Podcast appearances and mentions of megan garber

We talk to Megan Garber of The Atlantic about the new era of scamming, what it means for our society, and the status of reality television. TOPICS DISCUSSEDThe New Era of Scamming with Megan Garber Outside of Politics: Reality TelevisionVisit our website for complete show notes and episode resources. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Humanity's transition to life online is disorienting, but perhaps not without comparison. According to the researcher danah boyd, people faced similar challenges in the transition to city life, meaning that the history of urbanization can offer lessons for humankind's more recent mass digital migration. And if the rules and ways of cities have become clearer over the years, maybe there's hope that the same can be said for life online. Boyd's work is the focus of a recent episode of The Atlantic's podcast How to Know What's Real, with co-hosts Megan Garber and Andrea Valdez. This week, Radio Atlantic is showcasing that episode, with an introduction by host Hanna Rosin. Listen and subscribe to How to Know What's Real at any of these links:  Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | Pocket Casts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Games can serve as an escape from reality—but they can also shape our understanding of trust, collaboration, and what might be possible IRL. Megan Garber talks with C. Thi Nguyen, an associate philosophy professor at the University of Utah, to better understand how games can help us safely explore our current reality and shape new realities, too. Write to us at howtopodcast@theatlantic.com.  Music by Forever Sunset (“Spring Dance”), baegel (“Cyber Wham”), Etienne Roussel (“Twilight”), Dip Diet (“Sidelined”), Ben Elson (“Darkwave”), and Rob Smierciak (“Whistle Jazz”). How to Know What's Real is produced by Natalie Brennan. Our editors are Claudine Ebeid and Jocelyn Frank. Fact-check by Ena Alvarado. Our engineer is Rob Smierciak. The executive producer of audio is Claudine Ebeid, and the managing editor of audio is Andrea Valdez. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With smartphones in our pockets and doorbell cameras cheaply available, our relationship with video as a form of proof is evolving. We often say “pics or it didn't happen!”—but meanwhile, there's been a rise in problematic imaging including deepfakes and surveillance systems, which often reinforce embedded gender and racial biases. So what is really being revealed with increased documentation of our lives? And what's lost when privacy is diminished?  In this episode of How to Know What's Real, staff writer Megan Garber speaks with Deborah Raji, a Mozilla fellow, whose work is focused on algorithmic auditing and evaluation. In the past, Raji worked closely with the Algorithmic Justice League initiative to highlight bias in deployed AI products. Write to us at howtopodcast@theatlantic.com.  Music by Forever Sunset (“Spring Dance”), baegel (“Cyber Wham”), Etienne Roussel (“Twilight”), Dip Diet (“Sidelined”), Ben Elson (“Darkwave”), and Rob Smierciak (“Whistle Jazz”). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We often talk about the need to resist instant certainty, and how it contributes to bad outcomes and fake fights and false choices. In the digital age, living this principle is ever more important, and we are incentivized against this in every possible way. We need to be the ones who are vigilant and master our own minds. What are some ways we can do this? Megan Garber from The Atlantic talks with Boyd on Inside Sources.  

What is “real life,” now that the internet and AI are integrated into so much that we do? In the new season of The Atlantic's popular How To series, co-hosts Megan Garber and Andrea Valdez explore deepfakes, illusions, and misinformation, and how to make sense of where things are really happening. How to Know What's Real examines how technology has altered our sense of connectedness and how to determine what is authentic and true. Write to us at howtopodcast@theatlantic.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The past few years have seen a remarkable rise in the quality and quantity of deepfakes. Rob and Jackie discussed the rise of deepfakes with Ryan Long, Vice-Chairman of the California Lawyers Association, Licensing and Technology Transactions Group, Intellectual Property Section, and explored how to harness this technology responsibly while preventing abuse.MentionedHenry A Kissinger, Eric Schmidt and Daniel Huttenlocher. The Age of AI: And Our Human Future, (Little, Brown and Company, 2021).Megan Garber, “The Man Who Saved the World by Doing Absolutely Nothing,” (The Atlantic, September 2013).RelatedDaniel Castro, “Joe Biden Did Not Approve This Fake Message,” (ITIF, March 2024).Daniel Castro, “Blame Lawmakers, Not AI, for Failing to Prevent the Fake Explicit Images of Taylor Swift,” (ITIF, January 2024).

Megan Garber, staff writer at The Atlantic joins Stephen to discuss society's constant need for entertainment, and how she feels it has blurred the line between fiction and reality—on television, in American politics, and in our everyday lives.

Megan Garber, staff writer at the Atlantic, joins Offline to explain how we're already living in the Metaverse––not with headsets and legless avatars, but via a continuous stream of immersive entertainment. Jon and Megan discuss how our internet jargon, scandal-to-miniseries pipeline, and former reality TV president all reflect a blurring of fact and fiction. And they ask: when everything becomes entertainment, what remains of our reality? For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email transcripts@crooked.com and include the name of the podcast.

QUOTES FOR REFLECTION“Truth is so obscure in these times, and falsehood so established, that, unless we love the truth, we cannot know it.”~Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), French mathematician and philosopher “Each invitation to be entertained reinforces an impulse: to seek diversion whenever possible, to avoid tedium at all costs….  By the mid-20th century, the historian Warren Susman argued, a great shift was taking place. American values had traditionally emphasized a collection of qualities we might shorthand as ‘character': honesty, diligence, an abiding sense of duty. The rise of mass media changed those terms, Susman wrote. In the media-savvy and consumption-oriented society that Americans were building, people came to value—and therefore demand—what Susman called ‘personality': charm, likability, the talent to entertain. ‘The social role demanded of all in the new Culture of Personality was that of a performer,' Susman wrote. ‘Every American was to become a performing self.'”~Megan Garber in The Atlantic, “We've Lost the Plot” (March 2023) “Truth is true for all people in all places and times. It's also something you can't invent, think up, or create. It is something you discover. It doesn't change, no matter how much people's beliefs about it do. Truth isn't altered because of how it makes someone feel. Truth is entirely unaffected by the tone and attitude of the person professing it. A lie is still a lie even when communicated with humor and just the right amount of whimsy.”~Alisa Childers, singer, songwriter, and author “When, as a new Christian, I was introduced to the typical nature in which some Christians speak of their lives in the loveliest terms, I refused to give in to the convenient misery of being ambiguous about the truth. If the truth is what sets us free, then why not walk in it at all times? With wisdom and love, of course, but also with the reality that truth is where freedom begins.”~Jackie Hill Perry, poet, writer, and hip-hop artist “Before we can begin to see the cross as something done for us, we have to see it as something done by us.”~John Stott (1921-2011), English clergyman and theologianSERMON PASSAGE John 18:28-40 (ESV)28 Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor's headquarters. It was early morning. They themselves did not enter the governor's headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover. 29 So Pilate went outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” 30 They answered him, “If this man were not doing evil, we would not have delivered him over to you.” 31 Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.” The Jews said to him, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” 32 This was to fulfill the word that Jesus had spoken to show by what kind of death he was going to die.33 So Pilate entered his headquarters again and called Jesus and said to him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” 34 Jesus answered, “Do you say this of your own accord, or did others say it to you about me?” 35 Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?” 36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” 37 Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” 38 Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” After he had said this, he went back outside to the Jews and told them, “I find no guilt in him. 39 But you have a custom that I should release one man for you at the Passover. So do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?” 40 They cried out again, “Not this man, but Barabbas!” Now Barabbas was a robber.

Sarah and Beth discuss how technology is changing our lives and politics with Megan Garber from The Atlantic and sit with the horror of Tyre Nichols' murder in Memphis, TN.TOPICS DISCUSSEDPolice Killing of Tyre Nichols"We're Already in the Metaverse" with Megan GarberOutside Politics: Sarah's Robert Burns DinnerUPCOMING EVENTS:Maryville College Witherspoon Lecture Series: February 7, 2023 at 7pm.Sarah and Beth live at the Abbey in Orlando for The Politics of the Happiest Place on Earth: Wed. April 5, 2023 at 7 pmPlease visit our website for full show notes and episode resources. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Social media can act as a sounding board for issues in American politics, and it can also add to those problems. Megan Garber, staff writer at The Atlantic, joins host Krys Boyd to discuss the media landscape that has brought us to this divided point in American history, and how our desire to be constantly entertained feeds into the cycle. Her Atlantic Editions book is “On Misdirection: Magic, Mayhem, American Politics.”

