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 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
11 hours ago
- New Statesman
The revenge of the left
Photo byTwo-front wars seldom have happy endings for the combatant in the middle. But Keir Starmer's beleaguered government is now fighting one, following the announcement of the impending arrival of the Corbyn-Sultana party on the left. The emerging, and as yet unnamed new force, secured more than 245,000 sign-ups within twenty-four hours of the announcement by the two former Labour MPs, one of them Starmer's immediate predecessor as Labour leader. As this is being written supporters are registering at 200 a minute, with forty donations a minute too. All polls which have given it as an option register the party making an impact, and one put it level-pegging with Labour. Early days, only polls etc. But it should be clear that Reform UK is now not the only insurgent force that Downing Street chief strategist Morgan McSweeney needs to worry about. Indeed, it is likely that the Corbyn-Sultana party (CSP here on in) will prove more attractive to more Labour voters than the Farageists, very few of whom will ever switch to Starmer according to polling evidence. 'The electorate has twice given its verdict on a Jeremy Corbyn led party' was the only response from a Labour source to the news. OK, let's go there. The Corbyn-led Labour party polled three million more votes in 2017 than Starmer's party managed last year. Indeed, Starmer's Labour even undershot, in vote numbers, the more miserable haul Corbyn Labour secured in 2019. So the electorate may not exactly be where Downing Street imagines it is. One thing is certain – Starmer's five years as Labour leader, and year in government, have opened up enormous space to the party's left. The birth of CSP has been a long time coming. The meandering road to this week's announcement can be traced back to the hundreds of thousands of people who joined Corbyn's Labour, often engaging in politics for the first time, and have since quit. Long marginalised, socialism was back within the Overton Window of the politically-conceivable. The fuse was then lit by Starmer's suspension of Corbyn from Labour in October 2020, and his subsequent exclusion as a Labour candidate. Corbyn himself was long sceptical about the merits of a left-of-Labour electoral challenge, and could point to the wreckage of previous such initiatives – Socialist Labour, Respect, Left Unity and on and on – in his support. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe The game-changer was Gaza and the enormous movement of solidarity with the Palestinian people which developed after October 2023. That movement turned much of its anger against Labour, then in opposition, because of Starmer's blundering endorsement of Israeli war crimes in an LBC radio interview, a position it took him nine days to walk back. British Muslim opinion in particular proved to be irreconcilable, and Labour parted company with one of its staunchest voting blocs. Four independents were elected as MPs alongside Corbyn last year, above all on the Palestine issue. That is more than the aggregate of MPs elected to the left of Labour in all general elections since the second world war. The general election outcome also showed that Labour, beneath its puffed-up first-past-the-post Commons majority, is far more vulnerable to challenge than at any other time since its emergence as a governing force in the aftermath of World War One. The Party won over forty per cent of the vote, whether winning or losing, in all eight elections up to and including 1970. It has reached that benchmark just three times in fourteen elections since – twice under Blair (charisma) and once under Corbyn (authenticity). Its electorate is fragmenting in all directions. We can be sure it will not see forty per cent, or likely even thirty, again under Starmer. After a year in office, its polling is underwater, with resistance to the economic and social strategy of Rachel Reeves joining Gaza as a recruiting sergeant for the left. Now the CSP could be Britain's second biggest party in terms of membership by the end of the weekend. Its main asset at this stage is not just the sense that its two leaders say what they mean and mean what they say – it is enthusiasm. Reform may be cornering the market in anger, channelling the hyper-ventilating tabloid/GB News agenda, itself fuelled by decades of complacent establishment support for capitalist globalisation. But anger isn't the only emotion available. Hope and excitement get a look-in too. Where was the political enthusiasm in the generally enervating election campaign last year? Such as I came across was in a church hall in Chingford where Faiza Shaheen launched her independent campaign having been shamefully axed as Labour candidate on McSweeney's orders after the election had been called; on the streets of neighbouring Ilford North as charismatic British-Palestinian woman Leanne Mohamad came within a few hundred votes of ending Wes Streeting's political career, and in a garden in Bristol where Green canvassers massed to send their co-Leader Carla Denyer to Westminster. In Islington North too, of course, where a national mobilisation of the left helped return Corbyn for an eleventh term as their local MP, despite both Peter Mandelson and Paul Mason putting in appearances to try to get Labour over the line. Enthusiasm is not really the Prime Minister's thing, and to be fair he has never pretended otherwise. But he did promise 'Corbynism with competence' – the nod to his predecessor's policy agenda has long been discarded, and the last year has shredded whatever reputation he had for the latter. Nevertheless, the Corbyn years at Labour's helm have