature, wrote in response to the Axios story.
News of the internal "loyalty rating" spreadsheet comes days after Trump reached an unprecedented deal with the chip giants Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices that critics likened to a strongman-style "shakedown." The companies agreed to pay the US government 15% of their revenues from exports to China in exchange for obtaining export licenses.
Trump, who has reported substantial holdings in Nvidia, has hosted company CEO Jensen Huang—one of the richest men in the world—at the White House at least twice this year. Huang has effusively praised the president, calling his policies "visionary."
That's just one example of how major CEOs have sought to flatter Trump, who has proven willing to publicly attack executives—and even demand their resignation.
Fortune noted Wednesday that "Apple CEO Tim Cook gave Trump a customized glass plaque mounted on a 24-karat gold stand last week, when he announced his company’s $100 billion investment in domestic production."
Cook also donated $1 million to Trump's inaugural fund.
Companies that have worked to get in the president's good graces appear to be reaping significant rewards.
A Public Citizen analysis published earlier this week found that companies spending big in support of Trump are among the chief beneficiaries of his administration's deregulatory blitz and retreat from corporate crime enforcement.
"Tech corporations facing ongoing federal investigations and enforcement lawsuits that are at risk of being dropped or weakened following the industry's influence efforts include Amazon, Apple, ByteDance, Google, Meta, OpenAI, Snap, Uber, Zoom, and Musk-helmed corporations The Boring Company, Neuralink, SpaceX, Tesla, X, and xAI," the group said.
Business journalist Bill Saporito wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times earlier this week that "in ripping up numerous business regulations, Donald Trump seems intent on replacing them with himself."
"The recipient corporations don't necessarily want Mr. Trump's meddling, particularly given his fun house view of economics," Saporito added, "but they can't get away from it."
"Is that the art of the deal, or the sort of rubbish you expect from backward authoritarian regimes?" asked one financial writer.
In a deal that is being called "unprecedented," two computer chip manufacturers have agreed to give the United States government 15% of their revenues from exports to China.
The Financial Times reported Sunday that Nvidia and AMD "agreed to the financial arrangement as a condition for obtaining export licenses for the Chinese market that were granted last week, according to people familiar with the situation, including a U.S. official."
For months, the Trump administration had been blocking these computing giants from exporting their most advanced computer chips to China, including Nvidia's coveted H2O chips, which are used to develop artificial intelligence—a move applauded by the administration's China hawks.
But that blockade was apparently broken this past Wednesday when Jensen Huang, Nvidia's CEO, visited the White House on Wednesday to cut a deal with President Donald Trump.
It is not clear at this moment how the Trump administration intends to use the money, but experts told FT that such a "quid pro quo arrangement" lacks any peer in recorded history, as "no U.S. company has ever agreed to pay a portion of their revenues to obtain export licenses."
Columnist James Thomson noted the peculiarity of the deal in Australia's Financial Review magazine, referring to it as the latest "shakedown" by the Trump administration of corporations seeking its favor:
What we've seen in the past week has been extraordinary. First, Apple chief executive Tim Cook comes to the Oval Office to kiss the ring after Trump threatened to smash iPhones sales with huge tariffs earlier this year; Cook agreed to invest $US600 billion in U.S. infrastructure and even gave Trump a 24-carat gold gift in an excruciatingly awkward exchange.
A few days later, Trump suggested the chief executive of Intel, Lip-Bu Tan, was "conflicted" because of his ties to Chinese business. With Tan reportedly set to visit the White House on Monday night, the pattern looks pretty clear: Trump threatens to hurt a business in some way, and the business does a deal to get back in his good graces.
Is that the art of the deal, or the sort of rubbish you expect from backward authoritarian regimes?
The arrangement is also potentially unconstitutional, as Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution explicitly forbids the levying of export taxes.
But while the contours of this specific deal are unusual, the philosophy behind it is quintessential to how the Trump administration has operated over the past seven months.
Trump has applied similar tactics to his trade war with the rest of the world, stating plainly that countries have "given" the United States money in exchange for lower tariffs.
As part of the agreement made in July, Trump described in a CNBC interview receiving "a signing bonus from Japan of $550 billion—that's our money. It's our money to invest, as we like." Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick described Japan as a "financier and banker" that would pour money into projects at Trump's discretion.
His deal with the European Union has similar contours, with the E.U. agreeing to purchase $750 billion worth of American energy along with the vague promise to "invest" another $600 billion in the United States.
Bulwark and MSNBC commentator Sam Stein noted the opacity of these deals in a post on X: "Where is it going? To our Treasury? How is the [White House] saying it will account for it? Not minor details."
William Aceves, a law professor at the California Western School of Law, described Nvidia and AMD's deal as the most recent form of corporate capitulation to the Trump administration in comments to The Washington Post.
"We have already seen many situations where entities—including corporations, universities, and law firms—would rather accept hefty fines or settle lawsuits than challenge the administration in court. And, significantly, this has occurred even in cases where the administration's actions or allegations have little merit," he said. "It would appear that this is the cost of doing business with the administration."