What tomorrow's Strawberry Moon means for your star sign - from exposing fake friendships for Taurus to forcing Cancer to confront negative patterns
Due to a phenomenon known as 'major lunar standstill', the final full moon of spring will be the closest it's been to the Earth since 2006 - and won't sit as low in the sky again for another 18 years.
The orange-tinted full moon of June will also appear much larger than usual because it's sat near the horizon, much to the delight of stargazers.
Each month's moon is given a special name, such as 'Wolf Moon' in January or the 'Snow Moon' in February.
The Strawberry Moon is so named because it is associated with the fruit's harvest season and it will rise at 10.46 BST on June 11.
According to Jessie Hutter, an astrology expert at dating website SoSyncd, this is a time to take stock of your life and plan for the future - while navigating open, honest conversations and trusting your instinct.
The full moon in Sagittarius encourages you to put plans into action and trust that you'll land on your feet, while clearing out any negative energies or blocks that might be holding you back.
Here's what it means for each star sign:
Aries
This full moon will supercharge your fiery spirit, making you feel more energised than you have in weeks.
You'll feel the urge to take action on things you've been putting off.
Whether it's starting that side hustle you've been thinking of for weeks or taking that trip, go all in and do what makes you happy.
Taurus
Now is the time to step outside your comfort zone and have those honest conversations you've been putting off, even if it feels a little risky.
Maybe you feel the need to confront that 'friend' who doesn't always have your best interests at heart.
You know your boundaries, so don't be afraid to trust your intuition and put yourself first.
Gemini
Dreaming big isn't an issue for you, but taking action can be.
With the full moon this week, it's a signal to turn those ideas into reality by focusing your energy and…committing!
This doesn't always come naturally to you, but choosing one path - and staying on it - could be the best thing for you right now.
Cancer
It's time to shake up those routines that are making you feel stuck.
Be honest with yourself and think about what habits and beliefs are holding you back.
Recognising these patterns is the first step toward creating the change you need to move forward.
Leo
This rare moon is making your natural confidence and charisma shine even brighter. You were born to be in the spotlight, so don't let anyone dim your light.
The time to be bold is now.
Virgo
It can be hard for Virgos to take a step back and see the bigger picture. But the Strawberry Moon is encouraging you to let go of perfection and focus on progress for now.
Sometimes, it can be exciting to see how things unfold without controlling every little detail.
Libra
Are you overthinking whether you should take that next step again? This could be the green light you've been waiting for.
Being bold doesn't mean people won't like you. But sometimes you need to shake things up to move forward in life.
Scorpio
Why hold onto financial worries or hidden money issues when this full moon is inviting you to break free?
Now's the perfect time to face those tough money talks you've been avoiding.
Your intense focus and determination give you the power to take control and make bold financial moves.
Sagittarius
Embracing freedom and being bold have never really been an issue for you. But recently you've been doubting your intuition and second-guessing your decisions.
Remember, your optimism and adventurous spirit are your greatest strengths, so lean into them.
Capricorn
Loosening your grip on control and embracing spontaneity wouldn't be a bad thing right now.
Taking a risk could open up new opportunities and lead to quicker results than you expect.
Aquarius
You've been thriving lately by trusting your unique vision and challenging the status quo.
Now's the time to keep that momentum going and think about how you can give back in a way that matters to you.
Your intuition has always been a powerful guide, especially when it comes to your career.
This full moon encourages you to trust your inner voice and take steps toward your professional goals.