shown the limitations of enthusiasm alone. Can the CSP defy history and make a lasting impact? One pre-requisite for doing so must be reaching some form of electoral agreement with the Green Party, themselves presently choosing a new leader, with Zack Polanski's campaign drawing significant 'Corbynista' support. It is clear that in competition the two parties will simply eat each others' votes to a significant extent. United, it is easy to see seats tumbling to a red-green alliance all over the country. The Greens could sweep Bristol, the CSP half of Birmingham. Together, they could defeat Labour almost everywhere in east London. Bye bye, Health Secretary. Moreover, such an alliance would mark the birth of a five-party politics across England, and six-party in Scotland and Wales. Given the prevailing rules, that could see MPs being elected on thirty per cent of their constituency vote in many seats. At that point, predicting the outcome in a particular constituency becomes a lottery. In every seat there could be three or more possible winners. So the non-Labour left could be a significant force in the next House of Commons. But that is very far from certain. Several things could go wrong. One, entirely in the new party's own hands, is that the perennial habit of left-wing Pythonesque factionalism and splits could manifest. It is an open secret that Corbyn was surprised by the decision of the committee then organising the new party to vote for a co-leadership arrangement between him and Sultana, and even more by her subsequent public announcement of it. Nor is it news that Corbyn's own leadership style has its detractors. Unity has been restored – Corbyn and Sultana get on well together and are almost perfectly complementary in every personal characteristic and quality. But there are certainly different perspectives on how the new party should be organised, as well as its political strategy. Its promised founding conference will bear a heavy load. Then there is the possibility that Labour could shoot the CSP fox by actually addressing left-wing concerns. For a moment, after the U-turn on the welfare benefit cuts under backbench pressure, it had seemed that might be possible. The suspension of four MPs from the parliamentary whip punctured that bubble tout suite. The authoritarianism of the Starmer leadership, directed exclusively against the left, looks like remaining its hallmark. Number Ten is determined to foreclose any possibility of a revival of the left within Labour. Previous regimes within the party, of the left or far more often the right, always allowed the other wing of the party to hope for a turn of the wheel in the future. That is not the McSweeney way, and it is certainly one factor powering recruits to the CSP. Securing the support of more Labour MPs and official trade union backing for the CSP will be challenging in the short-term. But if the new party looks popular and properly-run a couple of years down the line, and the government continues on its dismal way, that could very well change. The government is imprisoned both by its commitments – to the electorate, to the City, to Trump – and its prejudices. It hopes that the possibility of Lee Anderson as Home Secretary will drive voters back into its arms in 2029. It also recycles the arguments I and others used in 2019 when pressing against a commitment to hold a second referendum on EU membership – Labour can lose votes to the Liberal Democrats and Greens in many areas without endangering seats. The margin for error in the 'red wall' is next to non-existent. So it proved. But does the argument hold true today? Labour's strategists claim that in 2024 they consciously allowed for a fall in support in safe big city seats in order to make gains where they were needed, in the red wall inter alia. This plan only half-worked at the time. The metropolitan support indeed dropped – in Starmer's Camden constituency he lost half his personal vote, something little remarked on since – but there was no return to voting Labour in seats which had been its traditional strongholds. It elected MPs entirely because of a split in the right. Today, those urban strongholds are not so strong. The day after Sultana's initial announcement that she was quitting Labour I spoke at a Palestine demonstration in Kentish Town, the heart of Starmer's own seat. Every mention of her and the 2024 independent challenger against the Labour leader, Andrew Feinstein, was cheered to the echo. Downing Street will have to listen. Andrew Murray is political correspondent of the Morning Star, a former advisor to Jeremy Corbyn and the author of The Fall and Rise of the British Left and Is Socialism Possible in Britain – Reflections on the Corbyn Years (both Verso). Related
The Independent
17 hours ago
- The Independent
Ghislaine Maxwell given ‘limited immunity' in meetings with deputy attorney general: reports
Ghislaine Maxwell was granted a form of limited immunity to talk during her meetings with Department of Justice officials, according to reports. The British socialite and former ex-girlfriend of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, met with Deputy U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche on multiple occasions this week. The so-called proffer immunity is commonly granted to those that prosecutors are seeking cooperation from in a criminal case. Maxwell was tried, convicted and sentenced in 2022 for sex trafficking underage girls. Such an agreement allowed Maxwell to answer questions from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche – which her attorneys claimed she did fully – sources close to the matter told ABC. Her responses to those questions would not be able to be used against her at a later stage, the sources added.
