Sainsbury’s has begun testing facial recognition technology in selected stores to identify repeat offenders and reduce shoplifting, triggering a wave of privacy concerns from civil liberties groups.

Surveillance Trial Rolling Out in London and Bath

The supermarket chain confirmed that an eight-week pilot programme is underway at a small number of stores in London and Bath. The facial recognition cameras are supplied by Facewatch, a UK-based security technology firm that already provides similar services to a range of retailers.

The system captures the biometric data of individuals who are already on a watchlist for suspected theft or abuse. If someone flagged on this list enters a participating store, an alert is sent to staff in real time. Sainsbury’s says the trial is being used only at locations with a high incidence of repeat offending.

The trial began in late August and is expected to run through to October. Depending on results, it could be expanded to more branches across the UK. Facewatch claims its technology can help retailers cut shoplifting and abuse by deterring known offenders and giving staff more time to intervene safely.

Why Sainsbury’s Is Doing This Now

Retail crime has surged in recent years, with the British Retail Consortium (BRC) estimating the total cost to the sector at £1.76 billion in 2023, including £1.04 billion in customer theft alone. Also, physical assaults and abuse of shop workers have also been rising sharply, prompting calls for tougher enforcement and more robust security measures.

Sainsbury’s said in a statement: “We’re constantly looking at new ways to keep our colleagues and customers safe. We’re currently trialling facial recognition in a small number of stores where there is a high level of crime.”

Signage About It

The company emphasised that the technology is not being used for general customer surveillance or profiling, and that signage is in place at affected locations to notify shoppers that facial recognition is in use.

Powered by Facewatch (Controversially)

The system being used by Sainsbury’s is provided by Facewatch, a private facial recognition firm founded in 2010. Facewatch says it operates within UK GDPR and the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and only stores data on those individuals who have been involved in past incidents, as reported by retailers.

Its technology compares live CCTV footage to images held in its centralised database of “subjects of interest.” If there is a match, an alert is sent to store staff with a still-image and time-stamped location data.

While Facewatch has been used by independent retailers, petrol stations and other supermarket chains including Southern Co-op and Budgens, it has not previously been adopted by any of the UK’s four major supermarket brands at this scale.

It seems that the company has drawn some criticism from privacy campaigners for operating a privately managed watchlist system that can share biometric alerts between businesses, with concerns raised about accuracy, accountability, and the lack of independent oversight.

The move by Sainsbury’s essentially takes facial recognition further into the retail mainstream and puts the technology under new levels of public and regulatory scrutiny. It also raises the stakes for how and where this kind of surveillance may be used next across the sector.

Privacy Groups Push Back

Civil liberties organisations were quick to voice concerns. For example, Big Brother Watch, a UK privacy campaign group, accused Sainsbury’s of introducing “unnecessary and Orwellian” surveillance under the guise of crime prevention.

“Facial recognition surveillance is extreme, and Sainsbury’s customers should not be subjected to identity checks to buy milk,” said Madeleine Stone, Senior Advocacy Officer at Big Brother Watch. “This sets a dangerous precedent not just for retail, but for everyday public life.”

The group also raised concerns about transparency and consent, arguing that biometric surveillance in shops blurs the line between policing and commerce. It warned that the use of facial recognition could result in misidentifications, discrimination, and the over-policing of vulnerable groups.

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has previously cautioned organisations using facial recognition to ensure legal compliance and necessity. It has not commented directly on the Sainsbury’s trial but is likely to monitor developments closely.

Facewatch’s Role in Expanding Everyday Surveillance

Sainsbury’s pilot sits within a broader shift where facial recognition is moving from niche deployments to visible use in everyday retail settings. Southern Co‑op has used Facewatch across dozens of branches since 2020, while independent convenience stores and some symbol groups have reported measurable reductions in repeat theft when using similar watchlist alerts. In one Morrisons Daily site, the store owner told trade press that incidents dropped by as much as ninety per cent after installation, though these results are self‑reported rather than independently audited.

Other Big Chains Are Already Testing the Waters

Other large grocers have been testing live facial recognition in recent months. For example, Asda ran a trial across five Greater Manchester stores, drawing thousands of complaints and sustained criticism from privacy groups, which shows how quickly public reaction can become a material factor in rollouts. Iceland has also been named by campaigners as exploring use, although details remain limited. These parallel efforts are relevant to Sainsbury’s because they indicate how public tolerance, operational benefits, and regulatory scrutiny interact in real retail environments.

Concerns About Accuracy and Misidentification

Concerns about accuracy and fairness remain central to the debate about the use of this kind of technology. For example, privacy group Big Brother Watch argues that commercial watchlists risk misidentifying innocent shoppers because entries are often created by retailers rather than police and can be shared between participating businesses. The group says this creates a risk of people being wrongly flagged and excluded. There have been reported misidentifications, including a case where a customer was barred after a Facewatch alert, which Facewatch later acknowledged was an error. These cases are shaping campaigners’ calls for stricter safeguards and clearer lines of accountability.

