The week in audio: Die Die DEI; Drama on 4: The Film; Good Hang with Amy Poehler; Confessions of a Female Founder and more

The Slow Newscast: Die Die DEI (Tortoise Media)Drama on 4: The Film (Radio 4) | BBC SoundsGood Hang with Amy Poehler (The Ringer)Confessions of a Female Founder with Meghan (Lemonada)Working Hard, Hardly Working (Grace Beverley) | Apple podcasts
The Slow Newscast is usually worth a listen. Take Die Die DEI, from the week before last. Queasy and pointed, it tackles the issue of the Trump administration's 'war on woke'. As soon as the orange man-baby got into office, his government started shutting down inclusion programmes, and corporate US followed. Why? It's not about saving money, or terminology-wrangling. It's far more deeply prejudiced.
Written and presented by Stephen Armstrong, the show focuses on one particular member of the Trump administration: the deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser, Stephen Miller. Described baldly by one contributor as 'a violently rightwing racist who is pushing a white nationalist agenda', he is far from a nice guy. But Armstrong is wise enough to tell Miller's story gradually. He was brought up in liberal, multiracial Santa Monica, California. Yet as a kid he dumps one of his friends by telling him exactly why he doesn't like him. 'Among that list of things,' recalls the friend, 'was my Latino heritage. That was one of the things that disqualified me from being his friend.'
We follow Miller through his college years, a controversial rape case (not his: he supported some lacrosse players who were falsely accused of sexual assault) and into the Senate. There, he uses the diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) approach against itself, telling white people that they are, in fact, victims. 'Hijacked victimhood' is what it's called: the idea that your lifestyle – your life – is put in a precarious position because other people are different from you. The way Miller plays it, it's a zero-sum game. You must triumph and 'they' – people not like you – must be vanquished.
Armstrong's script is excellent. I could quote from any part of the show, but he really hits his stride towards the end. 'Don't get distracted by absurdities. This administration is throwing out so many bouncing, multicoloured balls that it's almost impossible to focus on what's important. The trick is to watch Stephen Miller. When he says something, it matters… The truth is, his views haven't changed since he dumped his best friend for being Latino.'
There's something at once modern and classic about Armstrong's script, and I thought about this while listening to Drama on 4: The Film, a small gem of a radio play about a movie. Its subject is a true story. In 1945, Sidney Bernstein, a film-maker and producer, was given hundreds of hours of footage from the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Shot by British army crews for the Ministry of Information, the footage was basic but devastating, full of appalling, cruel, hellish murder. How to make this into a film that would both engage and expose the public to the horrors of the Holocaust? How to do justice to the suffering? Amazingly, Bernstein asked Alfred Hitchcock to help. And Hitch, initially reluctant, said yes.
Written by Martin Jameson, The Film is a Radio 4 drama of ye olde school: rather stagey, with theatrical speeches and performances. But it's also nicely paced, well acted, clear, moral. I found myself almost relieved that it exists. Not just because it's about the Holocaust, which should never be forgotten, but because it's an interesting real-life story that's a play, as opposed to an episode of a clever news podcast. Old-fashioned audio.
Here's an example of new-fashioned audio, and it's one that promises much. Amy Poehler, delightfully funny comedian and actor, has decided 'about four or five years too late' to give us a podcast. The pitch for Good Hang with Amy Poehler must have had producers drooling: Poehler simply scrolls her contacts list, calls up a famous mate and has a chat, avoiding anything controversial in favour of having a laugh.
Her first episode was with Tina Fey, who, being Tina Fey, took over and gave us insight (she works 12 hour days, plus 'homework' in the evening) and wit (she's worried about becoming one of those older Hollywood types who just 'tells it like it is'). But, God, it only takes a couple of episodes before we find ourselves riding on fumes. All is slapdash and self-congratulatory. An episode with actor Ike Barinholtz gives us almost nothing. There's a passing reference to him getting in an ecstasy mess in Amsterdam when he was younger, but we breeze past, and by the end of the show we know him no better. In every episode, Poehler enthuses so much about her guest – to their face! – that it feels performative. She laughs too much and for too long. Are these incredibly successful, creative, funny people so insecure that they need bolstering every other sentence? (Yes, clearly.)
In a similar vein, please welcome Meghan, Duchess of Sussex's latest podcast venture, Confessions of a Female Founder. Actually, don't bother, unless OMG-yes-sister-and-you-look-so-good-while-doing-it is your thing. Honestly, I think it's just how they talk over there. Their idea of a good hang, or a good podcast, is different from ours, and involves a lot less piss-taking.
Meghan's first show is with Whitney Wolfe Herd, founder of dating app Bumble, but, nope, we don't learn anything much, except about how Megs and Whits met (it was NYE and Wolfe Herd was wearing a rhinestone cowboy costume! The embarrassment!) and how supportive they are of each other.
If you want a decent podcast from a 28-year-old entrepreneur who's already built three companies and is generous with her business tips, then I recommend Grace Beverley's Working Hard, Hardly Working, now on episode 133. She also interrupts her guests too much to talk about her own life, but you get far more corporate insight and life practicality. The world, it seems, is full of these frantically perfectionist, success-obsessed, greige-swathed young women trying to get their life to work. I'd say relax, but they can't.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