Daily Mail
17 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Nancy Pelosi's bizarre rambling during speech to Gen Z sparks 'intoxication' claims
Nancy Pelosi 's speech to young liberals Friday baffled onlookers as she had to stop and start a rambling address. The former Speaker of the House, 85, has made viral moments for the wrong reasons this year, snapping at a reporter for asking if she'd run for a 20th term and using a walker to get around the floor of the Capitol. Addressing Gen Z activists at the Voters of Tomorrow summit in Washington, Pelosi attempted to diagnose problems she saw regarding income inequality. 'We've moved to shareholder capitalists, where the CEO of the company is making like 300 or 400 times what the workers are making. It would take some of the workers a lifetime to make... a lifetime to make what the CEO makes in one year,' she said as she gestured using her finger. 'We have important work to do about fairness and all the rest of that. How could that be okay? Even CEOs have complained about that, that's not what capitalism is supposed to be about.' She got sidetracked in trying to figure out how many years a worker would take to earn what a CEO does, saying you'd 'have to go back to before the Revolution... to make what the boss makes.' 'This is unfair, it's unjust, it's undemocratic, it's wrong, it's shameful and it must be shamed. And we are going to... that's our fight, to cancel the cuts,' she said, referring to Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' 'But with a reason... and also listening, to how you see what the priorities should be for the future.' Pelosi tried to end: 'I'll just, again, close by saying... and I mean it this time... I'm from Baltimore, I felt when I was going here that I was going back to Baltimore. Any Marylanders here? Any Californians here?' She then cited the Star-Spangled Banner being written in Baltimore before naming a favorite line from it as she ended the talk. Social media - particularly conservatives - pounced at the speech. 'WTF? What's wrong with Nancy Pelosi, is she intoxicated? Gibberish and more gibberish! I don't think the audience can even understand what she is saying. One of the premier faces of the Democrat Party,' wrote Eric Daugherty. Another took on the content of Pelosi's speech: 'What about the hundreds of millions SHE has made trading stocks of those companies based on insider information?' One compared the address to a fellow California politician's speech patterns: 'She drank Kamala's lemonade.' Another succinctly demanded: 'Term limits.' Pelosi, 84, suffered a fall last December in Europe and underwent hip replacement surgery. 🚨 WTF? What's wrong with Nancy Pelosi, is she intoxicated? Gibberish and more gibberish! I don't think the audience can even understand what she is saying. One of the premier faces of the Democrat Party. — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) July 25, 2025 Many branded Congress a 'nursing home' after Pelosi was pictured using her walking frame to get around the floor a month later. Heading into the 2025 session, the average age of Congress members is 79 days older than last session, at 58.9 years old. While the image of Pelosi has sparked criticism, she is not the oldest serving member of Congress. Delegate to the House Eleanor Norton holds that title at 88 years old. Hal Rogers is also 87, while Maxine Waters is 86, while Steny Hoyer is 85. Republican congresswoman Kay Granger was recently found in a dementia care facility after she vanished from work. A bombshell report in December revealed the 82-year-old Texas Representative, who hadn't cast a vote in the six months prior, was discovered at a memory care facility after reportedly being found wandering lost and confused through her neighborhood, according to an investigation by the Dallas Express. Granger, who wound up a nearly 30-year career in the House in January, was reportedly living in the $4,000-a-month nursing home for the previous six months. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, 82, has also faced intense scrutiny after several concerning public episodes where he appeared to freeze mid-sentence. To serve in the House, a member must be at least 25 years old, while the age restriction is set at older than 30 in the Senate. The retirement age in the United States is 65. Pelosi was an outspoken advocate in 2023 of Supreme Court term limits, arguing that they would help hold the powerful justices 'to account.' She has represented San Francisco in Congress for 37 years.
