logo
From Kobe Bryant to Hockey Canada: Athletes and the pursuit of ‘consent' in the digital age

From Kobe Bryant to Hockey Canada: Athletes and the pursuit of ‘consent' in the digital age

New York Times21-04-2025

It's nearly 3:30 a.m. on June 19, 2018, and inside a room at the Delta Armouries Hotel in London, Ontario, a six-second cellphone video is being recorded.
'You're OK with this?' an unidentified man asks a young woman, who is shown from the neck up. 'I'm OK with this,' she responds before the video cuts off.
Advertisement
Almost an hour later, another cellphone video is recorded. This one is about 12 seconds long. The same woman stands with a towel covering her chest.
She asks, 'Are you recording me?' before declaring, 'It was all consensual. You are so paranoid, holy. I enjoyed it, it was fine. It was all consensual. I am so sober, that's why I can't do this right now.'
This week, almost seven years since those two brief videos were recorded — and first reported on by The Globe and Mail and TSN — those 18 seconds of footage will be at the center of a case that has grabbed the attention of the hockey world as five former members of Canada's 2018 gold medal-winning World Junior Championship team — Alex Formenton, Carter Hart, Dillon Dubé, Michael McLeod and Cal Foote — each face one count of sexual assault, and McLeod a second charge for 'being party to the offense.'
In a lawsuit filed by the woman — referred to as E.M. in court documents — she said that eight players assaulted her over several hours in the London hotel room. She confirmed she engaged in consensual sex with one player, but he invited several of his teammates into the hotel room without her knowledge or consent. E.M. maintains she did not consent to any of the sexual contact or acts that followed. She also noted several of the players had golf clubs in the room, and that she felt physically intimidated and unable to leave.
The defendants, now aged 25 to 27, came of age during a turbulent period of prominent revelations of sexual violence by formerly esteemed figures. For many athletes from that era, a perception emerged that they were targets due to their fame and/or wealth and that steps and strategies had to be adopted to head off false allegations. In response, athletes sought digital indemnifiers. From 'sex contracts' to strategic sexting to so-called 'consent videos,' more and more athletes are creating digital footprints of their sexual encounters.
Advertisement
'There's been a series of events, or cascade of things, leading to cultural change … this mindset or sentiment among some who fear accusations because they think that false accusations are common,' said Kristen Jozkowski, a sexual violence expert and researcher at Indiana University in Bloomington.
In 2003, long before the Me Too movement brought widespread awareness to the issues of consent and sexual assault, Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant was accused of raping a 19-year-old hotel employee in Edwards, Colo.
The case garnered widespread media attention and dominated headlines. The case did little to impede Bryant's basketball career, while the woman's sexual history was paraded in court and across tabloids.
'The criminal justice system is not designed to protect women in these types of situations, especially with athletes,' said Dan Gilleon, a San Diego attorney who represented a 17-year-old girl who alleged she was gang raped by three San Diego State football players in 2021. (All cases, but one, have been settled.)
The criminal case against Bryant was ultimately dropped after the complainant refused to testify, but Bryant settled the woman's civil suit for an estimated $2.5 million.
The aftershocks of that scandal on the lives of athletes were significant. Some turned to 'pre-sex agreement forms' as insurance against any allegations. In an interview with Sports Illustrated in 2003, Ava Cadell, an L.A. area sex therapist, said in the wake of the Bryant case she had begun drawing up such agreements. 'Athletes are going to carry consent forms just like they carry condoms,' she said. 'It's another layer of protection.'
Stephen Jackson, who played 14 seasons in the NBA, explained to SI why he would rely on a consent form before sex: 'People look at us as targets and try to get what they can out of us.'
Advertisement
The concern amongst professional athletes spread to college campuses when, in 2006, an exotic dancer hired to perform at a team party accused three members of the Duke University men's lacrosse team of raping her. The details were splashed across front pages; '60 Minutes' devoted five separate segments to coverage of the case. Yet, it would later be revealed that the assault accusation against the trio was a fabrication. A 'Tragic Rush to Accuse' read a headline in the Canadian National Post.
In 2009, Apple unveiled its iPhone 3GS, the first model with both photo and video recording capabilities. Visual evidence of sexual encounters became more ubiquitous, in the form of both agreed-upon sex tapes and secret voyeuristic recordings. In 2013, Roxanne Jones, former vice president of ESPN, penned an op-ed for CNN titled 'Young men, get a 'yes' text before sex.''
'I've actually been encouraging my son and his friends to use sexting — minus the lewd photos — to protect themselves from being wrongly accused of rape,' Jones wrote about her college-aged son. 'Because just as damning text messages and Facebook posts helped convict the high schoolers in Steubenville of rape, technology can also be used to prove innocence.'
