Serial: An Inquiry into Memory

I first came across the Serial podcast in October 2014 while listening to This American Life on my way to work. I found the story it tells to be enthralling, yet somehow let it fall to the wayside due to stressful nature of my work at the time. When I saw it assigned for homework I was quite happy to have a reason to dive back into it.

What were you doing at 12:30pm last Friday? Three weeks ago? Fifteen years ago? I'll be honest with you, I can hardly remember what I had for lunch today let alone specific details about where I was and who I was with. Yet in the case of the Serial Podcast, the entire story is in those kinds of details. Ultimately the Adnan Syed case, still working through the appeals process after 15 long years in the US court system, boils down to what occurred during a 21 minute window in the middle of an otherwise ordinary January afternoon. Sarah Koenig's inquiry into the case has brought new life, and more importantly new doubt, into a case that had otherwise been considered resolved for the last 15 years.

Serial is a prime example of how the inquiry process should be approached. Despite the emotionally charged nature of her investigation, Koenig is able to take a meticulously impartial approach toward the facts and materials surrounding the case. As you progress through the series you can often hear from the tone of her voice that she very much wants to prove Adnan's innocence, yet she does not allow her personal feelings on the case keep her from evidence and lines of inquiry that point to his guilt. This is ultimately what makes Serial so enthralling to the listener. Every bit of information serves to make the situation seem even more uncertain. But the inquiry process is more about discovery than merely finding an answer.

Sometimes the first answer you get isn't the correct answer. However, without critical inquiries you might never know the difference. Koenig's inquiry has certainly brought evidence to light that might have significantly altered the original outcome of the case. It has also recently led to a key witness, Asia McClain, coming forward and releasing an affidavit on January 15, 2015 that may very well decide his appeal. We will have to wait and see though.

Academia and the Rhetorical Situation

While reading the article about academic writing I was struck by a theme that the author repeated on several occasions:

Academic writing and research may be knotty and strange, remote and insular, technical and specialized, forbidding and clannish—but that’s because academia has become that way, too.

 In effect Mr. Rothman's point was that we should not expect academic works to appeal or address a larger base because they are intended for academia. In the rhetorical context of academia, it makes sense to write this way, but I think Mr. Rothman is overlooking the real issue at hand in his defense of academic writing. Academia has largely isolated itself from the rest of our culture has worked itself into a self-perpetuating cycle of pandering to itself. This separation of academia and mainstream society can have dire ramifications when the people shaping public opinion and policy are not the same people who have the necessary knowledge to draft such policy. We can see examples of this in places like environmental and economic policy, where the people engaging in the rhetorical situation often misrepresent academic findings for personal and political gains. Meanwhile the academics who have devoted their careers to the very same topics do little more than sit back and grumble among themselves about how their findings are being misused or ignored. Ultimately I find myself agreeing with Nicholas Kristof in many respects, although I think that the problem goes beyond simple outreach. There needs to be a cultural change within academia and a shift towards opening up its vast wealth of knowledge to the public.