By Walt HickeyWelcome to the Numlock Sunday edition.This week, I spoke to Megan Garber who wrote the new essay collection On Misdirection: Magic, Mayhem, American Politics from The Atlantic. Megan is a writer at The Atlantic, and the magazine has compiled a number of her essays into the new book. It's a great read, an exploration into the ways that American political actors have parlayed the techniques of entertainment to their own ends. Today, we talked about amusing ourselves to death, what happens to a country when politics becomes entertainment, and Dwight Schrute. Megan can be found at The Atlantic and the book, as well as several other new compilations of essays from the magazine, is available wherever books are sold. This interview has been condensed and edited. Megan Garber, thank you so much for joining us.Thanks for having me.You have a new book, it's a collection of a lot of your essays at The Atlantic, it's called On Misdirection. What prompted you to figure out this beat and tease out that you were covering misdirection over the past couple years?A lot of the things that have really interested me about politics and political discourse, let's say, over the past few years are the ways that we are trained to see each other and then also to not see each other. It seems like so many things, so many of the big political stories, particularly at the beginning of the presidency of Donald Trump, and then up till now, so much has come down to are we seeing what we should be seeing, or are we in fact looking away from what we should be seeing?Ideas about vision is actually one of the main drivers of all of these essays, which are very different other than that. I'm a political junkie, I love to follow politics and all of that, but I kept feeling for myself just as a news consumer, "Is this really the most important thing right now?" All these shiny distractions, daily outrages that come and go, and I know I myself, as a news consumer, often feel very addled, almost, and just in a constant state of distraction.So these essays really do try to figure out what happens to that form of distraction on a mass scale. If I'm not the only one feeling this, but if a lot of people are feeling this, what are the consequences of that?I loved how also you kept it in some of the more conventional forms of media as well, too. I know that a lot of our conversation about distraction has been related to social media and algorithms and kind of blamed on Silicon Valley ghosts that are destroying our brains.But a lot of what you talk about is just super day to day. It's the way people talk about other people, whether it's on television or radio or things like that. Do you want to expand on how it's not just necessarily what we're doing online?The first essay, actually, is a look-back at the scholar Neil Postman, who's one of my favorite thinkers, critics, et cetera. He wrote a book called Amusing Ourselves to Death in 1985 that was looking at the impact of television, essentially, on American culture. And as you might guess from the title, making an argument that the entertainment has slipped the bonds of mere fun and mere escapism and distraction and has actually come into our lives and come to infiltrate lives in a lot of ways.Looking at him in retrospect is the first essay in the collection. We chose that specifically because I think one of the other arguments underlining a lot that's in the book is that entertainment, as much as I love it, and I am an inveterate lover of entertainment of all kinds, but it can, I think, also become fairly pernicious when it becomes our standard of judging things in the political realm.One example that's in another essay in there is the first impeachment trial of Donald Trump. The talking points, it seemed to me, among Trump's allies had nothing to do with the facts at hand. This was a legal proceeding, conducted by lawyers, by Meta lawyers, in fact, in Congress. Yet the arguments were nothing to do with the facts, but "this is boring." That was essentially what it came down to. "Ugh, snooze, ugh, no one's watching this." All that kind of stuff.When again, this was an impeachment trial of a president, there were facts at play, and yet the talking points completely elided that. What struck me as well, though, was it was not just partisan talking points. One news organization had an entire op-ed about the impeachment trial, sort of complaining that it lacked pizazz. Pizazz was literally the word that was used.I think there's this way that if we're not careful, the sort of logic of entertainment itself, this idea that everything has to be fun, that boring is its own kind of factual argument, that's what can happen. That was what Neil Postman was talking about.That, I think, is what's happening right now, too, where just entertainment becomes the only thing that matters at the end of the day. That can become, I think, pretty quickly dangerous and bad for us as a culture.That was a really remarkable argument in the book. Again, I'm a huge fan of pop culture. I like being entertained, but it just felt weird how so much of the language and the desire of pop culture was being adapted and weaved into politics. You mentioned obviously Trump, and rallies, and the impeachment, but you had an example in there about Pete Buttigieg after the Iowa Caucus that I thought was really potent where it's just, the question isn't like, "Did we win?" It's like, "Aren't we having so much fun?"Exactly right, and the Iowa Caucus is as famous and infamous for not having an immediate result. Very quickly, things went awry in a quite extreme manner there. Exactly what you said, Pete Buttigieg put out a talk saying, "We have shocked the nation," claiming victory even though no such victory had been claimed. Just like you said, this idea that shock is even part of the conversation, that shock is a value on its own, I think just speaks to the way that fun and high emotional stakes of everything are infiltrating, I think, our rhetoric and logic as a culture.I think also just we talk a lot about overheated rhetoric. Just everything is heated, and everything is ratcheting up at all times, and I think one of the extensions of the ratcheting is that we as news consumers and as citizens just become accustomed to evermore levels of drama, of outrage, of everything. We're sort of losing the ability, I think, to have a moderate anything in our conversations. Everything is just bigger, dramatic jazz hands.So, we may as well get to some of the heart of this. There's obviously a guy who comes up a couple times in your book who is very good at this, bit of a controversial figure, but you just keep on coming back to him, I think, for reasons that are clear.What draws you to Dwight Schrute?I will say, during the early days of the pandemic, I've always been a fan of the show The Office, and I went back to it as a comfort watch, a soothing watch in these really awful days. I was newly familiar with The Office.For anyone who might not be familiar, The Office is a U.S. sitcom, but it focuses on a very small office in Scranton, Pennsylvania. There is a boss, Michael Scott, who is kind of an oaf in a lot of ways. And then one of the other characters in the show is, yes, Dwight Schrute, who I've always been fascinated by, because he's this amazing contradiction, this walking category error.He is a beet farmer, but he has these authoritarian tendencies. I'm trying to think of how to describe Dwight. He's just a lot of things at once. I think one of the things that's so interesting about him is that he is this person who very much thinks that he knows better than everyone else what the rules are, that he can decide the rules for himself and then, importantly, inflict them on other people.So, Dwight thinks he is basically the ultimate agent of law enforcement, literally and otherwise, in the office. In fact, again and again is a physical danger to his colleagues. Just that tension in Dwight felt very resonant to me, as you say, for other political figures and power players as well. I wanted to look at Dwight as almost a character and a trope who conveys so much about the people in political power, often, who make up their own rules and then enforce them and inflict them on everyone else.This idea of, "We're doing it because I said so," and that's the only explanation you're going to get, and these lies that just, everyone just lies without any real sense of backlash or anything. And a lot of that, to me, seemed to be conveyed in Dwight.There's an appeal to him. You can understand, in a democracy where appeal is a key component of accessing power, that despite the obvious flaws in his leadership capabilities for a large duration, you can see how a guy like that just might appeal to a large group of people. I guess we can now broaden it out a bit, how do you think that applies to American society as a whole?A lot of the supporters of the fellow we've been talking about, poll after poll suggests that they feel a sense of encroachment. They feel like they used to be de facto at the top of American society and feel like now they are being pushed down a bit. I think there's a lot of indignation there and a lot of wanting to feel a little bit reassured that, "No, you still do have power. You still do. You can still say for everyone else, as you have throughout history."I think there's something about Dwight definitely that sort of conveys that idea. Donald Trump, very famously and infamously, promised, "I alone can fix it," with 'it' being fill in the blank. There's something in that message, there's something very reassuring to people who feel very caught in a tumult and who feel very unsettled and everything. So much is in flux right now and I think to just have that sort of authoritarian presence who can just say, "Trust me, I've got this. I can make the world make sense again," I think there's something very appealing just about that message.Then, of course, there's a question of how true that is, how politically problematic that is, et cetera. But in terms of rhetoric, I think that's very powerful. There's the adjunct to that message, which is if Donald Trump can say what's what, if he can look at an orange and say it's an apple, and just by force of will have the orange in some sense become an apple, I think there's also a silent message to people that they might have that same agency. They can still be the ones who decide. There's a very powerful message in that.You had a line toward the end of that essay, I think, that was just resolving Dwight's arc. You wrote this I think in October 2020, which was a fascinating time for a lot of people. You basically wrote that "his arc as an agent of chaos is simply not sustainable." Toward the end of it, he domesticates a little bit just because that's what folks want. I guess, how do you see that potentially applying beyond strictly the American television program The Office?One of the things that's so interesting to me about The Office itself is that you could see, or at least when I was rewatching it, what really struck me as a writer — not a writer of sitcoms, but a writer in general — I could see the type of arc that they were trying to give different characters. Just like you said, Dwight, after a while, a character like that can't simply stay an agent of chaos. There has to be some kind of evolution and some kind of arc to the character, or else it just gets too repetitive.Something about the arcs, I think, is very revealing because I think to the Neil Postman point, in the very broad sense, Americans are being conditioned to understand the world in roughly the same way as a sitcom understands the world, which is a character like Dwight needs, the arc needs, the evolution needs a bit of catharsis at the end.A lot of us are now coming to see the world itself in those terms, where we expect our political stories, we expect our real stories of everyday life to also have some tidy conclusions, to also mimic the flow of a TV show and a sitcom.That's one thing I would say, there is this logic of sitcom built into things, and I think that's what can make so many of the problems we have, which are so big and intractable — climate change would be one I would point to — that really resists a Schrutean narrative arc.It makes it sometimes hard for us to talk about. I would also say that The Office's writers recognized how deeply viewers — and I would also then say citizens and people and news consumers — how desperately we crave a catharsis at the end, in whatever form that might look like. Catharsis is a very important idea, both in sitcom writing and in the broader world.I like that idea. I do want to talk to you a little bit about the arc of your book, which was really, really great. It's a collection of essays, and I imagine that the order in which you present them, there was a lot of thought that went into that. You kick it off very much talking about irony and satire and how they're having a good moment, you talk a little bit about the Science March. I'll let you take it from there a little bit.But in the end, you also finish on the idea that "if you brand yourself an entertainer and not a journalist, you can spread falsehoods in the name of fun." You start off in a place where people are having fun for, one might think, deliberate and somewhat positive-facing means. And then in the end, that can get co-opted in a manner. Do you want to maybe talk about some of that?Sure, and thank you, that's such a good observation, totally.The book begins in this essay about Neil Postman looking at the March for Science, which it was put on in the same general time that the Women's March was happening, that people were trying to find ways to protest against the new presidency. This was a march that was very self-consciously designed to support science, facts, et cetera. I did not attend myself, but I was looking through Instagram afterward and looking at all the photos, and that's the way of the modern march, is to have your march, which happens in person, translate to Instagram, translate to memes.One of the things that you're supposed to do, really, as a good attender of these marches is to come up with a costume that will go viral, perhaps. I mean, there were some really good jokes, they were great, they were great costumes, great signs, all that stuff. But I just kept thinking, what now? Speaking of catharsis, is this enough catharsis for people? Is this going to feel like, okay, well we did this, so what else can we do? That's enough. We've had our catharsis, we've made our point?I don't mean to suggest that everyone involved just stopped at the march, but I do think that sometimes when this becomes our mode of political expression, there is a little bit of a, "Okay, but how are we going to actually defend science in real life? How are we going to defend women's rights in real life?" I worry sometimes that just the fun itself and the act of togetherness and all of that can be its own catharsis, and then not actually translate to additional action in the real world.That's a real, good point. I do want to stay here, because I know that we're on a roll, but it is interesting because the Science March, it seemed a very fun vibe. Everybody picked their favorite XKCD, it was a good time.Then if you were to compare that, as you just did, to the Women's March, which was not distinctly as much of a good time, one of those movements had a little bit more staying power, one might say.That's totally right. I want to also be clear that I think the fun elements of things can be great. Throughout American history, fun has been an important means of political expression. People sometimes forget the book Common Sense, the Thomas Paine track that at some level really did help to foment the revolution, not only was it passionately argued and this very compelling piece of rhetoric, it was also just really funny. It was a work of entertainment. People would read it aloud to each other around the fire, and it had that level of making politics fun.That is a really important element of politics, to make people feel engaged. But then I think for me the question is: To what extent does the fun encourage us? To what extent does it activate us? To what extent does it bring us together in community, or to what extent does it sort of alienate us from the reality of politics and condition us to see, again, everything as entertainment? In which case the fun isn't the means, but the fun is the end, essentially.Do you want to talk a little bit about how you close the book? I know you talk a little bit about Tucker, but you also talk a little bit about basically how everybody's having fun now.It's not just a technique used by those out of power to somewhat mock and undermine those in power, it's also used to enforce it a little bit, too.Speaking of Tucker Carlson, he famously in a legal case, his lawyer argued on his behalf that he is not a journalist, he is an entertainer and therefore can say anything he wants to say, and that argument won, that argument held sway.I think again and again, rhetoric that I would see as propaganda that really is designed to make certain Americans think that other Americans are less American and in some sense less human, that's a big part of the rhetoric going on in that show. It comes across, it is presented as entertainment. It's presented as, "Ah, we're just asking questions." Like, "Oh, it's not that big of a deal."There's a real minimization of rhetoric that I find to be very dangerous and frankly scary. We see that idea again and again. One of the subsidiary ideas that I tried to consider in these essays is, "What does propaganda actually look like?" Because at least for me, when I hear that word, I think of Soviet billboards and I think of the mid-century and very sort of overt, direct, "You should believe this."And now propaganda has taken on this much more insidious form where it's the same types of messages, it's the same attempt to win hearts and minds over to a cause, whatever the cause may be. But the propaganda itself is not overt; instead it is very buried in just messages that look like fun, that look like just entertainment. That is a really scary development because it means the propaganda can have even more power than it might otherwise to affect the way people see the world.Again, I really enjoy your work. I'm so happy that it's been compiled into this, On Misdirection.I have recently, and then for a little bit of a while, I have had increasingly complicated feelings toward The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I was a teenager during the Bush administration, and that was very much, I think, something that was formative for me.But I think it's impossible to look at what came after and what that flowed into, even Tucker directly, somewhat, through that somewhat fateful Crossfire interview. I think it's impossible to look back at the past 15 years and not see the fingerprints of that on a lot of different political movements that are not necessarily what it was originally going for.Yeah, that's such a good point. I would say, too, I mean, I think The Daily Show in my mind is a little bit of a piece of a broader collapse, almost. The Daily Show is very much a response to the rise of just reality TV in general. I would argue that the whole point of that genre is to collapse the real and the fake into one thing and be entirely unclear about where the reality ends and the fiction begins.The Daily Show is very much an extension of that. Around the same time, you've had just so many other cultural works in that space where the whole point is just to poke fun at the idea that you can even distinguish between fact and fiction. That, to be clear, that is not propaganda on its own, but I would also say that this idea that fact and fiction on some level can't be extricated from each other, that is a very foundational argument of any propaganda.I think we're starting in the '90s with reality TV, to some extent with social media as well. Where are the people on social media, are they people at all or are they characters in a show? It can be very hard to tell. We've been on this path since at least the '90s, possibly before, where just everything blurs together, and the fact looks like fiction, the serious stuff looks like entertainment, the entertainment looks like serious stuff, and everything is just in this blurry, chaotic mess.Again, you mentioned the Science March, but I went to the Rally to Restore Sanity when I was 20. The fun vibes of that, "We're all in this together." But, like, that was also the thing in D.C. from January 5th to 7th, 2021. I love in your book just how you went through all the different ways that this is manifesting.Thank you so much. Speaking of the order, we were going for that arc, so I appreciate that that was really clear, because it really does feel like one of those sort of paths that you can see in retrospect. And at the time, it's hard to know what's exactly happening, but now even just 10 years later, five years later, things become much more clear.  And then, too, at the end of the book, the final essay is about how endings themselves, the sense of things will come to a satisfying conclusion, that that alone, that logic — which is so much a product, I think, of movies and TV shows and all of that — how that logic alone can be really pernicious for people, because most things will not have an ending.Most things are fluid, news stories are fluid. Yes, there are some beginnings and some endings, but usually they're going to defy that in some way. I think as Americans, we are so conditioned to expect the catharsis, expect either the happy ending or the dramatic one. I think the arc of the past few decades really shows how connected everything is and how hard it is to distinguish the beginning of one thing and the end of the other.I've got to say, I almost wonder if it's systemic in the States. The thing that I envy the most about parliamentary systems is that inevitably, the country's leader, "the protagonist," will leave in shame. They will lose eventually. And you will have a conclusion to the end of the Winston Churchill arc of the United Kingdom. We don't have that. Barack Obama's still around, Donald Trump's still around. I wonder how much that's systemic.No, that's such a good point. I will admit this is a little bit extreme of me, but I actually do think it's true; you look in pop culture right now and what do we have but sequel, after sequel, after sequel? The highest grossing movies of 2022 were all sequels. We have this idea of the end of endings, essentially. And it's not just in politics, it's sort of everywhere.On the one hand, we crave the endings and expect the endings, but on the other hand, we live in a culture where nothing necessarily ends. The sitcom, however many years later, will get its almost inevitable reboot. Thanos will clap his hands, and that will all be undone. I won't say anything else for anyone who hasn't seen, but there is this sense, I think, that even the ending is not necessarily an ending. There can be resurrections and all of that stuff. Like you said, the presidency never ends, it just sort of takes its final form.Do you think that maybe that's going to get people a little bit more comfortable living in that ambiguity of things never necessarily ending?It might. It very much might, but then I also think that that desire for the ending is just so baked into our culture that I think it will be more of a tension becoming more comfortable with the flux.Well, you have teed this up perfectly because I would like to end this podcast. Megan, thank you so much for coming on.Thank you.This was such a great conversation. Why don't you tell folks where they can find the book, a little bit about it and where folks can find you?The book is called On Misdirection: Magic, Mayhem, American Politics. It's really just a look at ways of seeing in politics, and the ways that we have of not seeing in politics; how we look at each other, and then fail to look at each other; how our vision is often misdirected by the magicians in power in politics. You can buy the book, as far as I know, wherever books are sold. I know I have a big preference for IndieBound. I love that site, but everywhere books are sold.Great. I know some of your colleagues are coming out with other ones of these aggregations of essays.If I could share those, please, that would be great, too. We have Lenika Cruz, my colleague, writing on BTS. She is, I would say, one of the foremost experts on BTS and fandom and it's a lovely book, really. It actually made me very emotional reading it; it's wonderful.Past and future guest of this particular newsletter, Lenika Cruz.Oh, you're going to have so much fun. That's great. Then the other one is my friend and colleague, Sophie Gilbert, writing on womanhood and her experiences with womanhood, a feminist examination of pop culture and so much else, and that, too, is beautifully written. It's wonderful. So both of those books are excellent, excellent.Excellent. All right. Well, hey Megan, thanks so much for coming on. I really appreciate it.Oh, thank you. This is so nice to talk.Well, we'll see if we can reboot it next year.Yeah, inevitably, yes.If you have anything you'd like to see in this Sunday special, shoot me an email. Comment below! Thanks for reading, and thanks so much for supporting Numlock.Thank you so much for becoming a paid subscriber! Send links to me on Twitter at @WaltHickey or email me with numbers, tips or feedback at walt@numlock.news.  Get full access to Numlock News at www.numlock.com/subscribe