Legal Uncertainty Around Commercial Use

The policy landscape adds another layer. For example, the UK has no dedicated statute that comprehensively governs private sector facial recognition in public‑facing spaces, so retailers largely rely on data protection law, necessity and proportionality tests, and DPIAs to justify deployments. The ICO has previously investigated Facewatch and related deployments and, according to evidence submitted to Parliament, identified multiple areas where policies needed to better balance legitimate interests with people’s rights. This context frames what retailers must document and evidence when running pilots like Sainsbury’s.

How the Trial Is Being Measured

Operationally, Sainsbury’s says the Facewatch system is configured to alert staff only when a person on a pre‑defined watchlist is detected, focused on individuals linked to violence, aggression, or theft. Faces that do not match are deleted immediately, and signage at trial stores informs customers that facial recognition is in use. The supermarket has also stressed that the pilot is limited to locations with high levels of repeat offending, and that it is intended to support staff safety rather than to monitor ordinary shoppers.

Retail Crime Data Is Driving Urgency

Evaluation will centre on measurable changes in repeat theft and abuse, staff perceptions of safety, and any displacement effects, for example incidents shifting to nearby stores. The British Retail Consortium reports retail theft at crisis levels, with more than twenty million incidents in 2023 to 2024 and an estimated £2.2 billion lost to shoplifting, which explains why large chains are testing additional controls alongside guards, body‑worn cameras, and product protection. These sector‑wide figures provide the baseline against which any impact from facial recognition will be assessed.

Public Reaction Will Influence Industry Direction

It’s likely that public response will also form part of the assessment. Big Brother Watch has labelled the Sainsbury’s pilot “deeply disproportionate and chilling,” arguing that biometric scanning in supermarkets treats shoppers as suspects and risks normalising identity checks for everyday purchases. Trade unions have tended to frame the question through the lens of staff safety, calling for evidence‑led approaches that reduce violence and abuse at work. Therefore, how these competing views evolve during the pilot will influence whether other national chains follow Sainsbury’s lead.

Regulatory Input Could Shape What Comes Next

Also, any regulatory feedback could shape the design of future deployments. For example, if the ICO receives complaints during the trial, it may seek clarifications on data retention, watchlist criteria, redress routes for mistaken identity, and transparency notices. Previous facial recognition pilots in retail and other sectors have drawn attention to these governance questions, so documenting them clearly is likely to be as important as any headline reduction in theft.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The outcome of this trial will matter not only for Sainsbury’s but for any UK business operating in high-footfall environments where theft, abuse, or anti-social behaviour is on the rise. If facial recognition is shown to reduce repeat offending without undermining customer trust, other sectors may begin exploring similar systems, from retail and hospitality to logistics and healthcare. However, that will depend on clear governance, strong safeguards, and public confidence in how the technology is being used.

For technology providers, the stakes are also high. For example, Facewatch’s credibility as a supplier of compliant, proportionate, and accurate surveillance tools may hinge on how this pilot is received by regulators and rights groups. If the ICO intervenes or public backlash intensifies, it could limit how far these systems can expand. Businesses adopting facial recognition will need to be ready to justify every aspect of its deployment, from necessity and proportionality to data handling and redress.

For consumers and communities, the case raises fresh questions about what kind of monitoring is acceptable in everyday spaces, and where the boundaries lie between legitimate protection and excessive surveillance. The lack of specific legislation leaves a vacuum where privacy, ethics, and commercial interest are all pulling in different directions. Without clear national rules, it may fall to individual retailers, campaigners, and regulators to shape how far this goes.

As the pilot continues, attention will turn to how Sainsbury’s measures success and handles concerns. Whether this becomes a new layer of shopfloor security or a short-lived experiment will depend on what the results show, how they are interpreted, and whether wider industry and political appetite supports rolling it out further.

A three-month evaluation of Microsoft’s M365 Copilot AI assistant in a key UK department found mixed results and few measurable efficiency gains.

Mixed Results From Promising Tech

The UK Department for Business and Trade (DBT) has published the results of a detailed trial of Microsoft’s M365 Copilot AI assistant, revealing no definitive evidence that the tool leads to higher productivity. Despite users reporting moderate satisfaction and perceived time savings, the trial concluded that the AI often performed inconsistently across tasks, and in some cases, reduced output quality.

The trial, which ran from October to December 2024, involved 1,000 Copilot licences distributed across the department, with roughly 300 participants consenting to monitored usage. The pilot aimed to assess the AI’s real-world impact on common digital tasks using Microsoft 365 apps such as Word, Outlook, Teams, Excel and PowerPoint.