Said Jozkowski: 'There's at least over 10 years of initiatives, as well as individuals who have sort of attempted to implement this kind of technique of 'I'm going to record a video on my phone. … I'm going to record you saying you're consenting and I'm consenting, and then we have this sort of record to verify our consent. That way, neither of us can say rape later on.''
As the London Five entered their teenage years and climbed the rungs of junior hockey, there were numerous publicized cases where athletes were accused of sexual assault and visual evidence was key to the defense.
In 2012, three teenage members of the Ontario Hockey League's Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds — Nick Cousins, Andrew Fritsch and Mark Petaccio — were charged with sexual assault of a woman. But a series of intimate photographs, which depicted the woman participating in a sexual act with more than one male present, ultimately torpedoed the case, according to Sean Sparling, who spent 18 years in Sault Ste. Marie police service's major crimes unit.
'Even if she didn't want it to happen, the photograph raised the issue of whether you could prove lack of consent,' recalled former Sault Ste. Marie Crown Attorney Bill Johnson.
Advertisement
Commenting on the allegations against Cousins, Philadelphia Flyers director of player development Ian Laperriere later told the Philadelphia Daily News: 'Let's be honest, stuff like that has been happening forever. You can't get away with anything now. He can't put himself in those situations.'
In 2014 and 2015, at a time when most of the London Five were making their OHL or WHL debuts, the troubling culture of elite-level youth hockey was laid bare:
In 2014, a group of four Olympiques players allegedly sexually assaulted a woman in a Quebec City hotel room, and there was also a complaint of 'gross indecency' involving six players from the same team and an intoxicated woman in the washroom of a pizzeria. Also that year, the University of Ottawa suspended its men's hockey team for an alleged gang rape.
Around the same time, a vulgar online handbook of sorts, known as 'The Junior Hockey Bible,' circulated in youth hockey circles.
While some of the 84 entries refer to lingo used on the ice against opponents, most of the definitions are for words used to describe women, specific sexual acts to be performed on them, or ways to protect yourself from them.
The now-defunct document, which Vice called a 'sexual assault guide book,' defines 'Swamp Donkey' as a type of woman who 'must be avoided before the consumption of at least 13 beers, and after that precede (sic) with caution and only poke her if you can degrade her in some way in front on the boys, preferably on video camera.'
Or 'Kangaroo Court,' 'the law of the dressing room … enforced on players who commit crimes with disgusting sluts of the opposite sex.' Other players will make fun of this individual, but 'credit can be given for pretty much anything that degrades the broad in any way. Extra points for anything filmed on camera.'
Advertisement
While there are several references to recording these encounters, there are also warnings, too: 'You may videotape if possible, but do not make copies. Evidence can be harmful.'
In 2015, the Quebec Maritimes Junior Hockey League began teaching 'Unsafe Sexual Behavior' to its players, according to court records. On a training slide titled 'the meaning of consent,' the two following recommendations are provided to athletes: 'A person accused of sexual assault can argue in court that he honestly believed his partner agreed to the sexual activity. This defense is referred to as an 'honest but mistaken belief in consent,'' and 'Do not share information that could incriminate anyone.'
The Me Too movement arrived in 2017 — a year before the alleged sexual assault in London. It created greater awareness of sexual violence and calcified concerns amongst some men's groups, leading to more reliance on 'documented consent.'
In 2023, two former Ohio State football players were acquitted on rape and kidnapping charges based on a 'consent video,' in which a naked, crying woman states the encounter was consensual. The defense attorney for one of the players said his client took the video after receiving instructions by a school official at an OSU football team meeting to 'always make sure you get it on record that whatever you do is consensual.'
Last year, in Hamilton, Ontario, less than 100 miles from London, Jack Densmore, a popular YouTuber known for his controversial videos, testified that athletes, celebrities, and others he partied with advised him to make consent videos, so he adopted the practice himself. But at his own sexual assault trial in 2024, it was determined he had taken a video of a woman without her permission in what he later claimed was an effort to create a record of consent. He was sentenced to three years in prison.
Densmore's case underscores the misunderstanding that experts say surrounds consent in general and the effort to capture it digitally. Consent can be given and taken away, and may change over the course of an interaction. And jurors who may be viewing those 18 seconds of footage of E.M. during the Hockey Canada trial in London may have to consider that and more.
'The video may be misleading. It may include a component of a larger interaction. It may be potentially coerced,' said Jozkowski. 'Someone can look a particular way, do a particular thing, and then a moment later, the video is off and they are screaming 'no.''
(Illustration: Dan Goldfarb / The Athletic. Images: iStock)