NBC News

9 hours ago

• NBC News

Suspect arrested after GOP Rep. Max Miller says he was 'run off the road' by a man waving a Palestinian flag

CLEVELAND — Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, said he was 'run off the road' Thursday morning in a Cleveland suburb by a man who waved a Palestinian flag and threatened Miller and his young daughter. The incident, which comes amid acute concerns about a rise in political violence, is being investigated by the U.S. Capitol Police and by police in Rocky River, Ohio. A suspect, Feras S. Hamdan of Westlake, Ohio, turned himself in to Rocky River police after Miller signed a criminal complaint for aggravated menacing and an arrest warrant was issued, Rocky River officials said. Hamdan's attorney did not immediately respond to a message. 'I was just driving to work, and I was cut off by a man in a Tesla who held up a Palestinian flag to me, and then rolled down his window and said that 'I'm going to cut your throat and your daughter's,' Miller, who is Jewish, is heard saying on a 9111 call, audio of which the Rocky River Police Department released along with a statement Friday. 'And he said, 'You're a dirty Jew. I'm going to f---ing kill you all, and I know who you are and where you live.'' Miller, 36, told 911 dispatchers that he followed the man on Interstate 90 and rolled down his window to better hear what he was saying and to take note of his license plate number. 'I am a little shaken, to be quite honest,' Miller told a dispatcher in Lakewood, the neighboring suburb where Miller exited the interstate. 'I have a weapon on me. I'm glad I didn't use it.' During one stretch of Miller's 9111 call, a vehicle's horn can be heard honking — a detail that the dispatcher noted to police officials for their report. The police report also noted that while officers searched the interstate for a 'flag that may have been thrown out' of the suspect's car, no flag was located there. Julie Morron, operations manager for the Rocky River Police Department, said a flag has yet to be found but that the investigation is ongoing. Miller publicly commented on the incident Thursday in a video accompanying a social media post in which he expressed relief that his daughter, who is 1, was not in the car with him. A police report was not available to the public in the immediate hours after Thursday's incident, with officials waiting to gather more details before releasing documents Friday. Morron told NBC News on Thursday that Miller had been the alleged victim of a 'road rage incident' and 'could not wait to speak with officers' but agreed to later in the day. The suspect's car also had left the area by the time local officers responded, police said. In his video, Miller said that he had 'gone about my day' and 'carried on' with scheduled meetings. In a text message late Thursday, Miller wrote that he wanted to keep to his 'set schedule of meetings' to 'send a message' that his work would not be slowed by the incident. Miller was later interviewed by police in Rocky River, according to the department's statement. 'After further investigation, the second party to the road rage incident was identified' as Hamdan, the department said. Hamdan is awaiting a court appearance. Rocky River officials are investigating the incident, along with Capitol Police, the FBI, the Ohio State Highway Patrol, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Ohio, Rocky River police said. In a statement Friday, Capitol Police said the department immediately deployed special agents to the area to assist in the investigation and to locate Hamdan. 'In less than 24 hours, the USCP received notification of a threat against a Member of Congress, had boots on the ground, collaborated with the local police department, and the suspect in the case was arrested that same evening,' acting Capitol Police chief Sean Gallagher said the statement. 'This case is a prime example of the USCP's stance towards threats against our elected officials. We will continue to have a zero-tolerance policy.' The alleged incident occurred about 10 miles west of Cleveland and came less than a week after two Democratic state lawmakers were shot — one fatally — in what authorities have described as a politically motivated attack in Minnesota. 'If you have an issue with a legislator, your city councilman, your mayor, anyone like that, the appropriate thing to do is to reach out to them for a phone call, to set up a meeting at one of our district offices,' Miller said in his video. 'What is not OK is to assault anyone, whether you're a member of Congress or anybody else within our district, while you're driving to work.' House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., wrote in a social media post Thursday that the incident 'is yet another outrageous example of unhinged rhetoric inspiring unstable people to threaten and attack elected officials who are serving their communities.' Johnson added: 'We must turn down the temperature in this country.' House Democratic leaders also condemned the incident. 'We condemn in the strongest possible terms the attack on Congressman Max Miller and his family and are thankful they are safe,' House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, Democratic Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar of California said Thursday in a joint statement. 'The rise in political violence in this country is unacceptable. This is a moment of crisis that requires Congress to act decisively in order to ensure the safety of every single Member who serves in the People's House.'

