News Round-Up: EU Reports 92% of Illegals Arriving in Canary Islands Are Men; Social Media Age Checks Are Dangerous; N-Word Stumps Censors
The editorial team of Freedom Research compiles a round-up of news that caught our eye—or what felt like under-reported aspects of news deserving more attention—twice a week.
Over the past couple of days, the following topics attracted our attention:
EU Reports 92% of Illegals Arriving in Canary Islands Are Men
Experts Warn: Social Media Age Checks Are Dangerous
N-Word at British Film Awards Confuses Censors
EU Reports 92% of Illegals Arriving in Canary Islands Are Men
Last September, the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions investigated the impact of illegal immigration on the Spanish islands of Tenerife and Gran Canaria. In its report, the committee states that illegal immigration to the Canary Islands remains significant and that 92% of those arriving illegally are men. Most notably, around half of those claiming to be unaccompanied minors are in fact adults, according to Remix News.
As of the end of August last year, 201 boats carrying 12,249 migrants had reached the islands, including 9,955 men, 782 women, and 192 minors, accompanied by their parents. There were also 1,320 unaccompanied minors registered, of whom 629 were found by officials to be of questionable age. Of all arrivals, 92% were men and only 8% were women. Frontex data for 2023 showed a similar proportion: 92% of illegal immigrants were men, a figure that has remained remarkably stable for years.
In any case, the Canary Islands have long struggled with massive immigration. Reception centers there are overcrowded, and youth centers are operating at 123% capacity, housing approximately 5,860 minors – far more than the planned capacity of under 900. Although the Spanish government has tried to relocate minors from the islands to mainland Spain through several programs, in the middle of last year, the Canary Islands still accounted for approximately 37% of all unaccompanied minors arriving in Spain.
However, the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions has concluded, based on medical age checks at reception centers, that around half of these unaccompanied minors are not minors at all, but adults. Age is checked medically, for example, by assessing bone development, but only when authorities doubt the immigrant’s age. As of September last year, only 1,500 “minors” had been checked. The committee therefore concluded that there are systemic shortcomings in the initial screening of illegal immigrants and that assessments are often inaccurate. Many young men have been placed in the child protection system and in the wrong centers. The European Parliament delegation confirms that child protection remains a legal obligation, but much stronger age verification measures are needed to prevent abuse of the system.
The Committee on Petitions also addressed crime and public safety (see examples here, here, here, and here). Although overall crime rates in the Canary Islands had fallen by 3.8% in the first three months of 2025, according to the authorities, the situation was the opposite for serious crimes. For example, in the first three months of the year alone, the number of murders increased by 400%, attempted murders by 87.5%, sexual violence by 11.1%, and drug trafficking by 21.4%. MEP Sebastian Kruis noted that immigrants are overrepresented in Canary Islands prison statistics and that they are 1.5 times more likely to end up in prison. Immigrants make up 31% of prisoners in the Canary Islands, even though they represent only 22% of the population.
The Petitions Committee also noted that crime has increased since the arrival of unaccompanied minors, although these crimes have mainly been committed among themselves. The most common offenses in reception centers are fights, insults, and sexual violence. In other words, although crimes may have been committed against immigrants, they themselves have largely caused them. The report also addressed the difficulties in detecting smuggling networks. Last year, 282 preliminary investigations were launched into those who arrived by boat, but 97% were temporarily suspended because the perpetrators could not be identified.
The European Parliament delegation also addressed the issue of returns, which, according to Spanish officials, are very limited in the case of Morocco, for example. Many of those who arrive do not have documents, but Morocco does not process undocumented persons and rejects 92% of Spain’s requests for return.
The European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions has opened the investigation into Gabriel Bao Moreno’s petition (1268/2020). Moreno asked the European Union to take joint action to address the problems of illegal migration, particularly in the Mediterranean region. According to the petitioner, the EU’s measures to date have been fragmented, as seen in the different responses of EU Member States to the Syrian conflict since 2011, with some countries building border fences to stop refugees. The committee decided to investigate these issues on the ground with a view of helping to develop a more effective and coherent EU migration policy.
Experts Warn: Social Media Age Checks Are Dangerous
419 researchers in the field of security and privacy from 30 countries have signed a statement against age verification on social media. They warn: “We fear that, if implemented without careful consideration of the technological hazards and societal impact, the new regulation might cause more harm than good.” According to the researchers, it remains unclear how extensive age verification will affect security, privacy, personal freedom, and autonomy. They therefore call on governments to suspend plans to ban certain age groups from social media – at least until privacy and security issues are resolved, reports Politico.
Researchers describe large-scale age verification as a dangerous and socially unacceptable access-control mechanism. The methods are not secure and may expose users to malware or fraud on illegal sites that skip verification. They would also force service providers to collect far more personal information than they do today.