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Harvey Weinstein sex crimes retrial ends in disarray as jury foreperson refuses to deliberate
Harvey Weinstein sex crimes retrial ends in disarray as jury foreperson refuses to deliberate

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Harvey Weinstein sex crimes retrial ends in disarray as jury foreperson refuses to deliberate

Harvey Weinstein's sex crimes retrial case ended in disarray on Thursday as the jury foreperson refused to deliberate and the judge declared a mistrial on a remaining rape allegation. The ruling came a day after a split verdict on other charges in the landmark #MeToo-era case and now sets up the former studio boss for a third trial in New York. Before that case however goes ahead, the 73-year-old will face new sentencing early next month on his sexual assault conviction. The Oscar-winning movie producer denies all the charges and his lawyer says he plans to appeal. Related New York jury convicts Harvey Weinstein of top charge in #MeToo sex crimes retrial In Wednesday's partial verdict, Weinstein was convicted of one criminal sex act charge but acquitted of another. Both concerned accusations of forcing oral sex on women in 2006. Those verdicts still stand. While the jury of seven women and five men was unanimous on those decisions, it got stuck on the rape charge involving another woman, Jessica Mann. The hairstylist and actor testified at length — as she did in 2020 — that Weinstein raped her amid a years-long consensual relationship. 'I will never give up on myself and making sure my voice – and the truth – is heard," Mann said in a statement Thursday, confirming she's ready to testify yet again. Tensions and disagreements among the jury began to emerge in public last Friday as one member asked to be excused because he felt another was being treated unfairly. On Monday, the foreperson complained that other jurors were pushing people to change their minds and talking about information beyond the charges. The man raised concerns again Wednesday, telling the judge he felt afraid in the jury room because another juror was yelling at him for sticking to his opinion and suggested the foreperson would 'see me outside.' When Judge Curtis Farber asked the foreperson Thursday whether he was willing to return to deliberations, the man said said no. And with that, Farber declared a mistrial on the rape count. Two jurors disputed the foreperson's account as they left court. One, Chantan Holmes, said that no one mistreated the man and that she believed he was just tired of deliberating. 'We all felt bad. Because we really wanted to do this. We put our hearts and souls in here,' she said. Another jury member, who identified himself only by his juror number, said the deliberations were contentious, but respectful. 'What happened in that jury room was absolutely improper,' attorney Arthur Aidala said outside court. Weinstein is due back in court July 2 for discussion of retrial and sentencing dates. His first-degree criminal sex act conviction carries the potential for up to 25 years in jail, while the unresolved third-degree rape charge is punishable by up to four years — less than he already has served. He's been behind bars since his initial conviction in 2020, and he later also was sentenced to prison in a separate California case, which he's appealing. Weinstein's 2020 conviction seemed to cement the downfall of one of Hollywood's most powerful men in a pivotal moment for the #MeToo movement. The anti-sexual-misconduct campaign was fueled by allegations against him. But that conviction was overturned last year, and the case was sent back for retrial in the same Manhattan courthouse. Weinstein's accusers said he exploited his Tinseltown influence to dangle career help, get them alone and then trap and force them into sexual encounters. 'These hopeful young women were trying to follow their dreams in a world that he controlled,' Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, said at a news conference Thursday. Weinstein's defence portrayed his accusers as Hollywood wannabes and hangers-on who willingly hooked up with him in the hope of getting opportunities, then later said they were victimized to collect settlement funds and #MeToo approbation. Miriam Haley, the producer and production assistant whom Weinstein was convicted — twice, now — of sexually assaulting, said outside court Wednesday that the new verdict 'gives me hope.' Accuser Kaja Sokola also called it 'a big win for everyone,' even though Weinstein was acquitted of forcibly performing oral sex on her when she was a 19-year-old fashion model. Her allegation was added to the case after the retrial was ordered.

