When I think of a podcast- I immediately think of my grandfather sitting, reading the paper and listening to NPR. During the podcasts the narrator is the host so naturally, they are present and contributing thoughts and ideas about the topic that was being discussed for that segment. But, with Sarah Koenig’s Serial podcast, her presence in each episode is present, however the argument is how much is she holding back for the listeners, more specifically, how much is she alongside the readers?
Since Koenig is reporting on a topic that was so long ago, she is clearly different from a majority of Creative Nonfiction that we have read in class. Authors such as Didion, Wolfe, and Thompson are all present and reporting on events that they have attended, they are just choosing how much or little of their opinions they are writing and giving to the readers. Koenig has a similar approach to Capote’s In Cold Blood in the sense that they are trying to recollect memories, events, and potential evidence to get a compelling story. The only difference is that Koenig appears to be solving a case alongside the reader.
Personally, I do not think that Koenig is putting in much of her opinion as to whether or not Adnan is guilty or innocent. Koenig is just looking for answers just like the listener. It is evident that Koenig is knows significantly more than the listener because she has to fit an entire trial into hour long podcasts and give enough to keep the reader satisfied but not give all the details to keep the reader coming back for a weekly episode. Koenig does a good job in being as close to the reader as possible, For example, in episode nine, when she is just as equally if not more confused than the listener when she is interviewing a lawyer. Koenig is attempting to put back the missing pieces of a murder case that seems too vague to be true.