Welcome back to PARTISAN, a podcast exploring politics and history in film and entertainment. Join your host, Tony Black, as he is joined by co-host of the Affable Chat podcast, Affable Joey, to discuss Barry Levinson's 1997 political satire, WAG THE DOG... NOTE: this episode was recorded not long in advance of the tragic passing of Anne Heche, therefore she is referenced without that context. RIP. Next time on Partisan, guest Trevor Gumbel joins us to discuss Martin Scorsese's debut 1967 picture, WHO'S THAT KNOCKING AT MY DOOR? Host / Editor / Producer Tony Black Guest Affable Joey SHOW NOTES Interviews: Dustin Hoffman for Film Scouts: http://www.filmscouts.com/scripts/interview.cfm?File=dus-hof Barry Levinson for Hollywood Reporter: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/wag-dog-director-barry-levinson-sees-trump-era-comparisons-q-a-993067/amp/ Mark Knopfler interview: https://www.amarkintime.org/forum/index.php?topic=6230.0 Documentary with interviews in two parts: https://youtu.be/h5CwVqlVyYM https://youtu.be/8p5-qWsi0Kk Analysis: Watching Wag the Dog in 2020 Is Almost Comforting by Joshua Keating: https://slate.com/culture/2020/01/wag-the-dog-revisited-iran-trump-movie.html Too Bad ‘Wag the Dog' Isn't Fiction; Or, What It's Like to Live in 2020 by Cassandra Luca: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/11/30/wag-the-dog-retrospective/ Wag the Dog: A Study on Film and Reality in the Digital Age by Eleftheria Thanouli: https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/29691/1000254.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Barry Levinson's 'Wag the Dog' Was Prophetic at the Wrong Time by Liam Gaughan: https://collider.com/barry-levinson-wag-the-dog-prophetic-wrong-time/ Wag the Dog: The Cynical Movie Americans Deserve by Megan Garber: https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2016/10/wag-the-dog-the-cynical-movie-americans-deserve/622981/ Like our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/partisanpod Follow us on Twitter: @partisanpod Support the We Made This podcast network on Patreon: www.patreon.com/wemadethis We Made This on Twitter: @we_madethis wemadethisnetwork.com Title music: Progressive Progress (c) Howard Harper-Barnes via epidemicsound.com