Crown attacks defense's tactics, legal arguments in Hockey Canada trial
Crown attacks defense's tactics, legal arguments in Hockey Canada trial

New York Times

time17 hours ago

  • New York Times

Crown attacks defense's tactics, legal arguments in Hockey Canada trial

LONDON, Ont. – The Crown targeted a number of rape myths and stereotypes Thursday, challenging defense tactics and legal arguments, introducing case law about trauma response and memory, and arguing on behalf of E.M.'s credibility and reliability as a witness in the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial. Advertisement Crown attorney Meaghan Cunningham said the way defense attorneys have treated E.M.'s testimony explains why sexual assault victims don't come forward, citing 'accusatory' questions and 'laughing' and 'scoffing' as ways in which they have conveyed their disbelief. Cunningham said defense attorneys also misrepresented E.M.'s testimony on several occasions and attacked her testimonial demeanor in a way that was unfair. Cunningham pointed out that Hart's attorney, Megan Savard, argued in closing submissions this week that E.M. came off as too calm and rehearsed on the stand — and that it sounded like she was a 'P.R. professional.' 'This kind of argument really illustrates why some people feel that victims aren't treated fairly in the criminal justice system, because she can't win,' Cunningham said. 'If she's too emotional, she's combative. If she's not emotional enough, she's rehearsed. If she refuses to agree with suggestions, she's combative and difficult. But if she does agree, then she doesn't know her own mind. If she uses the same language at multiple points, then it's contrived, but if she uses different language, she's inconsistent.' Cunningham said that these ideas are all rooted in a 'myth of the ideal victim.' 'That there is a right way for someone to look and sound when they're describing sexual assault,' Cunnigham said. 'That there is a correct way, or a good way, for a real victim to testify.' Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dubé and Cal Foote are all charged with sexual assault after an alleged incident in June 2018 in which E.M. — whose identity is protected by a publication ban — has said she was sexually assaulted over the span of several hours in a London, Ont., hotel room. The players were in town for a Hockey Canada event celebrating their 2018 World Junior Championship victory. Advertisement McLeod is also facing a second charge for 'being a party to the offense' for what the Crown has asserted was his role 'assisting and encouraging his teammates to engage sexually' with E.M. All five players have pleaded not guilty. Cunningham said that E.M. emerging naked from the bathroom of Room 209 to find more men in the room was a 'highly stressful' and 'unpredictable' situation. That helps explain how she was feeling in the moment, why she did not always behave in ways that seem logical to an outside observer and how this interlocks with case law that addresses trauma response and memory loss or gaps, Cunningham said. 'Some people will fight or resist, some people will try and flee, some people will freeze, some people will appease or fall back on habits and reflexes, some people will dissociate or detach from reality,' Cunningham said. 'And some people will do a combination of all of these things. These are all normal, predictable responses.' Cunningham addressed Julianna Greenspan's repeated assertions that E.M. used the word 'men' because she had an agenda. Greenspan is the attorney for Foote. 'Her desire to use accurate language at trial and actually refer to them as men does not demonstrate any sort of animus and agenda,' Cunningham said. 'She knows, as do we all, they were not boys when this thing happened. They were legally adults.' Cunningham contrasted that with defense attorneys 'continuously' referring to the defendants as 'boys' while also portraying E.M. as a 'woman,' with one even referring to her as an 'older woman.' 'This is a juxtaposition that infantilizes the defendant and leaves the impression that [E.M.] was more mature and bears a greater responsibility for her actions than the defendants do,' Cunningham said. 'There is no negative inference that can be drawn from [E.M.] using an entirely accurate term to describe the defendant. In reality, they were adults at the time. They were of a similar age and station in life to [E.M].' Advertisement Cunningham refuted the notion that E.M. had motive to fabricate based on some of the defense assertions — that she wanted to save face with her boyfriend, her mother and because of her civil claim. Instead, she argued that E.M.'s credibility as a witness is supported by the fact that she already had a cash settlement with Hockey Canada, so she had nothing to benefit from continuing in a criminal trial with her version of what happened if it wasn't true. 