Whether it's pitching that creative idea or applying for a new role, don't be afraid to dream big.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
22 minutes ago
- Times
Minister criticises BBC for ‘catastrophic failures' after Gaza report
The BBC News chief has apologised for failing to sufficiently scrutinise a documentary, as the culture secretary criticises a 'series of catastrophic failures' at the corporation. An internal review found the BBC breached editorial guidelines by failing to give audiences the 'critical information' that the narrator of Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone, Abdullah al-Yazouri, was the son of a Hamas minister. It found that the programme, which was pulled from iPlayer days after it aired in February, breached editorial guidelines on accuracy, but not impartiality. Three members of the film's production company, Hoyo Films, knew who the 13-year-old's father was at the time the programme aired but did not tell the BBC, which the review called a 'significant oversight'. Peter Johnston, the BBC's director of editorial complaints and reviews, found that the corporation 'bears some responsibility' as 'it has ultimate editorial responsibility for the programme as broadcast'. He ruled the BBC team was not 'sufficiently proactive' with initial editorial checks and there was a 'lack of critical oversight of unanswered or partially answered questions'. Ofcom said that it had examined the BBC report and would be investigating under its Broadcasting Code. An spokesman said: 'Having examined the BBC's findings, we are launching an investigation under our rule which states that factual programmes must not materially mislead the audience.' On Monday Deborah Turness, the BBC News chief executive, apologised for the error, which she said had been taken 'incredibly seriously' by the broadcaster. 'I'm sorry this happened. It was a mistake,' she said. 'At BBC News, we are fully accountable for everything that we publish and everything we broadcast, but we didn't run those questions to ground.' However, she blamed Hoyo Films for the error. 'The questions should have been answered by the independent production company at the many times of asking,' she said. Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, welcomed the acknowledgement by the BBC that there had been a 'series of catastrophic failures' over recent weeks, including its decision to broadcast punk duo Bob Vylan's Glastonbury performance which included chants of 'death, death to the IDF [Israel Defence Forces]'. 'Our national broadcaster is too important for its independence and impartiality to be called into question,' Nandy added. 'I am pleased that there has been progress over recent weeks but as the BBC itself has recognised, there is more that has to be done.' The BBC has said it would 'ensure accountability' and said it had no planned commissions with Hoyo Films. Tim Davie, the BBC's director-general, said: 'Peter Johnston's report identifies a significant failing in relation to accuracy in this documentary. I thank him for his thorough work and I am sorry for this failing. 'We will now take action on two fronts: fair, clear and appropriate actions to ensure proper accountability and the immediate implementation of steps to prevent such errors being repeated.' Johnston said that in hindsight the use of this child to narrate the film was 'not appropriate', but there was no evidence that Hamas or the boy's father influenced the film. He did not rule that the production company misled the corporation, but found that it bore most of the responsibility for the failure. The report detailed at least five occasions when the BBC asked Hoyo about 'background checks' on individuals. For example, on January 12, a month before the programme aired, an editorial policy adviser asked Hoyo: 'Has due diligence been done on those featured to ensure eg the lead boy doesn't have links in any way to [Hamas] — I'm sure it has but critics may raise something and I want to make sure we're completely sure.' The BBC said How To Survive A Warzone, which followed children as they lived through the Israeli siege of Gaza, could return to iPlayer as a series of edited, shorter films. Hoyo Films said: 'We take the findings extremely seriously and apologise for the mistake. Our team in Gaza risked their lives to document the devastating impact of war on children. Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone remains a vital account, and our contributors, who have no say in the conflict, deserve to have their voices heard.' The Campaign Against Antisemitism pressure group called for an independent investigation 'into bias in the BBC's Middle East coverage'. Its chief executive, Gideon Falter, said: 'If the BBC were an accountable organisation, senior executives would be scrambling to save their jobs. Instead, it's the usual weasel pledge to 'update some guidelines'.' He called for Davie's resignation, accusing him of steering the broadcaster 'from national treasure to national embarrassment'. In a note to staff sent on Monday, Turness said that the failings 'did not take away' from the division's wider achievements. Several staffers said that it felt 'tone deaf' in light of the conclusions. 'There have been repeated failures and apologies on getting it wrong on Israel coverage and it seems to always be one way,' said one. 'Deborah's email read like a 'aren't we brilliant, but here's one small failing'.' Katie Razzall, the BBC culture and media editor, said that 'eyebrows were raised' about how the film came to be broadcast having been classified as a 'high risk project' by bosses. Davie is preparing to meet the broadcaster's Jewish staff network on Wednesday. Responding to the review on Monday evening, Downing Street said the BBC must take 'swift action' to ensure 'such errors' are never repeated again. The prime minister's official spokesman said: 'The BBC must ensure that such errors are never repeated and the public rightly expect the highest standards from the BBC and the corporation must learn and take swift action from the report's findings.'