Welcome back to PARTISAN, a podcast exploring politics and history in film and entertainment.Join your host, Tony Black, as he is joined by co-host of the Affable Chat podcast, Affable Joey, to discuss Barry Levinson's 1997 political satire, WAG THE DOG...NOTE: this episode was recorded not long in advance of the tragic passing of Anne Heche, therefore she is referenced without that context. RIP.Next time on Partisan, guest Trevor Gumbel joins us to discuss Martin Scorsese's debut 1967 picture, WHO'S THAT KNOCKING AT MY DOOR?Host / Editor / ProducerTony BlackGuestAffable JoeySHOW NOTESInterviews:Dustin Hoffman for Film Scouts: http://www.filmscouts.com/scripts/interview.cfm?File=dus-hofBarry Levinson for Hollywood Reporter: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/wag-dog-director-barry-levinson-sees-trump-era-comparisons-q-a-993067/amp/Mark Knopfler interview: https://www.amarkintime.org/forum/index.php?topic=6230.0Documentary with interviews in two parts:https://youtu.be/h5CwVqlVyYMhttps://youtu.be/8p5-qWsi0KkAnalysis:Watching Wag the Dog in 2020 Is Almost Comforting by Joshua Keating: https://slate.com/culture/2020/01/wag-the-dog-revisited-iran-trump-movie.htmlToo Bad ‘Wag the Dog' Isn't Fiction; Or, What It's Like to Live in 2020 by Cassandra Luca: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/11/30/wag-the-dog-retrospective/Wag the Dog: A Study on Film and Reality in the Digital Age by Eleftheria Thanouli: https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/29691/1000254.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=yBarry Levinson's 'Wag the Dog' Was Prophetic at the Wrong Time by Liam Gaughan: https://collider.com/barry-levinson-wag-the-dog-prophetic-wrong-time/Wag the Dog: The Cynical Movie Americans Deserve by Megan Garber: https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2016/10/wag-the-dog-the-cynical-movie-americans-deserve/622981/Like our Facebook page:https://www.facebook.com/partisanpodFollow us on Twitter:@partisanpodSupport the We Made This podcast network on Patreon:www.patreon.com/wemadethisWe Made This on Twitter: @we_madethiswemadethisnetwork.comTitle music: Progressive Progress (c) Howard Harper-Barnes via epidemicsound.com