Microsoft markets Copilot as an AI productivity enhancer that can summarise meetings, draft emails, generate slides, analyse data, and more. However, the DBT report suggests the real-world impact was far more nuanced than the promotional material might suggest.

Where Copilot Worked And Where It Didn’t

The government study found that users were most satisfied when using Copilot to perform simpler, text-based tasks, e.g., summarising meetings, writing emails, and condensing written communications.

In the trial, these tasks consistently showed time savings and improved clarity when compared with work from non-Copilot users. Email writing was slightly faster and judged higher in quality and accuracy.

However, performance in more complex tasks was notably weaker. For example, data analysis in Excel and visual content creation in PowerPoint suffered, with AI-generated outputs often requiring correction or falling short of expectations. PowerPoint slide creation was seven minutes faster on average, but to a lower standard of quality. In Excel, AI users took longer and produced less accurate results than their non-AI counterparts.

The report concluded: “We did not find robust evidence to suggest that time savings are leading to improved productivity. However, this was not a key aim of the evaluation, and therefore, limited data was collected to identify if time savings have led to productivity gains.”

Light Usage of Copilot

The study also revealed relatively light usage patterns. According to the M365 Copilot dashboard, the average user triggered just 1.14 Copilot actions per working day across the 63-day pilot.

Word, Outlook and Teams saw the highest engagement, but more specialised tools such as Excel, PowerPoint, Loop and OneNote saw very low uptake, i.e., less than 7 percent of users activated Copilot in Excel or PowerPoint on any given day. Loop and OneNote usage was negligible.

These numbers raise questions about whether the value justifies the cost. For example, UK commercial Copilot licences currently range from £4.90 to £18.10 per user per month. For large departments or enterprises, these costs could escalate rapidly, especially if many users engage with the tool only sporadically.

User Attitudes and AI Limitations

While 72 percent of participants were “satisfied or very satisfied” with Copilot, it seems that qualitative interviews suggested that much of this enthusiasm came from the novelty or perceived time saved on repetitive admin tasks. In some cases, staff used their saved time to take training courses or enjoy longer breaks, rather than focusing on higher-value work.

Interestingly, a significant number of participants (22 percent) reported witnessing hallucinations (AI-generated inaccuracies or fabrications). Another 11 percent were unsure, highlighting the still-fragile trust in GenAI tools in professional settings.

Adoption also varied across teams, often influenced by management attitudes. Some line managers actively encouraged use, while others created a “frosty” culture around AI assistance, which in turn impacted engagement.

Microsoft and Its Competitors

For Microsoft, the report is clearly a mixed result. The company has heavily invested in integrating Copilot across its core product suite and has made productivity gains a central part of its pitch. But in the DBT trial, the return on investment appears questionable.

Critics say that the AI’s strengths in low-complexity tasks are well documented, but the promise of broad-based productivity enhancement still feels premature.

A recent MIT survey cited in the DBT report found that 95 percent of companies investing in generative AI tools (including M365 Copilot) had little tangible benefit to show for it. With corporate spending on GenAI already topping $40 billion, pressure is growing for vendors to demonstrate real ROI.

The findings may also embolden competitors such as Google, Zoho, or even open-source productivity platforms. For now, Copilot’s core strength appears to lie in routine, text-heavy admin support. In more complex tasks requiring judgement or accuracy, it remains inconsistent.

As DBT continues to analyse the environmental and cost impacts of Copilot, Microsoft may need to further refine how its AI interacts with different apps and workflows, or risk a broader slowdown in enterprise adoption.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The DBT trial showed that M365 Copilot could save time on routine admin, but may not provide any meaningful productivity gains across a department. For UK businesses considering using the tool (or using it already), this raises some serious questions about cost-effectiveness, especially where licences are purchased at scale but only lightly used. With Microsoft positioning Copilot as a flagship product, the pressure to deliver clear, measurable value will only grow.

Usage data from the trial suggests that even in a controlled, well-supported environment, AI tools are far from being embedded into daily workflows. Inconsistent performance in more complex tasks, combined with ongoing concerns about hallucinations, points to a maturity gap that will be difficult to ignore. Competitors offering simpler or more focused AI products may now find space to challenge Microsoft’s all-in-one approach, particularly in areas where users need speed and accuracy over generalised support.

WordPress used WordCamp US 2025 in Portland to debut ‘Telex’, an experimental AI tool that turns plain English prompts into downloadable website blocks, making it faster and easier to build custom WordPress features without coding.

What Telex Is And Why It Matters

Telex is a prototype that generates custom Gutenberg blocks (the modular sections that make up WordPress pages) from a typed prompt, then packages the result as a downloadable .zip. The .zip file can then be uploaded as a plugin to a WordPress site or tested in WordPress Playground. In his keynote, WordPress co-founder and Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg described it as “V0 or Lovable, but specifically for WordPress,” referencing the rise of prompt-based “vibe coding” tools (vibe coding is using AI to generate code from natural language prompts). He showed how a developer used it to create a simple marketing animation, underscoring the aim to lower the barrier to building bespoke site elements.

