ExxonMobil has unveiled a new form of synthetic graphite designed to extend electric vehicle battery life by up to 30 per cent, in a move that could reshape the EV materials supply chain.

A Major Energy Player With a New Direction

ExxonMobil is best known as one of the world’s largest oil and gas companies, with operations spanning upstream exploration, refining, petrochemicals and energy logistics. However, in recent years, the company has increasingly turned its attention to low-carbon technologies, focusing on areas where it believes it holds a competitive advantage, such as carbon capture, hydrogen, and chemical-based solutions.

While it has often avoided wind and solar projects, citing a lack of in-house capability, ExxonMobil has consistently invested in R&D in the materials space. This latest development, presented by CEO Darren Woods at the University of Texas at Austin’s Energy Symposium, represents a significant step into the EV battery supply chain.

What Is This New Graphite, and Why Does It Matter?

The material is a newly engineered synthetic form of graphite, used in the anode of lithium-ion batteries, that the company claims can extend battery lifespan, improve charging speeds, and increase vehicle range.

“The carbon molecule structures we’ve developed show real promise for faster charging and longer-lasting batteries,” said Woods during the announcement. “This is a revolutionary step change in battery performance.”

Synthetic graphite is already a critical ingredient in EV batteries, accounting for more than 90 per cent of commercial anode material. However, existing production methods are energy-intensive, supply chains are stretched, and natural graphite sourcing is geographically constrained, with over 60 per cent of global supply currently coming from China.

ExxonMobil says its new form of graphite is designed for consistency and high performance, and can be manufactured using carbon-rich feedstocks derived from existing refining processes. This means the company can use its current infrastructure to produce the material at scale, reducing reliance on mining operations and imported feedstocks.

From Oil Barrels to Battery Materials

The move into battery materials may seem like a departure from ExxonMobil’s traditional focus, but the company actually has quite a long-standing history in the battery space. For example, it co-invented the lithium-ion battery in the 1970s and developed the plastic separator films used in early rechargeable versions.

Now, with the acquisition of Superior Graphite’s US production assets and technology, ExxonMobil is laying the groundwork for a large-scale synthetic graphite business. According to the company’s blog, the acquisition will allow it to build a “robust, American-based supply chain” for synthetic graphite.

“We’re expanding into the advanced synthetic graphite business, and we’re doing it with a name that’s been in the game for over a century,” said the company in a September statement.

Who Could Use This Graphite, and Why Now?

The synthetic graphite is being trialled by multiple unnamed EV manufacturers, although details remain under wraps at present. Industry analysts say it could be especially valuable for high-performance EVs, commercial electric fleets, and energy storage systems (BESS) that require longer cycle lives and more stable charging patterns.

By 2030, demand for battery-grade graphite is projected to exceed 4 million metric tonnes annually (Benchmark Mineral Intelligence). With growing concerns about China’s dominance in graphite processing, Western governments and manufacturers are actively seeking alternative, scalable sources.

For EV makers, better anode materials could reduce the cost per kilowatt-hour of batteries, improve durability, and reduce consumer anxiety around battery degradation.

For consumers, the promise of longer-lasting, faster-charging batteries could mean fewer replacements, longer warranties, and better range per charge, which are all critical factors in encouraging wider EV adoption.

The Implications for ExxonMobil and Its Competitors

Although ExxonMobil has stated it does not intend to become a battery maker, the strategic move into anode materials positions it as a key supplier to one of the fastest-growing industries in the world. The company has said it expects to start commercial production of the graphite by 2029.

This puts ExxonMobil in direct competition with a range of players including Chinese graphite suppliers, Korean battery component firms, and materials companies like SGL Carbon and Syrah Resources. While some rivals focus on natural graphite mined in Africa or South America, ExxonMobil’s emphasis on synthetic production could appeal to buyers looking for stable, traceable, and lower-emissions supply chains.

It could also provide the company with a new source of revenue as demand for petrol and diesel continues to decline in line with electrification targets across Europe, the UK, and North America.