Top Gun: Maverick is out soon! But can any movie with fast planes, Tom Cruise, and beach volleyball truly compare to the classic fighter pilot movie about, as writer Shirley Li puts it, "cute boys calling each other cute names"? Find out with Shirley, Megan Garber, and David Sims, and explore the moral (but fictional) simplicity of an earlier era: the Cold War 80s. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In a possibly-soon-to-be-post-Roe v Wade world, our hosts Sophie Gilbert, Megan Garber, and Hannah Giorgis thought it'd be worth re-examining the Judd Apatow/Seth Rogan comedy "Knocked Up," to discuss the way the movie treats women's bodily autonomy, angry reactions from men, and abortion. Megan also wrote recently on what it says that the movie simply edits direct mention of abortion out — and what that portended for the future of Roe, even fifteen years ago. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From Theranos to WeWork to the socialite grifter Anna Delvey, television these days is all about the art of the scam. Why are we so fascinated with the rise-and-fall stories of swindlers? What do these shows reveal about American culture at this moment?  And with many of these shows following female scammers through the “Lean In” / girlboss 2010's in particular, what should audiences make of that brief era of feminism today? Sophie Gilbert, Megan Garber, and Shirley Li attempt their best Elizabeth Holmes impressions as they discuss the Hulu series The Dropout and the other scammer shows airing now.  Further reading: The Comedies That Understand What Peak Scammer TV Does Not Netflix's Inventing Anna Writes a Check It Can't Cash The Mueller Report, Theranos, 'Billions': American Scams Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Emily and David are joined by guest host Juliette Kayyem to discuss the arming of Ukraine, how to prepare for the next pandemic or catastrophe, and daylight savings time debates. Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Megan Garber for The Atlantic: “The Grim Stagecraft of Zelensky's Selfie Videos” Atul Gawande for The New Yorker: “Costa Ricans Live Longer Than We Do. What's the Secret?” The Devil Never Sleeps: Learning to Live in an Age of Disasters, by Juliette Kayyem Here's this week's chatter: David: Nina Siegal for The New York Times: “She Discovered What Happened to 400 Dutch Jews Who Disappeared” Emily: Paul Blest for Vice: “Josh Hawley Accused Biden's SCOTUS Pick of Being Soft on Child Porn”; Emily Bazelon for The New York Times: “The Price of a Stolen Childhood” Juliette: Maria Cramer for The New York Times: “A Year After Suez Blockage, Another Evergreen Ship Is Mired in the Chesapeake” Listener chatter from Jonas Barciauskas: This Land podcast   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment Juliette, Emily and David talk about what they think about when they want to increase their happiness.   Tweet us your questions and chatters @SlateGabfest or email us at gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.) Podcast production by Jocelyn Frank. Research and show notes by Bridgette Dunlap. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Emily and David are joined by guest host Juliette Kayyem to discuss the arming of Ukraine, how to prepare for the next pandemic or catastrophe, and daylight savings time debates. Here are some notes and references from this week's show: Megan Garber for The Atlantic: “The Grim Stagecraft of Zelensky's Selfie Videos” Atul Gawande for The New Yorker: “Costa Ricans Live Longer Than We Do. What's the Secret?” The Devil Never Sleeps: Learning to Live in an Age of Disasters, by Juliette Kayyem Here's this week's chatter: David: Nina Siegal for The New York Times: “She Discovered What Happened to 400 Dutch Jews Who Disappeared” Emily: Paul Blest for Vice: “Josh Hawley Accused Biden's SCOTUS Pick of Being Soft on Child Porn”; Emily Bazelon for The New York Times: “The Price of a Stolen Childhood” Juliette: Maria Cramer for The New York Times: “A Year After Suez Blockage, Another Evergreen Ship Is Mired in the Chesapeake” Listener chatter from Jonas Barciauskas: This Land podcast   For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment Juliette, Emily and David talk about what they think about when they want to increase their happiness.   Tweet us your questions and chatters @SlateGabfest or email us at gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.) Podcast production by Jocelyn Frank. Research and show notes by Bridgette Dunlap. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Attempts to summarize the Showtime series Yellowjackets often lean on creaky comparisons: A female Lord of the Flies? A 90's Stranger Things? Teen Lost, but in Canada?  In any case, the coming-of-age horror story is as addictive as it is perceptive. The show follows a championship-bound girls soccer team that crashes in the wilderness in 1996, threading their story with that of the surviving members as adults in 2021. Yellowjackets takes the life-or-death feeling of high-school to its furthest extreme, with the pilot episode teasing a cannibalistic cult that the girls become after nineteen months in the wilderness. Episodes have kept viewers rapt and spawned dozens of theories about the show's many mysteries: Who are the ‘pit girl' and the ‘antler queen?' Who's blackmailing the adult Yellowjackets? What does the cult's strange symbol mean? And Is Christina Ricci's Misty the best character on television? Shirley Li, Megan Garber, and Lenika Cruz break down the first season. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Comfort watches are a mainstay of the pandemic—old television and movies one can revisit over and over again. And for a few writers on The Atlantic's culture team, that go-to watch has been the 1990s sitcom Frasier. Megan Garber, Sophie Gilbert, and Spencer Kornhaber debate why, despite its problems, Frasier holds up remarkably well (especially compared to more cringe-inducing contemporary shows like Friends and Seinfeld). What exactly explains its enduring appeal? Frasier is a show whose tastes are very much of its time. (See: Niles Crane's lapels.) But in a uniquely ‘90s end-of-history kind of way, the sitcom wrings its comedy from class tension while also existing in a strangely post-partisan world.  That lack of politics can seem like fantasy to a viewer in 2022, but its treatment of identity is fantastical as well. Frasier is a comedy about class that elides race and, often, sexuality. (Is this a show for—or even about—gay men?) The trio breaks down the legacy of the sitcom today, shares favorite moments, and debates whether Frasier is the worst or best character on his own show. Further reading: Megan Garber: Frasier Has Always Had a Maris Problem Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Let’s face it – we dress down every day RN. Our entire work wardrobe is yoga pants and t-shirts. But the idea of dress-down Friday can become a mindfulness exercise! Try these tips when you’re putting on your comfy fahhshion today, cause Casual Friday isn’t about what you wear, it’s all about how you feel. LINKS ‘Casual Friday and the “'End of the Office Dress Code”' Megan Garber for The Atlantic . ‘Smiling can trick your brain into happiness — and boost your health’ from NBC News. Follow The Space on Instagram @thespace_podcast. Follow Nova Podcasts on Instagram @novapodcastsofficial. CREDITS Host: Casey Donovan @caseydonovan88.Writer: Amy Molloy @amymolloy.Executive Producer: Elise Cooper.Editor: Adrian Walton. Listen to more great podcasts at novapodcasts.com.au.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Succession's Season 3 finale opens with a family session of Monopoly, a game that offers the perfect summary of the show: Players fight to be the last one standing—trading advantages and risking jail—going around the board over and over without a clear end in sight. But with the season's exhilarating ending, has the game of Succession finally changed? So far, each season has followed a different Roy sibling as likely successor: first Kendall, then Shiv, and now Roman. With that third season now over, how does Roman's time as the Number One Boy stack up? And with Kendall as the show's bloody beating heart, is every season fundamentally about him?  Sophie Gilbert, Hannah Giorgis, and Megan Garber discuss Tom, Shiv, and all the players in the Game of Roys. They also answer which Succession character they'd want to be stuck on a desert island with. (Note: the correct answer is Greg, the only one tall enough to reach the coconuts.) Further reading:  Megan on The Bodily Horrors of Succession Sophie's finale review: A Perfect—And Cyclical—Succession Finale Sophie's season 3 preview: The Best Show on TV Is Stuck The New Yorker profile: On “Succession,” Jeremy Strong Doesn't Get the Joke Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

David Sims, Megan Garber, and Sophie Gilbert examine the unlikely success that is Ted Lasso, and ask what the show's much-discussed second season has to say about the merits (and the limits) of American optimism. Visit theatlantic.com/thereview for more about the show. And check out Megan's pieces on Ted Lasso and on how comedy is reckoning with American decline. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Are you a fan of Friends ? The megahit show just had its long-awaited cast reunion. In a piece for the Atlantic, Megan Garber writes that the special treats the nostalgia of the original series as "a kind of absolution." She says, " Friends , after all, has not just failed to age well; it showed its failings even when it was young. Its jokes are sometimes homophobic; its plots are occasionally cruel; its cast, and its world, are almost entirely white. The show is popular, and it is, as a separate proposition, beloved. But the affection tends to come with an asterisk. Many other series have similar problems, and use their versions of a reunion or reboot to acknowledge that the world has moved forward around them. The Friends version, instead, goes out of its way to change the subject." This hour, we talk about the original series, the reunion, and how to evaluate a show like Friends both now and in the context of its time. Our guests: Irene Kannyo , freelance writer and editor who