The service is currently available at telex.automattic.ai and is marked as experimental, to show users that it’s still a work in progress. Early testers have reported that there have been projects that failed outright or needed manual fixes before working properly, which is consistent with the current prototype label. “At the core of it, there is a seed of something, which is so enabling,” Mullenweg said, while also acknowledging concerns about the hype cycle around AI.

Who Is Behind It?

Telex follows WordPress’s formation of a formal AI Team in May 2025, which was set up to coordinate AI features across the ecosystem using a plugin-first approach. The initial team includes contributors from Automattic, Google, and 10up, the apparent brief being to “accelerate and coordinate artificial intelligence projects” in line with WordPress values. This is the governance backdrop for Telex and other experiments.

How It Works In Practice

The idea of how Telex is used is simple, i.e. users describe the block they want (for example, a hero section with animated text and a call to action) and Telex generates code that the user can install as a plugin. WordPress Playground, which runs full WordPress instances in the browser, provides a safe place to try outputs without touching a live site. For many users, especially small teams, this should reduce the set-up overhead of traditional development and encourage and speed up layout or interaction ideas.

What’s So Special About Telex (Compared With Other AI Builders)?

There are, of course, plenty of AI website builders that generate whole sites in one go, including Wix’s AI Website Builder and Squarespace’s Blueprint AI. However, Telex is different because it targets WordPress’s modular architecture and outputs discrete Gutenberg blocks that can slot into existing sites, themes, and workflows. For teams invested in WordPress, that is a more natural fit than moving to a closed, hosted builder. Wix and Squarespace are pitching all-in-one creation and hosting, often with paid plans and platform lock-in, whereas Telex sticks to WordPress’s open approach and lets users host sites wherever they choose.

Benefits Businesses Might Notice

If Telex matures, the immediate benefit is likely to be time saved due to speed. For example, routine front-end building blocks such as hero sections, testimonial carousels, or animated counters could be generated in just minutes, then refined by a developer rather than built from scratch. Since the output is a standard plugin zip, teams can check the code, keep track of changes, and remove it easily if needed, which suits organisations that follow strict approval processes.

For non-technical teams that still prefer WordPress, Telex simplifies things. WordPress powers 43.4 percent of all websites (according to W3Techs , so any step that makes customisation easier is likely to have an outsized impact. If prompt-to-block works well, agencies could prototype options live with clients, then hand over code that slots into existing repos and CI pipelines.

Playground is also useful because it allows developers to test Telex-generated blocks in a browser without needing a live site. They can install the plugin, check it works as expected, and export the result as a .zip file when ready.

Where It Fits In The Competitive Landscape

WordPress remains the most widely used content management system. Other platforms such as Wix and Squarespace have recently introduced AI features that build entire sites in minutes, aimed at first-time users and small businesses.

Telex takes a different approach. Instead of generating whole websites, it focuses on creating individual WordPress blocks that can be added to existing themes and layouts. It stays within the open WordPress system and gives users the freedom to host their websites anywhere, which is often a priority for businesses that want more control over their data and setup.

This could help WordPress hold onto small businesses that might otherwise switch to closed, hosted platforms. If Telex proves reliable, it may also speed up work for agencies and internal teams who already build with WordPress.

There may also be knock-on effects across the WordPress ecosystem. If businesses can generate standard blocks themselves, this could reduce demand for some paid plugins and themes. At the same time, it could create new opportunities for agencies to offer reviewed prompt templates, support services, or curated collections of AI-generated blocks for clients in regulated industries.

Key Challenges And Early Criticism

It seems that Telex has already faced some questions about reliability, e.g. there have been reports that several early test projects failed or needed extra work before they could run properly. For now, it’s likely that businesses will still need developers to review, test, and secure any blocks before using them on a live site. How well Telex handles different themes, and whether it supports accessibility and good performance by default, will make a big difference to how useful it becomes.

There’s also the wider legal backdrop. For example, WordPress and Automattic (the company behind WordPress.com and a major contributor to the platform) have spent the past year in a legal dispute with hosting provider WP Engine. That case led to a court-ordered injunction in December 2024 and remains ongoing. Although it has nothing to do with Telex, the dispute has raised concerns about how decisions are made in the WordPress ecosystem and who holds the influence. At WordCamp, Mullenweg said only that the case was moving through the legal system.

Security is another area that will need close attention because like any AI tool that writes code, Telex can produce weak or incomplete results if the prompts are unclear. As WordPress runs in so many different environments, even small errors can lead to problems. WordPress Playground (the browser-based version of WordPress used for safe testing) may help lower the risk during development, but once in production, businesses will still need to carry out proper checks, just as they would with any third-party plugin.