'She could have taken that money and run,' Cunningham said. 'She did not need to come to this court, participate in this trial and subject herself to nine days of testimony in order to keep that money. There is no connection between the money and her participation in this trial. There is quite simply no evidence of financial motive.' Prior to the afternoon break, Cunningham and Carroccia sparred considerably during Cunningham's argument that the June 26, 2018 group chat showed the genesis of the players crafting a narrative about what happened that night. The Crown prosecutor asserted that they used that as a forum to get on the same page about how to describe the events. Several things stated by players in that group chat were not true, Cunningham argued, yet still took hold and were integrated into a number of players' stories about what happened. She specifically took issue with the ideas that the players were coming to the room for food and that E.M. was 'begging' for sex. 'The group chat shows the participants in the chat were all exposed to a discussion of a developing narrative,' Cunningham said. 'Or they were repeating what they believed happened,' Carroccia responded. After a number of tense exchanges in which Cunningham asked Carroccia to consider the totality of the evidence in context of the entire chat, she abandoned the argument because she said she could tell that Carroccia did not find it 'persuasive.' Advertisement Cunningham returned to the idea of E.M. 'begging' for sex — multiple players, including Crown witnesses, said that E.M. was asking players for sex — and said that was inconsistent with other evidence. She asked why McLeod would take the 'consent videos' he filmed that night if he felt she was 'begging' for sex, why he would tell police in his 2018 police interview that he filmed them because he was 'worried something like this would happen' if she was consenting enthusiastically, and why, if she was 'begging' for sexual activity throughout the night, players had failed to capture that via video or audio recording. Cunningham referenced the fact that multiple witnesses have described points in which E.M. was crying (Brett Howden described it as 'weeping') and their reasoning — they said she was upset players in the room weren't engaging with her sexually — and said that reasoning was 'illogical.' 'But guys were doing stuff to her, right? Three guys put their penises in her mouth. Another guy put his penis in her vagina and her mouth. Guys were slapping her on the buttocks and doing the splits over her,' Cunningham said. If she was upset that people wouldn't 'do stuff' to her, and it's true that they didn't want to engage with her, why didn't they simply let her leave the room when she got dressed at multiple points and said she was going to leave? Cunningham asked. Cunningham ended the day by covering the elements of consent law the Crown was asking Carroccia to consider as part of its case — that E.M. did not voluntarily consent to the specific sexual acts that have been charged. Cunningham stressed that Canadian law does not allow for broad, unspecific consent and that it has to be renewed consistently and tied to a certain specific act, not to sexual activity writ large. 'Consent has to be ongoing and consciously given throughout the sexual activity in question. Consent is not a one-and-done box check at the beginning or end of an encounter.' Cunningham said, adding that consent 'cannot be given in advance. It has to be contemporaneous' with the specific act. Advertisement Cunningham said E.M. did not weigh her options in the hotel room that night and make a conscious choice: 'There is no voluntary agreement when she believes she has no choice in the matter.' Cunningham said that if this was not enough to convince Carroccia that the sexual activity was non-consensual, she asked her to alternatively consider that the fear and stress she felt vitiated E.M.'s consent. She pointed out that E.M. was naked in a room of eight to 10 men — who were strangers — not knowing what was going to happen or how they'd react if she tried to leave or say no. 'Sexual assault is a gendered crime. The vast majority of victims are female. The vast majority of perpetrators are male,' Cunningham said. 'We as a society are starting to have a better understanding of just how prevalent and pervasive all forms of violence against women are and how patriarchal structures contribute to and perpetuate that violence. This is not a new phenomenon. It is not controversial or novel to accept that for most women existing in society means experiencing the fear that you may become the victim of some form of violence of a man.' — The Athletic's Dan Robson contributed reporting remotely from Toronto. (Courtroom sketch of Crown attorney Meaghan Cunningham during E.M.'s closed-circuit TV testimony earlier in the trial by Alexandra Newbould / The Canadian Press via AP)

