Radiolab: Post No Evil [audio]
wnycstudios.orgI don't think any discussion of Radiolab is complete without mentioning their episode about "Yellow Rain". I was pretty shocked at how the episode went.
https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/239549-yellow-rain
The episode contained significant distortions and omissions, all in the purported pursuit of truth.
https://hyphenmagazine.com/blog/2012/10/10/deliberate-distor...
This story made plain their lack of integrity. Since then, I've treated Radiolab for what it is- mildly interesting infotainment with unethical people at the helm.
In a search for the truth, eyewitness accounts should basically be ignored. Memory is terrible, and even his memory at the time seems to lack a true smoking gun. As of now, hearing a podcast dismiss an eyewitness account is a welcome change from the "true crime" reliance on them.
Besides that, it seems that both sides had a different expectation on what the topic was going to be. It's understandable that Mr. Yang felt hurt afterwards, and it also makes sense that the interviewers would get frustrated in that situation. A good solution would have been to find a platform for Mr. Yang's story after the miscommunication was realized, but the event seems to have went ugly fast.
Cool. I'm going to disregard any memory of having read this comment, or any of the ideas it attempts to present as facts. My memory is terrible, and if I did remember it, that would likely disprove everything you just said.
You helped me realize that I should only believe what I tell myself is true, rather than what I might mistakenly remember.
Good thing I won't remember writing this. It would be weird remembering a moment when I was right, but having to disregard it as wrong, because I tell myself I'm wrong, plainly, and in the face of my own memories.
Interesting read! It however does not shock me. That episode is, with your context, as much about truth for them (radiolab, living in US and trying to understand how they could produce chemical weapons) as about the truth of the Hmong. What they're living is a world where formal education says the truth. It would be nice if they would admit that a bit, and be more respectful to the interviewee.
I think this is probs my true of all media. Decent enough "info"tainment, but completely befallen to the presenters biases, shot-comings, and ignorance.
I doubt that unbiased, accurate journalism can exist outside of extremely narrow fields (Even then, who knows)
Not only was that a great story about mythology and fake tales that comes from war, it humanised and told the story of the Hmong.
What is the point exactly? Fox news is telling the Hmong's story better?
To be fair the story is amended, so you really need to link the original since it might have been worse?
[edit] Link to her story - https://apexexpress.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/22813-kao-kalia... (about 10mins in)
To be clear Yellow Rain is fake, this is an incredibly important story to be told. To be a westerner and believe in the Yellow Rain is nuts and should be laughed at, but how does one talk to a Hmong person about it?
Post WMD's, we still have Vietnam using Agent Orange in known propaganda, we know Rohingya refugees are lying at times but we don't know how much. It's important stuff.
How they treated the interviewee(The Uncle) was shitty, especially in the earlier version but at the end of the day this interview talked more about the Hmong story than the other shitty news outlets like Huffpo and created more thought.
I understand that the point of view that "kill all men" is not hate speech exists, and it's ok to interview someone who holds that view.
But when the hosts themselves started talking about how it's not hate speech like it's a very reasonable view to hold, I was a bit shocked. I never enjoyed radiolab or listened to much of it before, but I used to think it was a legit show with respectable hosts, even if I didn't like the format.
Would they also say "kill all Americans" is not hate speech because Americans are not "historically oppressed"? Sure, it's safer to talk about Japanese in China on the American radio.
(I haven't listened to the whole episode yet, in case they address it later.)
It's not just you. I'm reminded of antisemitism in the conspiratorial way the descriptor is being used and how the Reality Distortion Field extends that that White Males/Jews are the cause of every problem.
The fact is that many media people are racists and these people and their fellow travelers don't like it being pointed out that they are being hypocrites. Some of them think being white males themselves is an exemption from criticism - except there are so many historical examples of self hating peoples who supported the people attacking them that it would make your head spin. I remember Scott Alexander, usually a level headed person as you could hope to find - unsettled by what he was reading about the Jewish refugees who ended up in England during WWII - many of whom were praising Adolf with full awareness of what was happening. There's not much to stop self hate going from signalling to malignant.