Karl Rove served as Senior Advisor to President George W. Bush from 2000–2007 and Deputy Chief of Staff from 2004–2007. At the White House he oversaw the Offices of Strategic Initiatives, Political Affairs, Public Liaison, and Intergovernmental Affairs and was Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, coordinating the White House policy-making process.Karl has been described by respected author and columnist Michael Barone in U.S. News & World Report as “…unique…no Presidential appointee has ever had such a strong influence on politics and policy, and none is likely to do so again anytime soon.” Washington Post columnist David Broder has called Karl a master political strategist whose “game has always been long term…and he plays it with an intensity and attention to detail that few can match.” Fred Barnes, executive editor of The Weekly Standard, has called Karl “the greatest political mind of his generation and probably of any generation. He knows history, understands the moods of the public, and is a visionary on matters of public policy.”Before Karl became known as “The Architect” of President Bush’s 2000 and 2004 campaigns, he was president of Karl Rove + Company, an Austin-based public affairs firm that worked for Republican candidates, non-partisan causes, and non-profit groups. His clients included over 75 Republican U.S. Senate, Congressional, and gubernatorial candidates in 24 states, as well as the Moderate Party of Sweden.As a Fox News contributor, Karl provides a “genuine feel of inside knowledge,” says David Zurawik, Baltimore Sun television critic. Megan Garber, of the Columbia Journalism Review, says Karl has “focused his punditry on what he knows best: strategy.” Even the New York Times acclaims that “Rove’s substantive contributions may now inspire a little work ethic among the celebrity talking heads who may be forced to bring to the news a little more data and a little less opinion, a recalibration that would be welcome to its devoted viewers.”Karl writes a weekly op-ed for the Wall Street Journal and is the author of the New York Times Bestseller, "Courage and Consequence: My Life as a Conservative in the Fight." He has written for various publications, including The Daily Beast, Financial Times, Forbes, FoxNews.com, HumanEvents.com, Newsweek, The Times, Washington Post, and The Weekly Standard.A Colorado native, he attended the University of Utah, the University of Maryland-College Park, George Mason University, and the University of Texas at Austin.Karl has taught graduate students at UT Austin’s Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs and undergraduates in a joint appointment from the Journalism and Government departments at the university. He was also a faculty member at the Salzburg Seminar.He was previously a member of the Board of International Broadcasting, which oversaw the operations of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, and served on the White House Fellows regional selection panel. He was also a member of the Boards of Regents at Texas Women's University and East Texas State University.Karl now serves on the University of Texas Chancellor’s Council Executive Committee and on the Board of Trustees for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation and the Texas State History Museum Foundation. He is a member of the McDonald Observatory Board of Visitors and the Texas Philosophical Society. He was inducted into the Scandinavian-American Hall of Fame in 2009 and the American Association of Political Consultants Hall of Fame in 2012.

In 1938, Italian physicist Ettore Majorana vanished after taking a sudden sea journey. At first it was feared that he'd ended his life, but the perplexing circumstances left the truth uncertain. In today's show we'll review the facts of Majorana's disappearance, its meaning for physics, and a surprising modern postscript. We'll also dither over pronunciation and puzzle over why it will take three days to catch a murderer. Intro: By design, no building in Washington, D.C., is taller than the Washington Monument. The Vienna Vegetable Orchestra plays instruments made of fresh vegetables. Sources for our feature on Ettore Majorana: Erasmo Recami, The Majorana Case: Letters, Documents, Testimonies, 2019. Salvatore Esposito, Ettore Majorana: Unveiled Genius and Endless Mysteries, 2017. Salvatore Esposito, The Physics of Ettore Majorana, 2015. Salvatore Esposito et al., eds., Ettore Majorana: Notes on Theoretical Physics, 2013. Salvatore Esposito, Erasmo Recami, and Alwyn Van der Merwe, eds., Ettore Majorana: Unpublished Research Notes on Theoretical Physics, 2008. Francesco Guerra and Nadia Robotti, "Biographical Notes on Ettore Majorana," in Luisa Cifarelli, ed., Scientific Papers of Ettore Majorana, 2020. Mark Buchanan, "In Search of Majorana," Nature Physics 11:3 (March 2015), 206. Michael Brooks, "The Vanishing Particle Physicist," New Statesman 143:5233 (Oct. 24, 2014), 18-19. Francesco Guerra and Nadia Robotti, "The Disappearance and Death of Ettore Majorana," Physics in Perspective 15:2 (June 2013), 160-177. Salvatore Esposito, "The Disappearance of Ettore Majorana: An Analytic Examination," Contemporary Physics 51:3 (2010), 193-209. Ennio Arimondo, Charles W. Clark, and William C. Martin, "Colloquium: Ettore Majorana and the Birth of Autoionization," Reviews of Modern Physics 82:3 (2010), 1947. Graham Farmelo, "A Brilliant Darkness: The Extraordinary Life and Mysterious Disappearance of Ettore Majorana, the Troubled Genius of the Nuclear Age," Times Higher Education, Feb. 18, 2010. Frank Close, "Physics Mystery Peppered With Profanity," Nature 463:7277 (Jan. 7, 2010), 33. Joseph Francese, "Leonardo Sciascia and The Disappearance of Majorana," Journal of Modern Italian Studies 15:5 (2010), 715-733. Frank Wilczek, "Majorana Returns," Nature Physics 5:9 (2009), 614-618. Barry R. Holstein, "The Mysterious Disappearance of Ettore Majorana," Journal of Physics: Conference Series 173, Carolina International Symposium on Neutrino Physics, May 15–17, 2008. Joseph Farrell, "The Ethics of Science: Leonardo Sciascia and the Majorana Case," Modern Language Review 102:4 (October 2007), 1021-1034. Zeeya Merali, "The Man Who Was Both Alive and Dead," New Scientist 191:2563 (Aug. 5, 2006), 15. Erasmo Recami, "The Scientific Work of Ettore Majorana: An Introduction," Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics 3:10 (April 2006), 1-10. Ettore Majorana and Luciano Maiani, "A Symmetric Theory of Electrons and Positrons," Ettore Majorana Scientific Papers, 2006. R. Mignani, E. Recami, and M. Baldo, "About a Dirac-Like Equation for the Photon According to Ettore Majorana," Lettere al Nuovo Cimento 11:12 (April 1974), 568-572. Angelo Paratico, "Science Focus: Italy Closes Case on Physician's Mysterious Disappearance," South China Morning Post, Feb. 15, 2015. Antonino Zichichi, "Ettore Majorana: Genius and Mystery," CERN Courier 46 (2006), N6. Peter Hebblethwaite, "Saints for Our Time," Guardian, April 17, 1987. Walter Sullivan, "Finding on Radioactivity May Upset Physics Law," New York Times, Jan. 14, 1987. Nino Lo Bello, "Is Missing Atomic Scientist Working for the Russians?" [Cedar Rapids, Iowa] Gazette, May 3, 1959. Listener mail: "Farmers Project Is Right on Time," New Zealand Herald, Feb. 6, 2012. "Farmers Opens New Napier Store," Scoop, June 6, 2013. Megan Garber, "The State of Wyoming Has 2 Escalators," Atlantic, July 17, 2013. Brandon Specktor, "Believe It or Not, This State Only Has Two Escalators -- Here's Why," Reader's Digest, Sept. 8, 2017. Audie Cornish and Melissa Block, "Where Are All of Wyomings Escalators?" NPR, July 18, 2013. Natasha Frost, "Spiral Escalators Look Cool, But Do They Make Sense?" Atlas Obscura, July 5, 2017. "Spiral Escalator," Elevatorpedia (accesssed April 17, 2021). "Aussie," Wikipedia (accessed April 16, 2021). "Sir George Cockburn, 10th Baronet," Wikipedia (accessed April 14, 2021). "Naming Cockburn," City of Cockburn (accessed April 14, 2021). This week's lateral thinking puzzle is taken from Anges Rogers' 1953 book How Come?: A Book of Riddles, sent to us by listener Jon Jerome. You can listen using the player above, download this episode directly, or subscribe on Google Podcasts, on Apple Podcasts, or via the RSS feed at https://futilitycloset.libsyn.com/rss. Please consider becoming a patron of Futility Closet -- you can choose the amount you want to pledge, and we've set up some rewards to help thank you for your support. You can also make a one-time donation on the Support Us page of the Futility Closet website. Many thanks to Doug Ross for the music in this episode. If you have any questions or comments you can reach us at podcast@futilitycloset.com. Thanks for listening!

Welcome to Blockbusted! This week: Nora Ephron, platonic romance, the creation of the “high maintenance” woman, plus a piping hot slice of whatever Meg's having. Shownotes:"The Quiet Cruelty of When Harry Met Sally" by Megan Garber - https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/07/when-harry-met-sally-and-the-high-maintenance-woman/594382/Theme Music:RetroFuture Clean by Kevin MacLeodLink: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/4277-retrofuture-cleanLicense: https://filmmusic.io/standard-license

A Collection of Episodes featuring David Chen & Joanna Robinson; 1) In the very first episode of Gen Pop, Joanna and David are joined by James Poniewozik from the NYTimes to discuss online theorizing and whether it's hurting television. 2) Joanna and David are joined by Maureen Ryan from Variety to discuss the use of sexual assault in television and film. 3) David and Joanna discuss the bittersweet movie endings of 2016. Amy Nicholson, chief film critic at MTV News, stops by to share her thoughts on La La Land. 4) David and Joanna discuss the how people grieve online, and the rise of grief policing. Megan Garber joins us from The Atlantic. 5) Joanna and David count down their top 10 most anticipated films of 2017. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/yeahitsback/support

The Atlantic staff writer Megan Garber says "we sometimes don't have satisfying languages" for talking about Fox News. Garber talks with Brian Stelter about his new book "Hoax" and her essay titled "Do You Speak Fox?" She says the network employs the "rhetoric of warfare" and "us" versus "them" themes that have "infiltrated the way that we approach the world in a really basic level." To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

In which RJ, Sarah and Dave talk guilty pleasures, quarantine fatigue, 1st century exorcisms, and eccentric branches of the welfare state. Also, Dave turns to ebay while Sarah lets them eat cake. Click here (https://mbird.com/2020/05/the-acquittal-of-our-guilty-pleasures/) to read Ian Olson's article on The Acquittal of Our Guilty Pleasures Click here (https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2020/04/groundhog-day-horror-movie-quarantine/610867/) to read Megan Garber's appraisal of Groundhog Day Click here (https://theweek.com/articles/909137/when-time-stops) to read Damon Linker's When Time Stops Click here (https://mbird.com/2020/04/exorcisms-jesus-and-modernity/) to read Todd Brewer's post on Exorcisms, Jesus and Modernity. Click here (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/03/church-leaders-should-not-talking-like-middle-managers-time/) to read Tom Holland's argument for why Church Leaders Should Not Be Talking Like Middle Managers in this Time of Crisis.

