Remember That Podcast You Liked So Much?

[Azrael]

oof

 

[Elliotte Friedman]

Im very sorry to hear this. I loved the podcast....Can only imagine how difficult it will be for Callimachi.

 

[Azrael]

Me too. Big fan.

But from the moment 'Serial' first launched, I've had concerns about the tension between dramatic narrative and shoe leather reporting inherent in these hit podcasts.

I think that's at least partly what happened here. The desire for great radio drama overwhelmed very necessary judgments about the journalism.

I'm not sure what it means for Ms. Callimachi's career.

 

[Jerry-atric]

Me too. Big fan.

But from the moment 'Serial' first launched, I've had concerns about the tension between dramatic narrative and shoe leather reporting inherent in these hit podcasts.

I think that's at least partly what happened here. The desire for great radio drama overwhelmed very necessary judgments about the journalism.

I'm not sure what it means for Ms. Callimachi's career.

This is also a concern with "long form" magazine writing.

 

[Azrael]

"That" is a very good point!

Although I think the serialized nature of these podcasts - and the requirement for chapter-ending cliffhangers - creates more opportunity for errors in judgment.

 

[DanOregon]

Having been a reporter for a big chunk of my life, you can kind of get a vibe that someone is telling you what they think you want to hear - to get their name in the paper, to promote something they are advocating etc. I sense this a lot with The Daily and with NPR's features highlighting people in marginalized communities facing hardship, The New Yorker's coverage of refugees even book editors who seem to have a thing for writers of memoirs or other personal books who have undergone similar trauma or disaffection. Not saying it's all BS, or downplaying the strife - but that too often the "backstory" is the sell, not the main narrative.

 

[Azrael]

Having been a reporter for a big chunk of my life, you can kind of get a vibe that someone is telling you what they think you want to hear - to get their name in the paper, to promote something they are advocating etc. I sense this a lot with The Daily and with NPR's features highlighting people in marginalized communities facing hardship, The New Yorker's coverage of refugees even book editors who seem to have a thing for writers of memoirs or other personal books who have undergone similar trauma or disaffection. Not saying it's all BS, or downplaying the strife - but that too often the "backstory" is the sell, not the main narrative.

Good point.

Part of the challenge to good reporting is understanding not only the subjects' motives, but your own. And those of your bosses. And their bosses.

Lots of competing interests very quietly at war in every story.

 

[Azrael]

 

[Azrael]

 

[Jerry-atric]

I am beginning to like this Ms. Dean.

 

[Azrael]

What's Going on With This Whole Caliphate Mess?

 

[Pilot]

Yeah, I haven't listened to Caliphate but it's very interesting where fact checking and podcasts collide when the dominant style early in the medium has been to make the podcast about the reporting of the story more than about the story.

We always get audio depicting the reporter as being skeptical, and of him or her calling sources to verify, down to hearing the reporter pick up and dial the phone.

"Maybe this guy is full of shirt" is inherent in the appeal of something like S-Town. I'm not sure I've considered where I as a listener expect the responsibility of "truth" to fall, on the subject who may be pumping me full of shirt or on the reporter who, hey, he or she is just playing their interview recording for me.