What It Could Mean For WordPress

Telex is part of WordPress’s ongoing move to introduce AI in a way that’s open and easy to test. The AI Team set up in May 2025 has said it will use a plugin-first approach, meaning features like Telex will be released separately at first, not baked into WordPress Core. If Telex becomes more widely used, it could start to shape WordPress development practices, training materials, and support tools.

It could also lead to more conversational features in WordPress itself, such as tools that help users build blocks by describing what they want in plain English. Mullenweg made clear that this ties directly into WordPress’s long-standing goal of making publishing accessible to everyone. “We’ve taken things that were difficult to do, that required knowledge of coding or anything else, and made it accessible to people,” he said.

If AI can continue that trend without lowering code quality or reducing choice, Telex could help keep more creators on the WordPress platform rather than losing them to simpler, hosted services.

What About Business Users of WordPress?

For small and medium-sized UK businesses already using WordPress, Telex could speed up common tasks such as adding new sections to a homepage, updating layouts, or testing different calls to action. Also, marketing teams could test ideas quickly and agencies could deliver small custom features faster and at lower cost. Developers could spend less time writing basic layout code and more time on integrations, security, and performance.

For companies in regulated sectors, the fact that Telex generates installable plugins, not hosted code or external widgets, is also important because it makes it easier to track changes, review code, and remove features if needed, which fits well with internal approval processes.

Hosted platforms like Wix and Squarespace now offer strong AI tools for beginners, but they also limit flexibility and hosting choices. Telex offers an alternative that works within WordPress and still gives users full control over where and how their site is hosted.

For developers, Telex essentially changes the way some work gets done but doesn’t remove the need for human input (it still needs the AI prompts). Early feedback shows that AI-generated blocks often still need testing and refinement and, therefore, agencies with strong technical teams may be best advised to combine effective prompting with proper review, offering clients speed without sacrificing quality.

How To Try It Safely Today

Telex is still experimental, and the safest way to try it is through WordPress Playground (a browser-based version of WordPress for safe testing). This lets developers test blocks directly in the browser, without affecting any live sites. For now, users may want to keep the scope simple, such as generating a hero section or a testimonial layout, and then review the code before installing it on a development site. That will give teams a chance to see how Telex works while keeping control over what goes into production.

Where Things Stand for Now

Telex is still in its early stages, and some outputs may not yet be reliable enough for complex sites. However, the tool sits within a wider AI development effort at WordPress, supported by a new AI Team and a plugin-first approach. For now, therefore, Telex appears to offer a way for developers and businesses to explore how prompt-based tools could be used inside existing WordPress workflows, without relying on external platforms or hosted AI builders.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Telex essentially gives users a faster way to create modular WordPress features using natural language prompts. By generating standard plugin files that can be tested, reviewed, and installed like any other block, it offers a practical route to exploring AI-assisted development without changing platform or setup.

For UK businesses already using WordPress, this could simplify everyday site updates and reduce the time spent on routine layout tasks. It may also allow smaller teams to create and test new features without relying on external developers, provided there is still a review process in place to catch errors or security issues. Larger organisations, especially those in regulated sectors, are likely to value the ability to track changes and control what gets deployed.

Telex also points to wider changes across the WordPress ecosystem. Agencies may begin using it to accelerate early design work, freeing up developer time for more complex builds. At the same time, plugin developers may face new pressure to show the added value of their products if standard blocks become easier to generate on demand.

The real test will be how well Telex performs in production environments, across different themes and hosting setups. Its usefulness will depend not just on speed but on consistency, security, and whether it can meet accessibility standards. For now, it gives WordPress users a way to experiment with AI-driven development using familiar tools, while keeping full control over hosting and site management.

Google has announced a major upgrade to its Circle to Search feature, allowing users to see live translations as they scroll through content on their screens.

What Is Circle to Search?

Circle to Search is a relatively new tool on Google’s Android that allows users to search directly from whatever they’re viewing on their phone. Introduced globally in January 2024, the feature lets users activate a search by circling, highlighting, scribbling on, or tapping any part of their screen, without needing to switch apps or open a browser. The tool is essentially designed to make on-the-fly research and translation faster, more contextual, and more seamless across Android devices.

To launch it, users simply long-press the home button or navigation bar. Once activated, they can interact with whatever is on their screen, e.g. an image, a product, a word in another language, and instantly trigger a Google Search related to that element.

Google originally introduced Circle to Search on its Pixel 8 series and Samsung Galaxy S24 devices, positioning it as a flagship AI-powered search interface. Since then, its capabilities have expanded rapidly. For example, earlier in 2025, Google added AI Overviews (summary answers generated by generative AI) and smart tap functions for phone numbers and URLs visible on screen. In May, it also rolled out “AI Mode,” which lets users ask follow-up questions related to what’s on their screen, similar to how you might query a chatbot.