“This isn’t a step in; it’s a full-scale launch with power and purpose,” the company said. “When our product enters the market, we expect it will deliver faster charging and longer life than existing graphite materials today.”

Sustainability Claims Under Scrutiny

ExxonMobil argues that synthetic graphite offers significant sustainability benefits compared to traditional mining. For example, its internal estimates suggest the process could be less energy-intensive, more land-efficient, and have higher throughput than natural alternatives.

However, the environmental impact of producing synthetic graphite at scale remains a subject of debate. Critics point to the use of fossil-based feedstocks, the carbon footprint of high-temperature furnaces, and the lack of independent life cycle analysis to support the company’s claims.

Some experts have welcomed the technical breakthrough but say the environmental claims still need to be independently verified. While synthetic graphite can offer improved purity and performance compared to natural sources, producing it typically involves energy-intensive processes and high-temperature furnaces. Without a full lifecycle assessment, it’s unclear whether ExxonMobil’s version offers a lower carbon footprint overall.

Some environmental groups have also expressed concern that the announcement could serve as a reputational tool, allowing the company to appear aligned with energy transition goals while continuing high levels of oil and gas production. ExxonMobil has faced ongoing criticism over its lobbying record and past delays in embracing renewable energy.

Barriers and Uncertainties Ahead

Despite the positive headlines, several hurdles remain. For example, the synthetic graphite market is highly competitive, and pricing pressure from natural sources remains a factor. Regulatory alignment, especially for battery materials used in vehicles sold in the EU and UK, may require third-party certification and data disclosure.

ExxonMobil also acknowledged risks around market timing and tax incentives. In a recent comment about its hydrogen and ammonia plans, Woods warned that changing government policy could create uncertainty for long-term investment.

“We can’t do it on charity,” he said, referring to the limited duration of US tax credits under recent legislation.

Even so, the company appears to be betting that its scale, technical experience, and control of the supply chain will allow it to succeed where others have struggled.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

What happens next depends on how effectively ExxonMobil can scale up production and prove the performance gains it is promising. If the material lives up to expectations, it could give battery manufacturers and vehicle makers access to a more stable, domestic supply of high-performance anode material, especially in markets looking to reduce dependence on China. That includes the UK, where securing critical minerals and battery components has become a growing concern for both government and industry. A reliable source of synthetic graphite with lower volatility and consistent quality could support EV production, battery research, and even domestic energy storage projects.

For UK firms involved in automotive manufacturing, advanced materials, or clean energy systems, this may open up opportunities for new partnerships or supply arrangements, particularly if ExxonMobil’s product proves compatible with emerging battery chemistries. At the same time, UK businesses developing their own alternatives will likely face growing competition from larger, vertically integrated players able to produce materials at scale and integrate them into existing logistics and refining networks.

ExxonMobil’s move appears to signal that legacy energy companies are looking for viable routes into clean tech supply chains without abandoning their core expertise. Whether this is seen as genuine innovation or simply an extension of fossil-based operations will depend on the transparency of the data that follows. If the environmental claims can be substantiated and the product delivers on cost and performance, it may set a new standard for what synthetic graphite can do. If not, the gap between energy transition rhetoric and reality may widen even further.

Either way, the development adds some momentum to an increasingly strategic part of the EV supply chain. For governments, manufacturers, and consumers alike, a more competitive graphite market could bring welcome improvements in performance, pricing, and resilience. However, it will also bring new questions about sustainability, transparency, and where the true value in the battery industry really lies.

ChatGPT provides an extremely powerful way to study, get an interactive ‘mentor’ and improve your learning abilities in many other ways too. By leveraging the ‘Study Mode’, you can accelerate your training to the next level and best of all, it’s so easy to use.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, It may be best to download it first]

We’ve all done it — you’re working away, close a browser tab by mistake, and instantly regret it.

Good news: most browsers let you reopen it in seconds. On Windows, just press Ctrl + Shift + T; on a Mac, use Cmd + Shift + T. Your last closed tab will reappear, and you can repeat the shortcut to bring back several tabs.

Many browsers also keep a full history, so you can find a site later if needed. This simple trick avoids frustration and keeps you moving.

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.