Hello friends,
Welcome back to the blog where we discuss the podcast elements in “The Drop Out”, about the Stanford dropout, Elizabeth Holmes, who took the world by storm by becoming the youngest, female, self-made billionaire through her company, Theranos. However, life isn’t all sunshine and rainbows anymore for Holmes after her so called therapeutic blood test company was found to be a fraud.
Last episode introduced Elizabeth Holmes and her company. We heard some background about Holmes from mentors during her youth and former employees. This gave us a better understand who Holmes was and how she ran her company. As we continue explore the path of the rise and downfall of her company, we were left with a hurdle she had to face in order to keep her dreams alive: Money. At the moment where the podcast left off, Elizabeth needed a fat check to keep her research going and the podcast picked up, revealing that she found an old friend that wrote her a check for a whopping 13 million dollars. Some friend right? Well we find out it was actually more than that. Sunny met Holmes when they were at a conference in China a while back and after selling his billion dollar business before the market crash, he decided to write Holmes a good faith loan. He was then hired with no lab or research background, yet he was in charge of the researchers and scientists. The podcast basically goes on saying how he was a terrible boss according to the employees and was only kept around because he was engaged in a romantic relationship with Holmes. The podcast then shifts to Theranos’s introduction in Walgreens stores around the country, which really made me wonder, how?
I thought the way the two podcasts were linked was pretty standard. Like I said, the last podcast ended by saying Holmes needed money, a lot of it. It put a lot of emphasis on why she needed the money, and asked who would give a huge check to some 19 year old entrepreneur with a too good to be true idea. But then, it ended with saying “Holmes had something up her sleeve, a white knight with deep pockets”. This got me really wondering who it was because she did end up finding a way like she always does.
After introducing Sunny, the narrator gave a brief recap of the previous episode to give listeners a refresher of what was covered. I thought this was helpful since I didn’t remember all the specifics. And continuing on with the theme of the first one, she began interviewing more people involved, this time, one employee that worked under Sunny and one lab technician from Walgreens. The interviews conducted this time was far less about Holmes and more about Sunny and the company itself, which was a nice change of perspective. One of the interviews with the lab tech went really in depth about the company. Long story short, he was sent by Walgreens to explore the lab of Theranos but was met with suspicion around every corner. They didn’t let him see the lab, walked him to the bathroom, didn’t want to compare results to Stanford across the street because “they didn’t trust it”, not introduced to a chief medical officer, the list goes on and on about his time at Theranos. He said the whole meeting felt like a dodge. Because of this interview, I was able to kind of get a behind the scenes look of the company, as if I was the one that went to the meeting.
I am still waiting for an episode of just a full on interview with Holmes, one on one. So far, we have only received snip its of her comments here and there, but never anything more than a few sentences. I believe a full interview with Holmes will really give readers an insight to who she was and why she did this, which is what all of us are wondering. The music stayed pretty consistent, having an upbeat but mysterious mood.
Word Count: 685 words
Hi Kenny,
Great job on your second post! I thought it gave just enough information for the readers to not only get a glimpse into the podcast but also want to listen to it as well! You mention that the narrator gives a brief recap of the previous episode in the beginning to “refresh” the listeners on what had happened. This technique was also used within the podcast I am listening to, and I too thought it was significantly helpful because it placed me right back into the action, yearning to discover what happens next.
Furthermore, you briefly explain how the music is consistent among the episodes and establishes an upbeat yet mysterious mood. Within my podcast as well, the musical elements remained relatively consistent in their eerie and intense tone. I thought this continuity in the usage of similar background music was a major factor in developing a consistent identity between the different episodes. Without the ability to actually see the narrators in a given podcast, I feel like the music and sound effects are the things that naturally gain dominance when dictating the mood and atmosphere.
Going forward and reflecting on the benefits of using specific types of music, I think that in order to improve my future podcasts I could do a better job of choosing music that either emphasizes the tone of the topic I’m speaking or establishes a mood that I want the listeners to feel. In this way, I can not only enhance the podcast’s entertainment value, but also its ability to convey information effectively.
Overall, I thought you provided a well constructed analysis regarding the different techniques and elements of the podcast that helped link the episodes together in a way that produced a consistent identity.
Word Count: 293
Hi Kenny!
First off, I wanted to say that I really enjoyed reading your second blog post about Elizabeth Holmes, the story strongly resembles that of my own podcast Dr. Death. It’s intriguing to recognize and understand how such lackluster individuals sought and achieved copious amounts of infamy and recognition!
In my opinion, our podcasts share many similar qualities beyond the synopses. One tool I recognized your podcast use, was the method by which both narrators chose to end their episodes. In your podcast, you mentioned that the episodes would end with various questions or statements surrounded by mystery, later to be reflected on in the following episode. Compared to Dr. Death, I recognized similar scenarios – in the second episode, “Chris and Jerry,” the narrator finished the episode with a quote directly from the third episode, “Occam’s Razor.” Personally, I found this tool to be essential in creating a suspenseful environment for the listeners, and leaving them to want more.
Additionally, your podcast shared the same interview format that mine did, which I believed to be a powerful tool towards amplifying the way storytelling is performed. It appears to me that in The Dropout, the interviews were utilized to place listeners in the footsteps of the characters, and allowed them to recognize what was occurring at the time. I mention this in my own blog post as well, but it’s interesting to realize that these podcasts all revolve around one titular character, however their voice is yet to be heard. In Dr. Death, there has yet to be an interview conducted with Dr. Christopher Duntsch, similar to how in The Dropout, there has been no word heard from Elizabeth Holmes herself. Hopefully both podcasts will introduce these characters so we’re able to gain greater perspective!
You did an amazing job of writing an appealing and intriguing analysis on The Dropout, and I’m very interested by the number of shared similarities it has with my own podcast! I hope that you’ll be able to better understand the failed ideas of Elizabeth Holmes, and maybe we can discuss them together!
Word Count: 348