Now “Scroll and Translate” Added

Last week’s update focused on translation. Previously, users could translate foreign-language text using Circle to Search, however, the feature had a frustrating limitation, i.e. the translation would disappear whenever the user scrolled, refreshed the page, or switched apps. To continue translating, they had to restart the whole process manually each time.

Now, Google has added a new “scroll and translate” mode that keeps translation active while users move through content. This means that translated text updates continuously as a person scrolls down a webpage, swipes through images, or even switches between apps. There’s no longer any need to keep reactivating the tool.

The updated feature is being rolled out first to (select) Samsung Galaxy devices running Android, with wider availability expected in the coming weeks. To use it, users just activate Circle to Search as normal, tap the “Translate” icon, and select “Scroll and translate.” The live translation then stays active until they exit the mode.

Why This Update Could Make a Real Difference

According to Google, translation has become one of the most widely used features within Circle to Search, particularly for users encountering foreign-language content on social media, in images, or while navigating websites and apps abroad. However, until now, it hasn’t been particularly smooth to use.

As Google explained in a recent blog post: “You can get more context for social posts from creators who speak a different language, or browse menus when you’re booking restaurant reservations while travelling abroad. But until now, you had to restart the translation process every time you scrolled or the content on the screen changed.”

The new “scroll and translate” mode, therefore, has been designed to address that limitation directly. Once activated, it allows translation to remain on as users move through pages, swipe across photos, or even switch between apps. Google says the aim is to make interacting with foreign-language content feel more continuous and intuitive.

How This Could Help More Than Just Travellers

While this might appear to be a minor user interface tweak, the impact could actually be broader than it first appears. For international teams and mobile professionals, the ability to get uninterrupted translation in real time may reduce friction in daily workflows.

For example, reading through a contract, document, or website in another language no longer means repeatedly triggering a translation tool. With the new update, translated content can stay visible as the user moves through it, which may prove especially useful when skimming longer texts, working with multilingual sources, or reviewing supplier and customer information on the go.

The feature also reduces reliance on third-party translation apps or copy-paste methods. For businesses, that could mean smoother collaboration across regions, fewer errors introduced by switching tools, and a faster way to understand what’s on screen without leaving the task at hand.

Google and Its Competitors

The update may strengthen Google’s position as a leader in mobile search and ambient AI integration. Circle to Search is one of the company’s most visible efforts to embed AI more deeply into the daily experience of Android users, without requiring them to open dedicated apps.

By removing friction from multilingual browsing, Google is also essentially extending its dominance in the translation space. For example, Google Translate already reportedly serves over 500 million people each day, and the new feature effectively bakes that capability into Android’s navigation layer. This could reduce usage of rival apps and services such as Microsoft Translator, DeepL, or third-party browser extensions.

More broadly, the move could be said to illustrate Google’s ongoing strategy to layer AI tools into operating systems, search workflows, and productivity tools rather than offering them only as standalone products.

According to Jack Krawczyk, Senior Director of Product at Google, who oversees many of the company’s AI integrations, “We think the best AI is the kind that’s helpful when you need it and invisible when you don’t. Circle to Search is designed to remove the friction between what you see and what you want to know.”

Who Can Use It and When?

The “scroll and translate” feature is already starting to roll out to users on supported Android devices. Initially, it will be available on select Samsung Galaxy models, with broader rollout expected to follow shortly. Google has not given a definitive timeline for when other Android devices will receive the update, but given past patterns, it’s likely to extend to Pixel and other high-end models first before reaching wider mid-range devices.

Users will need to ensure they are running the latest version of Android and have updated their Google app to access the feature. There’s no indication yet that the feature will come to iOS, as Apple currently does not support Circle to Search.

Potential Use Cases for Businesses

For UK business users in particular, the practical benefits are tangible. Teams that interact with overseas suppliers, manufacturers, or clients could use the feature for quick translation of communications, spec sheets, or product listings. HR teams dealing with multilingual job applications, or marketing teams researching global campaigns, could also find the real-time translation useful in their day-to-day work.

Also, because it doesn’t require switching between apps or screens, the process is less disruptive and more conducive to multitasking. As more work takes place on mobile devices, including messaging and approvals, the integration of live translation at OS level is likely to become increasingly relevant.

Concerns?

Despite the clear benefits, the new translation feature isn’t without its concerns. For example, privacy campaigners have previously raised questions about Circle to Search more broadly, particularly around how much screen data is shared with Google during a search.

Google has stated that Circle to Search only processes the exact area selected by the user and that all interactions are covered by the same privacy protections as standard search queries. However, continuous translation raises new questions, especially if text is being interpreted and sent to Google’s servers as users scroll across private chats or internal business documents.

Another concern is that real-time translation accuracy is still variable, depending on the language pair and complexity of the text. While Google Translate has improved significantly in recent years, it can still struggle with nuance, idiomatic expressions, or specialist technical vocabulary.