The Guardian
31 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Superman: identity crises, fascist space holograms and a super furry animal
James Gunn's Superman is a curious film: so earnest, so heartfelt, and so defiantly weird it sometimes feels less like a reboot of the world's most iconic superhero and more like an elaborate fan project. Most of us will be relieved we've said goodbye to the heavy metal space Jesus of the Zack Snyder years, and that Gunn has avoided paying too much retro cosplay tribute to the Christopher Reeve era. This is undeniably a Superman we've never seen before on the big screen: a Kal-El who's deeply human, flawed, and more likable for it. The new Man of Steel, played with boyish charm and the right amount of golden retriever energy by David Corenswet, spends most of the movie juggling black holes, battling clone siblings, and dealing with the looming realisation that his space dad might have been one bad day away from full-blown genocide. And yet there's always the sneaking suspicion he would break off from all this in a second if you asked him to fix your router and play Enya until your existential dread subsides. Here's a deep dive into the new movie's themes and revelations, as we all try to work out whether Gunn has reinvented the superhero film – or just lovingly detonated it. We're used to Superman being first on to the scene. In Richard Donner's 1978 classic, Kal-El was greeted with wonder and open-mouthed awe by a terrestrial population who had never seen anything like him. But in the new DCU, we learn that superheroes have been around on this version of Earth for centuries. Superman isn't even the first of his kind in the modern era, and this completely recolours how people see him – presumably because, across those decades, the whole 'metahuman' thing must have had as many PR disasters as miracle saves. Which brings us to the Justice Gang: Nathan Fillion's Green Lantern (Guy Gardner), Edi Gathegi's Mister Terrific, and Isabela Merced's Hawkgirl. We're never quite sure if they're supposed to be the good guys, or just government-licensed super-Narcs with branding. But their presence amplifies the sense that humanity has yet to get its collective head around these costumed anomalies. And who can blame them, when Gardner is a one-man HR complaint, Mister Terrific delivers every line like he's moderating his own Ted Talk, and Hawkgirl has all the enthusiasm of a substitute teacher on the last day of term? There's clearly a fair amount of suspicion around superheroes – a tension that's exploited by the villainous Luthor to portray Superman as a ticking alien timebomb in a cape. Did you buy the evil tech bro's raging hatred and distrust of the Man of Steel? This is one pillar of the Superman mythos that Gunn chose not to jettison, but I would have loved to know quite why Lex is so determined to take Kal-El down, especially when there are plenty of other metaheroes around to interrogate, sideline, or frame for an alien tech conspiracy of your own making. Is he just livid that Superman keeps saving people for free, completely devaluing the scalable, app-based rescue model Lex had soft-launched in beta? Does he secretly loathe the idea of a being who can fly, lift mountains and still doesn't own a single crypto wallet? Could it all boil down to the unbearable truth that Superman became Earth's most beloved figure without raising seed funding, writing a thought-leader thread, or launching a podcast? Much has been made of erstwhile TV Superman Dean Cain's horrified reaction to Gunn imagining the last son of Krypton as the ultimate immigrant hero (even though this has been part of the superhero's identity since at least 1938). But if this version of Luthor really is supposed to be a cipher for Maga views on alien invaders, isn't he a strange one? He's certainly too polished and corporate to convincingly stand in for a movement that would more likely have live-streamed that bit where they storm the Fortress of Solitude. It may still be year zero in the new DCU, but it's still a blessed relief that Gunn has avoided giving us portals to other dimensions, alternate timelines and cameos from moustachioed Supermen from Earth-47. This doesn't mean, however, that the comic-book weirdness hasn't been dialled up to 11, as we're still treated to a pocket universe, a dumb version of Supes who's controlled by Luthor with hi-tech drones and a manual for every single move ever seen in Mortal Kombat, and a guy (Metamorpho) who's capable of turning his own leg into Kryptonite in order to take down Kal-El. This is big, bonkers sci-fi, but it's refreshingly self-contained and also a rare thing: a superhero film more interested in identity than interdimensional travel. No collapsing timelines, no digital resurrections, and no mid-credits cameos from Nicolas Cage in a wireframe suit. Just one Superman, one moral crisis, and one very complicated crystal palace full of daddy issues. Which brings us to … Perhaps Gunn's bravest – and most controversial – move is to completely retcon the story of how Superman got to Earth in the first place. Rather than Jor-El and Lara lovingly placing the baby Kryptonian into a space capsule and sending him across the cosmos as a gift to humanity, it turns out they targeted our solar system so baby Supes could go full Zod the moment he grew up. Suddenly, this is the comic-book movie reimagined as a sci-fi identity crisis – built out of grief, clones, and orphan guilt, then dunked in a vat of Kryptonian tech and fired out of a narrative T-shirt cannon. Rather than a Superman who descends from the heavens in slow motion to save the world with a glinting kiss curl, he's more like a farm boy in the throes of an existential meltdown, awkwardly squeezing into his dad's super-suit while discovering that his entire origin story might be a lie. Worse still, he learns this in front of a watching world that's already crowned him as saviour, symbol, and all-purpose moral compass. In moments like these, it's as if Gunn has given us The Truman Show – if Truman could fly, shoot lasers, and was being emotionally micromanaged by a fascist space hologram. Is this the new DC big cheese making Superman's backstory more interesting? Or just seeing how many daddy issues he can cram into one cape? Superman's best friend is an absolute scene-stealer, a brilliant mix of emotional support animal and furry missile. If anyone's going to get a spin-off in this brave new DC world, it's surely the laser-eyed pooch who could probably take out Darkseid if you gave him a chew toy and pointed him in the right direction. Later on in the movie, we find out he actually belongs to Kal-El's cousin Kara Zor-El, played by Milly Alcock, after she turns up to engage in some sarky super-banter with Superman. Apparently Kara's not around a lot because she prefers partying on planets where she can actually get drunk. This is definitely not your dad's Supergirl. It's just one more element of Superman that made me think that, despite the tonal unevenness, the clone chaos and the occasional Kryptonian info-dump, I'm still genuinely intrigued to see where Gunn plans to take us next. Because even if it doesn't always fly straight, this is definitely a DC we've not seen before. What did you think? Is this the rebirth Superman needed – or just an interstellar therapy session with a cape and a dog?