In this episode, Natalia, Neil, and Niki discuss the new Netflix series, Tiger King. Support Past Present on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/pastpresentpodcast Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show:  Tiger King is a runaway hit as social distancing has increased appetite for binge-watching. Niki referred to this Mother Jones article about the connection between coronavirus and the wild animal trade. Natalia referenced this New York magazine article by Robert Moor that spawned the Netflix show and the Wondery podcast, “Joe Exotic.”   In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History: Natalia recommended Jordana Horn Gordon’s Kveller article, “The Heartbreaking Loneliness of Mourning During a Pandemic.” Neil discussed David Grann’s book, Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI. Niki shared Megan Garber’s Atlantic article, “Homes Actually Need to Be Practical Now.”  

A New York City jury has found Harvey Weinstein guilty of a criminal sexual act in the first degree and of third-degree rape. Today, Megan Garber of The Atlantic joins Front Burner to unpack the court proceedings that led to Weinstein's conviction and discusses whether this trial is a watershed moment for the #MeToo movement

¿Os acordáis del Rey Juan Carlos I diciendo eso de “lo siento. No volverá a ocurrir”? Sobre la disculpa pública y lo poco que lo vemos en política hablamos hoy “Por qué las figuras públicas han dejado de disculparse”, de Megan Garber en The Atlantic (inglés): https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/12/sorry-no-apologies/600742/ | Contacta conmigo en: http://www.adriancaballero.net/contactar/ | Si os gusta el podcast os animo a compartirlo. Podéis seguirme en Twitter y contactar conmigo con nuevas ideas, críticas, etc: https://twitter.com/a__caballero

¿Os acordáis del Rey Juan Carlos I diciendo eso de “lo siento. No volverá a ocurrir”? Sobre la disculpa pública y lo poco que lo vemos en política hablamos hoy “Por qué las figuras públicas han dejado de disculparse”, de Megan Garber en The Atlantic (inglés): https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/12/sorry-no-apologies/600742/ | Contacta conmigo en: http://www.adriancaballero.net/contactar/ | Si os gusta el podcast os animo a compartirlo. Podéis seguirme en Twitter y contactar conmigo con nuevas ideas, críticas, etc: https://twitter.com/a__caballero

In this episode, Neil, Natalia, and Niki discuss the recent escalation of tensions with Iran, new allegations of rape against President Trump, and controversy on the knitting social media network Ravelry. Support Past Present on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/pastpresentpodcast Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show:  Tensions between Iran and the United States are escalating. Niki recommended Robert D. Kaplan’s article at the New York Times on the connection between U.S. concerns in Asia and the Middle East. Advice columnist E. Jean Carroll is the latest woman to accuse Donald Trump of sexual assault. Natalia referred to Megan Garber’s Atlantic article about attention fatigue and sexual violence in the Trump era and to historian Estelle B. Freedman’s book Redefining Rape. Knitting social media network Ravelry has revised its policy to prohibit any pro-Trump projects on its site. Natalia referred to writer Emily Matchar’s book Homeward Bound: Why Women are Embracing the New Domesticity.   In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History: Natalia recommended the online documentary project 1938 Projekt. Neil discussed a new Harris Poll that showed decreased support among young people for LGBTQ rights. Niki reflected on the exchange between Kamala Harris and Joe Biden about busing at the Democratic debate, sharing historian Matt Delmont’s Twitter thread and Brett Gadsden’s Politico article, “Here’s How Deep Biden’s Busing Problem Runs.”

In this episode, Niki, Neil, and Natalia debate the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the Golden State Killer, and the news that Americans are forgetting the Holocaust.  Support Past Present on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/pastpresentpodcast Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show: At this year’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, comedian Michelle Wolf caused controversy. You can watch Wolf’s full performance here. Niki referenced Megan Garber’s Atlantic article, “The Slow, Awkward Death of the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.” Natalia cited this Columbia Journalism Review article noting that some members of the WHCA are opting to bring journalism students rather than celebrities to the event. The Golden State Killer, who claimed fifty victims in the 1970s and 80s, has been apprehended thanks to DNA evidence. Neil recommended Sarah Zhang’s Atlantic article explaining how police investigators used genealogy websites to find the killer. (We discussed genetic testing websites on Episode 90.) Niki referred to Michelle McNamara’s posthumously published I’ll Be Gone in the Dark that helped solve the crime, and Neil referenced McNamara’s Los Angeles magazine article about how the serial killer terrorized California. Natalia recommended the Atlanta Monster podcast that chronicles a serial killer who victimized that city. A troubling report suggests Americans are decreasingly aware of the scale of the Holocaust. Natalia discussed Rebecca Onion’s Slate article historicizing this apparent illiteracy. Niki cited this Atlantic article considering Poland’s relationship to its role in the Holocaust along with Timothy Snyder’s Bloodlands and Jan Gross’ Neighbors. In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History: Neil shared Dana Goldstein’s New York Times article, “Teacher Pay is So Low in Some U.S. School Districts That They Are Recruiting Overseas.” Natalia discussed Kyle Swenson’s Washington Post article, “Harold Bornstein: Exiled from Trumpland, Doctor Now ‘Frightened and Sad’.” Niki discussed Pamela Burger’s JSTOR Daily article, “The Bloody History of the True Crime Genre.”