There’s also the issue of platform exclusivity. For example, by limiting new features to select Android devices (often in partnership with Samsung), Google may face criticism for fragmenting the user experience across the wider Android ecosystem. This could leave users of other brands or older devices without access to key updates.

Also, competitors such as Apple and Microsoft may see this move as a signal to accelerate their own integrations of translation and AI capabilities into mobile workflows. Apple already offers on-device translation in Safari and the Translate app, but not yet at the OS interaction level seen here.

What Does This Mean for Your Business?

This latest update may appear incremental, but it’s actually a sign of Google trying to integrate more AI-driven tools directly into mobile interfaces in ways that simplify daily tasks. For UK businesses, especially those with international operations or multilingual clients, it opens up new opportunities for faster and more accurate decision-making on the go. Having real-time translation embedded at system level reduces the need to rely on separate apps or switch between tools, which can often slow down workflows and introduce errors.

At the same time, it raises fresh concerns around privacy, platform fragmentation, and dependency on a single provider for key language processing tasks. Organisations handling sensitive data may, therefore, need to consider where that information is going and how it is processed during on-screen translation. Smaller device makers and software rivals may also feel pressure to respond, particularly as Google continues to consolidate its AI advantage through tighter integrations.

What’s clear is that Circle to Search is no longer just a novel gesture-based tool. With features like “scroll and translate”, it is starting to become a more practical part of the Android user experience, particularly for professionals who rely on speed, accuracy, and context when working across languages.

A US judge has ruled that Google can avoid the most severe antitrust penalties, including being broken up, because of rapid changes in the search market driven by generative AI.

Why the Case Was Brought in the First Place

The ruling stems from a five-year legal battle between Google and the US Department of Justice (DoJ), which accused the tech giant of illegally maintaining a monopoly in online search. First filed in October 2020 by the DoJ and 11 US states, the case argued that Google used unlawful tactics to protect and extend its dominance, particularly through exclusive agreements that made it the default search engine on smartphones, browsers, and other devices.

The trial began in September 2023 and focused on whether Google’s business practices, especially its multi-billion-dollar deals with companies like Apple, Samsung, and Mozilla, were shutting out competitors and reinforcing its hold over more than 90 per cent of the online search market. In August 2024, US District Judge Amit Mehta agreed with the DoJ that Google had violated antitrust laws under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. That left everyone wondering (until now) what the consequences should be.

What the DoJ Wanted, and Why

The DoJ argued that serious structural changes were needed to stop Google from continuing to wield disproportionate power over how users access information online. For example, this included the forced divestiture of two of Google’s most strategically important assets, ie. its Chrome web browser and the Android operating system.

The DoJ essentially argued that these platforms were being used to entrench Google Search as the default option, thereby making it harder for rivals to compete. The government also sought a ban on exclusive agreements, and demanded that Google share its search data (information about user queries and clicks) with other search providers, to level the playing field.

However, in the final judgement just issued (early September 2025), Judge Mehta rejected most of these proposals, ruling that they were overly broad and unsupported by evidence of direct misuse.

What the Judge Said

In his 230-page decision, Judge Mehta confirmed that Google had maintained its dominance through anti-competitive means, but concluded that forced divestiture of Chrome or Android was unnecessary and would risk harm to other parts of the tech ecosystem.

“Plaintiffs overreached in seeking forced divestiture of these key assets, which Google did not use to effect any illegal restraints,” Mehta wrote. Instead, he ordered more targeted remedies. Google must now stop entering into exclusive default agreements and must share certain user-side data, such as search indexes and click data, with “qualified competitors.”

So, rather than force a breakup of the company, Mehta imposed “behavioural remedies.” These include:

• Providing syndication access to qualified competitors at standard rates

• Ending exclusive contracts involving Search, Chrome, Assistant and Gemini.

• Sharing key data such as search index and click-through info with rivals.

However, this data-sharing excludes advertising-related information, a core part of Google’s business model. Google can also still pay to have its products preloaded on devices, as long as those deals are not exclusive.

AI as the Game-Changer

One of the most unexpected aspects of the ruling was Judge Mehta’s emphasis on the rise of generative AI. He argued that since the case began in 2020, the search market has evolved significantly, with AI products such as ChatGPT and Perplexity offering new ways for users to find information online.

“The emergence of GenAI changed the course of this case,” the judge wrote. He noted that no witnesses during the original liability phase viewed AI as an immediate threat, but that by the remedies stage, AI tools had become a meaningful source of competition in general search.

This shift, he said, made structural remedies less appropriate. “Unlike the typical case where the court’s job is to resolve a dispute based on historic facts, here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future. Not exactly a judge’s forte,” he added.