Edinburgh Live

10 hours ago

• Edinburgh Live

Edinburgh Council to explore trial run of a four day workweek

Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Edinburgh Council is to explore running a trial of a four day work week on the back of a successful study in an English council. After a decision by city councillors on Thursday, council officers will study four day workweek trials in other parts of the country, and determine if and how a trial can be run in Edinburgh. They will also explore the state of recruitment, staff retention, productivity and health of council staff. Officers will present the report at a future meeting of the city's Finance and Resources Committee. Green councillor Claire Miller, who put forward the motion asking for a trial to be explored, said: 'When faced with the need for budget cuts every year, it's a joy to find a proposal which helps to save money while also being beneficial rather than detrimental. 'And the four day week is just that. The four day week is one where services remain as-is – there are no changes as far as residents are concerned, either in opening hours or what's provided – but our workers deliver in a reduced working week. 'Studies of four day weeks show that productivity remains the same, or in some cases even improves, when the number of hours worked is reduced down and a greater proportion of the week is given back to people for their other responsibilities, for rest and for leisure.' Cllr Miller's motion comes off the back of a 15-month four day week trial for some staff at South Cambridgeshire District Council, which found it offered significant benefits. An academic study of the trial found that it reduced turnover by 39% and saved the council over £300,000 in agency worker fees. Additionally, it found that a range of council services either saw no change or improvements in delivery. Further, less council staff were found to be going on benefits. However, not all councillors held firm support for the motion. Conservative councillor Chris Cowdy said: "At a time when our own council continues to face budgetary pressures, rising demand of core services and persistent performance issues, now may not be the time for a speculative experiment." It was found that some council staff were working second jobs in their time off – however, most reported to the local authority that they had been doing so since before the trial. A spokesperson for Edinburgh Council said: 'As approved by full council, a report will be brought to a future Finance and Resources Committee. "The report will examine this issue in more detail including reviewing evidence from other organisations.'

Daily Mirror

11 hours ago

• Daily Mirror

What happens next after historic assisted dying vote - 'not over yet'

MPs backed a landmark Bill that will allow assisted dying in England and Wales - but it still has to undergo scrutiny in the House of Lords, which could prove tricky MPs today backed historic legislation that will legalise assisted dying. A Bill put forward by Labour backbencher Kim Leadbeater narrowly passed through the Commons after an intense debate. But opponents say "this is not over" as there are still hurdles to overcome before it can become law. ‌ Ms Leadbeater's Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was supported by 314 MPs from across the political spectrum and opposed by 291. It was a huge victory for campaigners who have lobbied for decades to change the law and give terminally ill people control over how they die. ‌ Throughout the day the Commons heard passionate pleas from both sides of the argument. READ MORE: Terminally ill gran's heartbreaking message to MPs ahead of assisted dying vote What happens next? The Bill has passed its third reading, which means elected MPs support it. As is routine, it will now be sent to the House of Lords to scrutinise. Although the Lords is unelected, and there have long been calls to abolish it, it does have a crucial role in passing legislation. Peers will go through the Bill line-by-line and outline any parts they are unsure about. Members can table amendments, and if the House backs them these will be sent back to the Commons to have another look. So can they block the Bill? The main danger for supporters will be that the Bill runs out of time. The legislation will fall if it isn't completed in the current session of Parliament, which does give disgruntled peers the power to throw a spanner in the works. ‌ Sessions usually last a year, and the current one began last July after the general election. But there's no fixed rule, meaning it could still run for a few more months. The problem will come if there's a long back-and-forth - known as "ping pong" between the Lords and the Commons. The last time this happened was with Rishi Sunak's botched Safety of Rwanda Bill, which kept being sent back to MPs as peers tried to make changes. If the same happens again, the process could take several months. And a lot of MPs are expecting this - during today's debate there was a lot of talk of scrutiny in "the other place" - meaning the House of Lords. ‌ Baroness Finlay, a palliative care doctor who opposes the Bill, told the BBC: "Our role is not to rubber stamp whatever has happened in the Commons, particularly when we know that so many amendments put down in the Commons that would have improved the Bill have gone undebated." So is there still a fight to come? Potentially, depending on the mood of the Lords. It's not gone unnoticed that the majority this time around was lower than it was in November, when the legislation was last in the Commons. ‌ Lib Dem MP Tim Farron, an opponent of the Bill, posted: : "Wow! Majority slashed. At the risk of sounding like Jeremy Corbyn … we clearly won the argument there! With a tiny majority and growing opposition from expert groups, the Lords will now rightly feel that they have the right to disagree. To my pleasant surprise, this is not over!" Do Lords amendments have to go in the Bill? No. As we saw with the Rwanda Bill, peers can suggest changes to legislation, but it is the Commons that decides. If MPs think suggestions from the Lords are helpful, they can accept them. If they don't - as the Conservatives decided with the proposed changes on Rwanda - they can vote them down. ‌ So when will it actually become law? Once both Houses are satisfied, or when MPs throw out amendments by the Lords. As we saw under Mr Sunak, having a lot of unhappy peers does not have to stop legislation going through. Once it gets through the Lords it will receive Royal Assent, meaning it is on the statute books. ‌ When can the first assisted dying case happen? There are a number of safeguards put into the Bill to ensure this is not rushed. The Bill as it stands - although peers may try to push for changes - says it will take up to four years. This means it could be late 2029 by the time the first person is able to choose to end their lives this way. In each case there will be a panel of experts who will have to give their consent to each assisted death, along with doctors. This process will take time to set up, and it remains to be seen whether there are any big legal hurdles to overcome. But Ms Leadbeater has indicated that the four year timeframe is not a target but a "backstop" - meaning it could be sooner.