The Independent
32 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ofcom to investigate after Gaza documentary breached BBC editorial guidelines
Ofcom has announced it will investigate the BBC's Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone documentary after a review found it had breached the corporation's editorial guidelines on accuracy. The regulator said it had examined the BBC report and would be investigating under its broadcasting code, which states that factual programmes 'must not materially mislead the audience'. An Ofcom spokesperson said: 'Having examined the BBC's findings, we are launching an investigation under our rule which states that factual programmes must not materially mislead the audience.' The programme was removed from BBC iPlayer in February after it emerged that the child narrator, Abdullah, is the son of Ayman Alyazouri, who has worked as Hamas's deputy minister of agriculture. The review, conducted by Peter Johnston, the director of editorial complaints and reviews, which is independent of BBC News, said the programme was in breach of accuracy for 'failing to disclose information about the child narrator's father's position within the Hamas-run government'. But the review found no other breaches of editorial guidelines, including breaches of impartiality, and also found no evidence that outside interests 'inappropriately impacted on the programme'. The report said that 'careful consideration of the requirements of due impartiality was undertaken in this project given the highly contested nature of the subject matter'. Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone, which also aired on BBC Two, was made for the BBC by independent production company Hoyo Films. The detail of the background information regarding the narrator's father is deemed as 'critical information', which the report said was not shared with the BBC before broadcast. The report found that Hoyo Films did not 'intentionally' mislead the BBC about the position of the narrator's father, but said the independent production company 'bears most responsibility for this failure'. However, it further added that the BBC also 'bears some responsibility'. The report detailed that at the time the programme first aired the information regarding the position of the narrator's father was known only by three members of the production company, 'but not anyone within the BBC'. It said: 'In light of this inequality of information and the opportunities that the production company had to bring this information to the BBC's attention, which it did not take, the production company is the party with most responsibility for this failure. 'However, I do not consider that the production company intentionally misled the BBC about the narrator's father's position. 'The production company has been consistently transparent that, notwithstanding their belief that the father's position was a civilian or technocratic one, as opposed to a political or military position in Hamas, they made a mistake and should have informed the BBC about it.' The narrator's scripted contribution to the programme also did not breach BBC standards on due impartiality, the report said, adding: 'I have also not seen or heard any evidence to support a suggestion that the narrator's father or family influenced the content of the programme in any way.' But the use of a child narrator for this programme was 'wrong', the report added. It explained that in this instance, the narrator 'was put in a position where his narration had to be highly scripted (meaning there was a limited portrayal of his background, story and life) and where he had to carry the rights-of-reply of others, in particular the IDF. 'In light of what the production company knew about the narrator's family and background, putting him forward as the voice of the programme as it was scripted was wrong in my view.' The BBC's director-general Tim Davie said: 'Peter Johnston's report identifies a significant failing in relation to accuracy in this documentary. I thank him for his thorough work and I am sorry for this failing. 'We will now take action on two fronts – fair, clear and appropriate actions to ensure proper accountability and the immediate implementation of steps to prevent such errors being repeated.' The BBC Board said: 'We thank Peter Johnston for his work. His report is a comprehensive examination of a complex programme, the production of which spanned many months from concept through to broadcast – and is critical in laying bare the facts of what happened. 'Nothing is more important than trust and transparency in our journalism. We welcome the actions the executive are taking to avoid this failing being repeated in the future.' Hoyo Films said in a statement that they take the report findings 'extremely seriously' and 'apologise for the mistake that resulted in a breach of the (BBC) editorial guidelines'. They added: 'We are pleased that the report found that there was no evidence of inappropriate influence on the content of the documentary from any third party. 'We appreciate the rigorous nature of this investigation, and its findings that Hoyo Films did not intentionally mislead the BBC, that there were no other breaches of the editorial guidelines in the programme, and that there was no evidence to suggest that the programme funds were spent other than for reasonable, production-related purposes. 'Hoyo Films welcomes the report's recommendations and hope they will improve processes and prevent similar problems in the future. 'We are working closely with the BBC to see if we can find an appropriate way to bring back to iPlayer the stories of those featured in the programme. 'Our team in Gaza risked their lives to document the devastating impact of war on children. 'Gaza: How To Survive A Warzone remains a vital account, and our contributors – who have no say in the conflict – deserve to have their voices heard.' It comes as it was announced that Mr Davie and BBC chairman Samir Shah will face questions from MPs over the documentary, the investigation into allegations of misconduct made against Gregg Wallace, and its Glastonbury Festival coverage of Bob Vylan and Kneecap. The pair will appear before the Culture, Media and Sport Committee on September 9.