What This Means for Google and Its Rivals

For Google, the ruling is clearly a significant reprieve. The company avoided being broken up and is still able to fund default placement deals, as long as they are non-exclusive. Not surprisingly, Alphabet’s share price rose more than 8 per cent after the decision was announced, while Apple, a key partner in default search placements, saw a 4 per cent increase.

Google welcomed the outcome, stating: “Today’s decision recognises how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI, which is giving people so many more ways to find information.”

However, the decision was less favourable for Google’s competitors, including smaller search engines like DuckDuckGo and data-hungry AI startups. While they now have limited access to user-side search data, many argue that without access to Google’s full “recipe”, including advertising data and ranking algorithms, they still face an uphill battle.

Adam Kovacevich, CEO of the tech policy group Chamber of Progress and a former Google public policy executive, told reporters: “What you had is Google’s rivals arguing that Google had to share its recipes’ secret sauce. And the judge rejected that. He said: ‘You only have to share their ingredient list.’”

Users and Businesses

For everyday users, the immediate impact of this ruling is likely to be minimal. For example, Google will remain the default search option on many platforms and services, although it must now offer some level of choice. Businesses that rely on search visibility, digital marketing, or ad placement are unlikely to see major short-term changes.

However, the longer-term implications may be more subtle. For example, by avoiding structural changes, the court has left Google’s advertising dominance intact, although critics argue that this could limit innovation and keep ad prices high.

Some privacy advocates have also voiced concern. For example, the Electronic Frontier Foundation warned that limited data-sharing requirements could be easily circumvented or rendered ineffective if not tightly monitored.

Reaction from the Markets and Others

Investor reaction was, of course, overwhelmingly positive. The share price rises for Alphabet and Apple suggest relief that the court did not force a radical restructuring of the tech ecosystem. Mozilla, another major Google distribution partner, welcomed the ruling’s caution, noting that sudden revenue loss from Google payments “could put Firefox out of business.”

The Department of Justice, while not immediately commenting on whether it would appeal, said in a statement: “The ruling recognises the need for remedies that will pry open the market for general search services, which has been frozen in place for over a decade.”

Not everyone agrees the outcome goes far enough. Nidhi Hegde, Executive Director of the American Economic Liberties Project, called the remedies “feckless,” comparing them to letting a bank robber off with a thank-you note. “This is a complete failure of duty and must be appealed,” she said.

Critics across the political spectrum have also questioned whether the court placed too much faith in AI’s ability to regulate the market. As the technology is still in flux, it remains uncertain whether generative AI will truly provide the kind of competition that could erode Google’s dominance.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For now, the ruling leaves Google in a dominant position and offers limited changes for users or competitors. While exclusive defaults have been blocked, the company can continue paying for high-profile placements and retains full control over its most valuable advertising and ranking data. For UK businesses reliant on search traffic, online visibility or Google Ads, the immediate landscape remains largely the same. That may bring short-term certainty, but it also means that the pressures and pricing structures of a highly centralised market are likely to continue.

The court’s focus on generative AI as a future source of competition reflects just how quickly the tech environment has changed. However, it also places significant weight on an evolving technology that has yet to fully deliver on its disruptive promise. While AI tools are gaining traction, they are not yet mature enough to provide a realistic alternative to traditional search for most users or businesses. Whether they will in time remains to be seen, but for now, much of Google’s advantage is still firmly in place.

For regulators, the outcome sets a clear precedent. Rather than restructuring dominant platforms, the focus has shifted towards softer remedies such as data-sharing and long-term oversight. That approach may limit harm to partners and consumers in the short term, but it leaves open questions about whether smaller search providers and emerging AI tools can genuinely compete without broader intervention.

UK businesses operating in digital sectors, online retail, media, and advertising will need to monitor these developments closely. The effectiveness of the data-sharing requirements, and whether AI can level the field as the court suggests, will help determine whether genuine competition emerges, or whether the market remains firmly tilted in favour of one provider. Either way, it now seems that the responsibility for driving that change could lie more with technology and market forces than with the courts.

Jaguar Land Rover has confirmed that a cyber attack has severely disrupted its global production and retail systems, forcing plant shutdowns and causing delays during a key sales period.

The incident was first detected on Sunday 31 August, prompting an immediate IT shutdown to contain the threat. Staff at factories in Merseyside, the West Midlands and Wolverhampton were told to stay home, with parts of the dealer network also affected.

A hacker group known as Scattered Lapsus$ Hunters has claimed responsibility. Internal system screenshots posted online suggest they had access to sensitive tools, although there is no current evidence of customer data theft.

Suppliers have described the situation as “extremely serious”, with some moving into recovery mode due to the knock-on effect on production and parts supply.

Cyber experts say attackers increasingly target the link between IT and operational technology, knowing it can bring manufacturing to a halt and increase pressure on victims to pay.

To protect against these types of attacks, businesses should prioritise multi-factor authentication, restrict access across systems, and regularly test their detection, containment, and recovery capabilities.