“We share the concerns about the negative effects that exposure to harmful content online has on children,” the researchers write. However, the current plans “would require all users – minors and adults – to prove their age to converse with friends and family, read news, or search for information; well beyond what has ever happened in our offline lives.” Web platforms and governments have so far described government-issued ID checks, selfies, or artificially inferred age as possible methods. Yet researchers stress that strong age verification would require government-issued ID checks with cryptographic protection. Such an infrastructure is complex to build and maintain globally and would hinder service provision. Many companies would likely be unable to comply, leading to centralization of these tools in the hands of only a few capable providers.
Furthermore, age verification offers no guarantee of solving the original problems it aims to address. On the contrary, it would create an infrastructure that could easily be misused to deny access for reasons unrelated to safety. Those who decide on and enforce age controls would gain enormous influence over what content is available online and to whom. In the wrong hands – such as authoritarian governments – this technology would make it extremely easy to censor information, block “undesirable” content, or even shut down the internet entirely, as recently seen in Iran.
The researchers also point out that age verification is easy to circumvent, for example with VPNs or borrowed/fake accounts. There is therefore no assurance that minors would be prevented from accessing adult content or social media. At the same time, they warn of the risk that governments might ban or restrict VPNs to stop circumvention. VPNs are essential tools for vulnerable groups, journalists, activists, and victims of domestic violence, as well as people protecting themselves from authoritarian regimes.
The researchers therefore call for a moratorium on deployment plans until the benefits, harms, and technical feasibility of age-assurance technologies are clearly established and it is proven that the benefits outweigh the risks. Until then, they recommend focusing on alternative measures – in particular regulating the algorithmic practices of social media that often cause the harm in the first place. They also suggest improving tools and support for parents to locally block non-age-appropriate content and apps, which would be far preferable to mandatory age checks by service providers.
Among the signatories are Ronald Rivest, Turing Award winner in computer science, and Bart Preneel, president of the International Association for Cryptologic Research.
N-Word at British Film Awards Confuses Censors
A scandal erupted in the United Kingdom when the n-word was broadcast during the BAFTA Film Awards ceremony in February. This occurred despite the word being uttered by a person with Tourette’s syndrome, a disability that prevents control over verbal and other tics, according to The Daily Mail.
The incident was complicated because Tourette’s activist John Davidson unintentionally shouted the forbidden word when Sinners’ Black stars Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo presented the award for visual effects. Yet it was this one word that drew huge criticism, unlike earlier shouts like “Shut the f*** up!**”.
John Davidson attended the BAFTAs with his film I Swear, which was nominated for six awards. The film draws from Davidson’s life story and explores the origins, symptoms, characteristics, and manifestations of Tourette’s syndrome, highlighting the complexities he has faced. For example, it was hardly deliberate that he shouted “F***ing queen!” when meeting Queen Elizabeth II. Ultimately, the film won BAFTA awards for Best Actor (Robert Aramayo) and Best Casting.
Unfortunately, Davidson had to leave the BAFTAs early due to fears of causing discomfort with his tics. He has said he is very sad that his involuntary tics are seen as intentional or meaningful.
Warner Bros demanded that the “racial slur” be edited out immediately, but it appeared on the BBC broadcast despite a two-hour delay. During the broadcast, host Alan Cumming apologised to viewers for the language heard. This happened even though guests had been informed beforehand that a person with Tourette’s syndrome might shout offensive phrases.
The broadcast sparked a scandal, with British liberals divided. Some defended Davidson, but many condemned both the man and the BBC. The BBC faced accusations of prejudice and negligence, as the clip should never have aired. Filmmaker Jonte Richardson announced he was stepping down from his BAFTA jury position because of the incident. He stated that the organization had failed to protect the dignity of its black guests, members, and creative professionals. There were even extreme suggestions that Davidson should have been seated in a separate room, away from other guests, or not invited to an event with black people present at all. Many black actors in the US criticized the incident, and only few showed understanding for Davidson’s condition. Some US TV hosts even accused him of lying: “Of all the words you could have said, Tourette’s made you say that. No, he meant that s***.”
Davidson was defended by disability activists, who explained that Tourette’s syndrome often causes sufferers to say the most offensive things involuntarily. He was also supported by several people with the syndrome, including black individuals, who argued that one should not feel offended because of a disability.
Overall, these reactions illustrate how poorly understood Tourette’s syndrome remains, even though Davidson’s film I Swear introduced and showed its complexities. More broadly, the incident exposed a legal tension: the law protects both race and disability, leaving many unsure which side to take – that of the working-class white man with a lifelong disability, or that of black millionaire actors.
In the end, BAFTA issued an apology and said it would take responsibility for putting its guests in a difficult situation. A BAFTA spokesperson stated: “Last night at the BAFTA Film Awards, our guests heard some very offensive words that caused immense trauma and pain to many. We want to acknowledge the harm caused, address the incident, and apologise to everyone.”