I actually decided to listen to this episode only after I finished “Right to be Forgotten”. I thought that because both episodes had to do with remembrance in some way, finding consistency to analyze would be easy. I should’ve read the blurb. “The Memory Palace” is the name of a different podcast created by Nate DiMeo. In it he retells historical moments and describes them in rich detail, a much different approach to podcasting compared to Radiolab’s hosts Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich.
As a quick recap, Radiolab typically follows one central story for the duration of each episode using a philosophical and scientific lens to explore its nuances. For this episode, they had Nate come onto the show and played clips of his podcast about the story of how the Morse code came to be, the draft lottery, and cow DNA.
I briefly mentioned in my previous blog post about the style of podcasting Radiolab has decided to use. There are multiple layers to their episodes, a Russian nesting doll of perspectives in a single episode. There is an outer layer where both Jad and Robert ask questions and learn about the story alongside the listener. Then there is a producer who is the one that investigated the story and is explaining it. Then there are the actual people involved. We get to hear from all, their reactions and thoughts. One lead often turns into another as it did in “Right to be Forgotten” where the producer explains one side of argument, the implications of letting someone remove their name or image from a story that harms their character, before moving to the other, and finally ending the show by speaking to a man that this affects. This news story style lets audiences understand the topic at hand from a variety of perspectives because each follow-up question is explored and discussed. Consistent editing of music as sound effects and this layering structure is what makes each story familiar even though topics varies. It’s effective because returning audiences know and expect this level of craftsmanship. Variation is not about the structure as it may be with more fictional/descriptive podcasts (because plot), but the focus is on the topic at hand.
The clips of Nate’s pieces are lush with detail (They include lines like: “Dots and lines that can transmit the stuff of real lives and of dying wives”, while Radiolab uses conversational and filler words like the “you knows”, quick “ums”, and affirmative “mhms”). Nate doesn’t have the back-and-forth interruptions of speakers and sounds. Instead, light background music accompanies him as he describes the story. In each of the clips, it’s only Nate narrating. He uses imagery and repetition of certain phrases to build suspense and allows the modern day person relate to people of the past. By telling historical stories like this, it becomes more personal. You’re less emotionally invested in a story when it happened in the past. It doesn’t affect you the way it would if you had experienced the event. But here he gives characters a background and fleshes them out with the intent of making them relatable. Radiolab does this so we can understand each person’s reasoning behind their actions.
Each style reflects the goals of each podcast. Both want to impart an impression. One through a more educational frame, and the other by being personal.
Word Count: 562
Dear Tiffany,
I really enjoyed your post and thought of many things in the podcast I’m listening to that relates to the concepts you described. Criminal, the podcast I am currently listening to, also follows a similar technique of highlighting a particular case each episode. The multiple layer technique that you described being used is one I have noticed many times. The effect that it creates really does help bring you into the experience, hopefully making you feel like your in the room with the hosts. You mention how the narration is in “news-style” and although I had not thought of that previously, that notion really resonated with me. Often I notice hosts leading the listeners through events very similar to an anchorman on the TV news, but in a much more interesting and academic way.
In your second main paragraph, you describe the amounts of detail that is given through descriptive language. In all senses of literature or speech, descriptive language is key to really show the audience exactly what is going on, but this is even more critical in podcasts. Something I mentioned this in my own blog post and I feel is quite relevant here is the key notion that without visual aids like TV or Movies, podcasts have to rely much more on the details given through speech, and you highlighted some great lines in your post that shows how Radiolab does that so well. I would be really excited to read more of your posts to try to understand the similarities and differences between Criminal and Radiolab. (Word Count 262)