Weinstein case judge declares mistrial on remaining rape charge as jury foreperson won't deliberate
Weinstein case judge declares mistrial on remaining rape charge as jury foreperson won't deliberate

Associated Press

time18 hours ago

  • Associated Press

Weinstein case judge declares mistrial on remaining rape charge as jury foreperson won't deliberate

NEW YORK (AP) — Harvey Weinstein 's sex crimes retrial came to a disjointed end Thursday as the jury foreperson declined to deliberate and the judge declared a mistrial on a remaining rape charge, a day after a split verdict on other charges in the landmark #MeToo-era case. The outcome positions the ex-studio boss for a third New York trial — prosecutors said they're ready to retry the rape count — even as he faces a new sentencing on his sexual assault conviction. Weinstein, 73, denies all the charges. The Oscar-winning movie producer had a blank, drained expression as court officers escorted him out Thursday in his wheelchair. His lawyer said he plans to appeal. 'What happened in that jury room was absolutely improper,' attorney Arthur Aidala said outside court. Weinstein is due back in court July 2 for discussion of retrial and sentencing dates. His first-degree criminal sex act conviction carries the potential for up to 25 years in prison, while the unresolved third-degree rape charge is punishable by up to four years — less than he already has served. He's been behind bars since his initial conviction in 2020, and he later also was sentenced to prison in a separate California case, which he's appealing. In Wednesday's partial verdict, Weinstein was convicted of one criminal sex act charge but acquitted of another. Both concerned accusations of forcing oral sex on women in 2006. Those verdicts still stand. While the jury of seven women and five men was unanimous on those decisions, it got stuck on the rape charge involving another woman, Jessica Mann. The hairstylist and actor testified at length — as she did in 2020 — that Weinstein raped her amid a years-long consensual relationship. 'I will never give up on myself and making sure my voice – and the truth – is heard,' Mann said in a statement Thursday, confirming she's ready to testify yet again. Jury-room strains started leaking into public view Friday, when a juror asked to be excused because he felt another was being treated unfairly. Then Monday, the foreperson complained that other jurors were pushing people to change their minds and talking about information beyond the charges. The man raised concerns again Wednesday, telling the judge he felt afraid in the jury room because another juror was yelling at him for sticking to his opinion and suggested the foreperson would 'see me outside.' When Judge Curtis Farber asked the foreperson Thursday whether he was willing to return to deliberations, the man said said no. And with that, Farber declared a mistrial on the rape count. Two jurors disputed the foreperson's account as they left court. One, Chantan Holmes, said that no one mistreated the man and that she believed he was just tired of deliberating. 'We all felt bad. Because we really wanted to do this. We put our hearts and souls in here,' she said. Another jury member, who identified himself only by his juror number, said the deliberations were contentious, but respectful. Weinstein's 2020 conviction seemed to cement the downfall of one of Hollywood's most powerful men in a pivotal moment for the # MeToo movement. The anti-sexual-misconduct campaign was fueled by allegations against him. But that conviction was overturned last year, and the case was sent back for retrial in the same Manhattan courthouse. Weinstein's accusers said he exploited his Tinseltown influence to dangle career help, get them alone and then trap and force them into sexual encounters. 'These hopeful young women were trying to follow their dreams in a world that he controlled,' Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, said at a news conference Thursday. Weinstein's defense portrayed his accusers as Hollywood wannabes and hangers-on who willingly hooked up with him to court opportunity, then later said they were victimized to collect settlement funds and #MeToo approbation. Miriam Haley, the producer and production assistant whom Weinstein was convicted — twice, now — of sexually assaulting, said outside court Wednesday that the new verdict 'gives me hope.' Accuser Kaja Sokola also called it 'a big win for everyone,' even though Weinstein was acquitted of forcibly performing oral sex on her when she was a 19-year-old fashion model. Her allegation was added to the case after the retrial was ordered. Holmes, the juror who spoke outside court, said the panel all felt Sokola 'wasn't credible.' The Associated Press generally does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted, unless they agree to be identified. Haley, Mann and Sokola did so. ___ Associated Press journalists Joseph B. Frederick and Ted Shaffrey contributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store