The Duchess of Cambridge gave birth to another baby prince, but all anyone's talking about is that bouncy blow dry, that red dress and those heels - a mere 7 hours after she gave birth. Is this glamorous portrayal of new motherhood doing a disservice to mothers and the trauma of birth? Why is it an inevitable part of Kate's role as a princess? And could it in fact be a form of protection?Also today: we discuss Millie Bobby Brown's inclusion on Time's 100 Most Influential List. The 14 year old actor has over 16 million Instagram followers and is currently producing her first film. Is she too young for such adulation? You can email us thehighlowshow@gmail.com or tweet us @thehighlowshow. Links:- Lovesick on Netflix https://www.netflix.com/gb/title/80041601 - The Week Unwrapped, hosted by Olly Mannhttps://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-week-unwrapped-with-olly-mann/id1185494669?mt=2&i=1000409321265- When Beauty Is A Troll, by Megan Garber for The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/558467/- The Rise of Beauty-Standard Denialism, by Amanda Hess for The New York Timeshttps://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/23/movies/i-feel-pretty-amy-schumer-beauty.amp.html- Heartburn, by Nora Ephron with an introduction by the authorhttps://www.amazon.co.uk/Heartburn-Virago-Modern-Classics-Ephron/dp/0349010358/ref=nodl_- Cariad Lloyd on The Adam Buxton podcasthttps://m.soundcloud.com/adam-buxton/ep73-cariad-lloyd- No woman should have to pose post-birth, by Sali Hughes for The Pool https://www.the-pool.com/health/wombs-etc/2018/17/sali-hughes-on-kate-middleton-post-birth-scrutiny See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Conor Friedersdorf recently argued in The Atlantic that in this moment, when the truth is bitterly contested, fiction presents us an opportunity. It allows us to step into another person’s perspective and talk about gray areas without the problems of detailing an actual person’s private moments. But does blurring the lines between truth and fiction undermine the messy complexities of the real world? David Sims and Megan Garber join to discuss the spate of recent pop culture that aims to recast reality. Links - “‘The Arrangements’: A Work of Fiction” (Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie, The New York Times Magazine, June 28, 2016) - “Remote Control” (Sarah Marshall, The Believer, January 2014 Issue) - "Re-Examining Monica, Marcia, Tonya and Anita, the 'Scandalous' Women of the '90s" (Sarah Marshall, Splinter, April 19, 2016) - “The Crown: Netflix's Best Superhero Show” (Sophie Gilbert, December 9, 2017) - “How #MeToo Can Probe Gray Areas With Less Backlash” (Conor Friedersdorf, January 18, 2018) - “'Cat Person' and the Impulse to Undermine Women's Fiction” (Megan Garber, December 11, 2017) - “Aziz Ansari and the Paradox of ‘No’” (Megan Garber, January 16, 2018) - “Dinner Discussion” (Saturday Night Live, January 27, 2018) - “Grease Dilemma” (CollegeHumor, 2011) - Sticky Fingers: The Life and Times of Jann Wenner and Rolling Stone Magazine (Joe Hagan, 2017) - “One Day at a Time Is a Sitcom That Doubles as a Civics Lesson” (Megan Garber, January 17, 2017) - An epic 200-plus tweet thread on Janet Jackson (October 23, 2017) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For generations, Hollywood has defined what masculinity means in the U.S., with iconic screen figures such as John Wayne. But Wayne's stoic, taciturn image was the product of a complicated relationship with the director John Ford, one that offers different lessons about masculinity and its constraints. As scandals about men and their behavior fill the news, we discuss the legacy of John Wayne and other male screen icons. Our cohosts are joined by Atlantic staff writer Megan Garber and Stephen Metcalf, author of the story "How John Wayne Became a Hollow Masculine Icon." Links:  - "How John Wayne Became a Hollow Masculine Icon" (Stephen Metcalf, December 2017 Issue) - "Masculinity Done Well and Poorly" (James Hamblin, September 25, 2017) - "The End of Men" (Hanna Rosin, July/August 2010 Issue) - "Angry White Boys" (Kevin D. Williamson, National Review, August 16, 2017) - "Toxic Masculinity and Murder" (James Hamblin, June 16, 2016) - "Does Masculinity Need To Be 'Reimagined'?" (Erik Hayden, September 21, 2010) - "How Hollywood Whitewashed the Old West" (Leah Williams, October 5, 2016) - "Hollywood Has Ruined Method Acting" (Angelica Jade Bastién, August 11, 2016)  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"Winter is coming," they warned us, and the seventh season of Game of Thrones might have proved them right. But no one mentioned that winter in Westeros would coincide with so many troubling events in real-world politics. In this episode, Megan Garber, staff writer for The Atlantic, joins Radio Atlantic cohosts Alex Wagner and Matt Thompson for a conversation about lessons from the show, and other recent pop culture. - If you're not a Game of Thrones fan, or don't want to be spoiled, worry not: the second segment of our conversation (around the 16:30 mark) turns beyond the show to discuss recent movies, books, and TV shows with political lessons to offer. - If you are a Game of Thrones fan, be forewarned: we discuss spoilers up to and including the final episode of season 7. For links and other show notes, go here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Founder of StandardEbooks.org Interview starts at 11:43 and ends at 40:40 “One of the criteria for the books that we accept is that we very specifically don't want to become a dumping ground for everything public domain. I think Project Gutenberg suffers from that to some extent. They are more of an archival website at this point. Anything and everything that was produced before 1923 gets on there, and a lot of stuff just wasn't good. A lot of stuff didn't survive for a reason.” News “Amazon launched 22 years ago this week--here's what shopping on Amazon was like back in 1995” by Caroline Cakebread at Business Insider - July 20, 2017 “Here is the First Book Ever Ordered on Amazon” by Megan Garber at The Atlantic - October 31, 2012 Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies: Computer Models of the Fundamental Mechanisms of Thought by Douglas Hofstadter “Amazon possibly working on new stand-alone messaging app called Anytime” at AFTVnews - July 13, 2017 “PSA: here's how to put your old Amazon shipping boxes to good use” by Natt Garun at The Verge - July 15, 2017 Give Back Box “Amazon's next Echo will be more like Apple's HomePod” by Devindra Hardawar at Engadget - July 12, 2017 Amazon Treasure Truck “The First Alexa Phone Gets Amazon Even Closer to Total Domination” by Brian Barrett and David Pierce at Wired - July 18, 2017 Interview with Alex Cabal Standard Ebooks Project Gutenberg “The $5 million ‘Blurred Lines' legal fight over the song's ‘vibe' could permanently change the music industry” by Paul Schrodt at Business Insider - December 15, 2015 Calibre Books mentioned that are available at Standard Ebooks:   The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin   North of Boston by Robert Frost   Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, translated by George Long   A Voyage to Arcturus by David Lindsay   Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert, translated by Eleanor Marx-Aveling   The Magnificent Ambersons by Booth Tarkington Content Amazon Rapids feature Signature Stories Next Week's Guest Harry Bingham, author of The Deepest Grave, the sixth book in the Fiona Griffiths detective seri3s Music for my podcast is from an original Thelonius Monk composition named "Well, You Needn't." This version is "Ra-Monk" by Eval Manigat on the "Variations in Time: A Jazz Perspective" CD by Public Transit Recording" CD. Please Join the Kindle Chronicles group at Goodreads!

http://bonfiresofsocialenterprise.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/HH3-1.jpe () http://bonfiresofsocialenterprise.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Chris_Photo.jpe () http://bonfiresofsocialenterprise.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/HH4-2.jpe () http://bonfiresofsocialenterprise.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/HHarvest_Logo-2.png ()   Chris Nemeth of Hopeful Harvest   Romy interviews Chris Nemeth of social enterprise Hopeful Harvest on Season 2 episode.  Chris gives an important look inside his operation and openly discusses the challenges of launching this type of endeavor and the challenges that arrive when growth happens quickly. Learn about his grand plans, the broader partnership with Forgotten Harvest, and how he has overcome by serving the food entrepreneurs in Detroit.   Full transcript: Romy: Hey, thanks for tuning in. This is Romy. I’ll be your host for this episode of the Bonfires of Social Enterprise. Today, I’m interviewing Chris Nemeth in Oak Park, Michigan, which is just outside the border of Detroit. Hopeful Harvest is a food manufacturing company that helps food entrepreneurs with some of the “bottlenecks” to production when you’re just starting out. You’ll learn how Chris came up with the idea to begin to use the facility and how he grew so quickly and what some of the barriers are he’s facing today. It’s a very interesting story. Before we meet our future guest, we have a little something called the Fun Facts Fuel. Jentzen: Hey, everyone. This is Jentzen. I have some fun fuel to spark this episode. Chris from Hopeful Harvest inspired me to check out some history on some of the first types of food manufacturing. Before I tell you what I found, I have a little fun fact about chickens. Did you know wild chickens naturally produce roughly 15 eggs per year? However, farmers have bred chickens to lay 200 to 300 eggs per year. Wow, fascinating. Now, back to my fun fuel. Today, I would like to share with you the top 10 most significant inventions in food and drink according to Megan Garber in the September 14, 2012, article in the Atlantic magazine. Okay. Here we go with the top 10. Number 10, the plow. Number 9, grinding and milling. Number 8, selective breeding. Number 7, the process of baking. Number 6, the threshing machine. Number 5, irrigation. Number 4, the oven. Number 3, the process of canning. Number 2, the process of pasteurization and sterilization. The number 1 food and drink invention was the refrigerator. All right. That’s all, folks. Hope you enjoy the show. Romy: Thank you, Jentzen. I want to give a shout out now to all of our patrons that are supporting us on Patreon. We appreciate you. If you’d like to support us on Patreon, please go to our website for the link to great supplemental content and connections. All right. Let’s listen in to my interview with Chris Nemeth of Hopeful Harvest. Welcome, Chris. Would you begin by telling us about Hopeful Harvest? Chris: Thank you very much. Hopeful Harvest is a for-profit social enterprise that is an outgrowth from Forgotten Harvest, our non-profit. Forgotten Harvest is 1 of the largest fresh food rescue operations in the United States. We have 35 trucks that go out every day, six days a week, rescue fresh, healthy food from over 800 retail outlets. Then, we turn around and deliver that food to over 283 agencies throughout the metropolitan Detroit area. Where social enterprise got it start was that there was a sense of building on the mission that we had with Forgotten Harvest: How can we go beyond what we were currently doing and not only address the problem on a daily basis but begin putting some things in place to fix the problem long term. The idea with social enterprise was to focus on three areas. We were going to focus something with food, something with workforce development and something with product development. My goal was to go basically...