tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1030220433025894048.post1602826910585258999..comments2023-11-03T08:02:25.369-04:00Comments on AmericanScience: A Team Blog: The Epistemology of a PodcastDavid Roth Singermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12841041983824755867noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1030220433025894048.post-45783794444935998772014-12-22T13:03:17.974-05:002014-12-22T13:03:17.974-05:00Hi Matt,
Thanks for reading and for your comment!...Hi Matt,<br /><br />Thanks for reading and for your comment! <br /><br />Upon re-reading, I think you are right that both statements B and C are somewhat unfair to Koenig. In my experience as a listener, I had become quite frustrated with what seemed at times to be Koenig's dogged belief in Adnan's innocence (an opinion that I don't necessary share). My comments are colored by that frustration. In her defense, however, she was always very open about narrating her own experience of the investigation, including her vacillating ideas about Adnan's innocence and guilt - a big part of what made the show so gripping. While Koenig did investigate the case at Adnan's sister's behest, exoneration wasn't the sole motivation of her investigation. Instead, I think she made her best effort at discovering the "truth" - as elusive as that turned out to be!<br /><br />The have since listened to the final episode which I think crystallized a few things for me. Koenig's final conclusion (spoiler alert!) that she would ultimately acquit Adnan did confirm some of my previous suspicions that quite apart from Adnan's innocence or guilt, Koenig had decided the jury did not have the evidence to convict him. I will concede, however, that this wasn't just based on "any anomaly or inconsistency." Koenig's rationale for acquittal was certainly more complex than that. I'm still not sure where I stand in the whole matter, which I think is a credit to Koenig's excellent reporting.Jennahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08919705479619555709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1030220433025894048.post-78066113456205459922014-12-22T09:51:38.323-05:002014-12-22T09:51:38.323-05:00Thanks for this subtle and engaging post on Serial...Thanks for this subtle and engaging post on Serial. I listened to all of the episodes as they appeared and was as gripped by it as most. Discussing it with my spouse, who is a former federal prosecutor, has been enlightening. While I applaud your post overall, I think you make a couple of claims, both involving Koenig's motivations or beliefs, that are either false or unsupported by the content of the episodes. In particular, I think there aren't grounds for asserting B and C below. <br /><br />"[A] Koenig meticulously pokes at these inconsistencies, [B] in hopes that by picking apart Jay’s testimony, the case against Adnan will unravel ... [C] For Koenig, any anomaly or inconsistency should be enough to throw the conviction out the window."<br /><br />Though I agree there were times when Koenig seemed to clearly believe in Adnan's innocence, I don't think, per B, that her reporting was motivated by that belief. I also don't think that Koenig was ever so uncareful as to believe, per C, ANY anomaly or inconsistency was grounds for a not-guilty charge. Matt McAdamnoreply@blogger.com