If you look around you won't notice many people speaking out against it, that's because it's mainstreamed, it is the we've always been at war with Eurasia. These people are very confident and very stupid.
The moderation mechanism on websites such as this feeds back into this echo chamber too, because I'm aware that every thing I say will be under exacting scrutiny but I'll regularly see violations of the rules I'd never get away with. Rule violations have to be extraordinary to reach a moderators's inbox if they are in the general spirit of the group believes.
Don't dismiss this episode. I thought it would be kind of trite and boring, but they bring up some really good "What if?" issues that Facebook has to deal with. It also brings up other issues like pay to those filtering and (albeit only a small amount) the stress of workers who have to wade through all the nasty reports.
I want so badly to like Radiolab, but honestly I feel like it's produced by ADHD'ers, for ADHD'ers.
Hell, I feel like it gives me ADHD just listening.
Doesn't this imply it's best for people who aren't ADHD?
Wait, what are we talking about?
As somebody who has ADHD quite severely, I have never once in my life got distracted in the middle of a conversation. That’s not how it works, and I’m so goddamn sick of people making jokes like this about it.
Everybody with ADHD is slightly different, but for me it’s more of a disconnect between future rewards and present internal motivation. It’s not an issue when I’m talking to somebody – – that shit is all in the present and I thrive in the moment.
What I can’t do well at all is make my brain feel like a task is important, rewarding and worth doing if that reward will come far in the future.
I'm a lifelong sufferer myself, and so I like to jest.... forgive me
What you say makes sense and matches the neurology. I find that maintaining my dopamine levels can be a challenge, and on the extreme end, definitely associated with fatigue severe enough to lose track in the middle of a conversation.
Problems with the reward system and executive function are definitely part of the spectrum though! I identify with the symptoms you describe.
Today I'm on wellbutrin for the first time, and Im finding it more effective than amphetamines, despite perhaps an increase in social awkwardness. YMMV
Disappointed to see the discussion here revolve around the podcast production style when the core topic of determining a world wide consensus for what is or isn’t considered ok to publish is such an impossible and simultaneously interesting problem.
Although the content is audio, I'd like to point out that this page is quite badly designed, particularly that giant fixed-position header.
Radiolab is incredibly hard to listen to with all the random noises and things they sprinkle into each episode. Contrast this with This American Life and its a world of difference.
I find the style patronising to the point of irritation. Overly edited, repeatedly cutting to the hosts instead of letting the subject just damn well speak and letting the listeners damn well think for themselves. Maybe I am overly critical but I listen to a wide spectrum of podcast content and their style really gets my back up to the point I gave up listening recently.
TAL tends to deal with a more specific topic or story compared to Radiolab, which deals with an idea that has many smaller bits. The editing reflects this. I find it fine to listen to.
Impossible to listen to. I can’t stand it. Their series on the Supreme Court, More Perfect, is slightly better and just manageable. But I couldn’t finish one episode of their flagship show.
I’m relieved to hear I’m not the only one, to be honest. I thought I was going mad. Or worse: old.
I would recommend listening to the catalogue in reverse order. I agree with the broad criticisms in this thread, and I no longer listen. But for the first 4 or 5 years they produced a lot of fascinating shows. Probably around Jan 2017 it takes a nosedive.
I totally agree. I feel like the audio editor is having fun for their own sake, and it takes away from the show for me. It makes the listening experience super irritating, despite the fact that I often find the content interesting.
I quite like it. I like the interleaving.
My favorite is they figured out the most infuriating amount of dead air it takes to get you to check if the headphones disconnected.
I personally love both styles.
have you listened to a more recent episode (eg this one)? the early episodes sounded like avant-garde sound experiments but the newer ones are much closer to TAL-style editing, just more people talking. they've acknowledged this criticism at least once in an episode.
I think I listened to a reasonably recent one when the Furby source code was released recently. Podcasts are one of my favorite ways to relax and I still found it jarring.