Jake

Idle Thumbs 189: Serious Ma'am

Recommended Posts

Idle Thumbs 189:

625__header.jpg

Serious Ma'am

Alone and in a strange place, a robot types furiously at a terminal keyboard. "dir" it writes. No response. "asdfghjk," it continues, to similar success. It glances around, looks back at the keyboard and then the screen. "load Dragon Age."

Games Discussed: The Talos Principle, Serious Sam, Portal, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Framed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: The tangent with Danielle and Serial

 

I agree with her. Overall, Serial's patina and structure (with the twee, off-the-cuff Mail Kimp gaffe, even) reminds me of the elements of This American Life that rubbed me the wrong way - it feels like "making good tape" (to use Glass' words) off other people's lives, a lot of times people of color, that white middle-class liberals can interact with as entertainment but not really grasp the fuller contexts of. There's a general issue (as Danielle said) with how our society and media works with peering into people of color's lives but without having to really examine why that is fascinating to us. 

 

http://www.theawl.com/2014/11/serial-and-white-reporter-privilege and

http://www.vice.com/read/serial-and-the-white-liberal-medias-race-problem-twir-121 

 

are both dovetailing breakdowns of why Serial might rub some people the wrong way.

 

(In the interest of disclosure, I myself am also white, also listened to TAL for a long time but had no interest in Serial for these reasons and reading these pieces cemented that slightly off-kilter feeling I had)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't played The Talos Principle so this might be off base but from the videos I've seen and you talking about it, I think you might enjoy Kairo. EDIT: It's currently 80% off on Steam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: The tangent with Danielle and Serial

 

I agree with her. Overall, Serial's patina and structure (with the twee, off-the-cuff Mail Kimp gaffe, even) reminds me of the elements of This American Life that rubbed me the wrong way - it feels like "making good tape" (to use Glass' words) off other people's lives, a lot of times people of color, that white middle-class liberals can interact with as entertainment but not really grasp the fuller contexts of. There's a general issue (as Danielle said) with how our society and media works with peering into people of color's lives but without having to really examine why that is fascinating to us. 

 

http://www.theawl.com/2014/11/serial-and-white-reporter-privilege and

http://www.vice.com/read/serial-and-the-white-liberal-medias-race-problem-twir-121 

 

are both dovetailing breakdowns of why Serial might rub some people the wrong way.

 

(In the interest of disclosure, I myself am also white, also listened to TAL for a long time but had no interest in Serial for these reasons and reading these pieces cemented that slightly off-kilter feeling I had)

 

I feel I did an incredibly poor job articulating my thoughts re: Serial on the podcast. I apologize for that. The last thing I want to do is come across as someone who just spouts off opinions about what I'm "supposed" to think as a *good intersectional feminist* 

 

With that said, I think the Awl piece does a fair job of representing my issue with Serial. I don't think Serial is poorly made or thoughtless, by any means. If it existed in a vacuum where a sort of cultural tourism for white people re: the lives of people of color didn't exist, it would be all good, basically. But it does exist in that context. And I do feel mildly uncomfortable with its packaging as *entertainment* in that context.

 

Koenig does do admirable original reporting in the podcast. There's a great deal of value to Serial, and I don't want to imply otherwise. And my point about it making people aware of just how deeply, deeply fucked out criminal justice system is still stands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who does a weekly feminist gaming podcast, I completely understand how hard it is to have to drop some science about really complex topics on the fly. But I think you started scratching at some of the issues, which are pretty complex! 

 

I don't think anyone who does TAL or Serial are bad reporters or don't do a ton of work and both podcasts have or had a lot of value, but that doesn't detract from some of the really glaring issues, which do have quite bigger contexts, yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had already read the Awl piece, but did not find it persuasive. This Atlantic piece explains why, to me:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/12/unpacking-the-social-justice-critique-of-serial/383071/

I believe I am pretty decent in terms of recognizing privilege and coded language; obviously I am white so there is a limit to the amount of firsthand experience I can actually bring to bear in this, but in general I do honestly believe myself to be at least FAIRLY self-aware and thoughtful. And I fully accept--fully--that ANY cultural artifact in our society inherently exists in a context that comes along with a huge amount of unbalance of privilege and assumptions about experience. That is something that will always color every work, regardless of its text in and of itself, and I tried to indicate my awareness of this on the podcast. But I do think it is possible to over-read on the individual scale, and I think that Awl piece does that. It is, to me, poorly argued and poorly substantiated. There may be a better case to be made that would cause me to reevaluate my feelings on the matter, I just don't think it's this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh man, Serious Sam talk. Serious Sam 3 is only a few years old (came out in 2011), and Serious Sam 4 is rumored to be coming next year. I still play 3. It's my daughter and I's Sunday afternoon game. When it's a lazy Sunday, and there isn't anything that we particularly want to do, we'll boot up 3 and spend an hour or two just going crazy in it. It's also the rare PC shooter that has split screen.

Also, you guys sold me on the Talos Principle. On the praise of its UI, Serious Sam 3 has an absolutely fantastic interface, and really robust options for all sorts of things (like way above and beyond what's typically expected from a PC game). It's probably my favorite UI in any shooter ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a white, middle-class Canadian dude, I have no idea what Serial is about or why it may or may not be contributing to a continuing racial reporting problem in America, but I greatly enjoyed listening to your discussion about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was a good discussion but I wanted to throw my lots in because I definitely have similar feelings to Danielle. It's just a reason why I don't want to consume Serial in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I almost thought there wouldn't be a podcast this week, but here it is! :D

Looking forward to hearing the Talos Principle talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was discussed a bit in the Serial thread on these forums but it's also uncomfortable to listen to an episode where Sarah Koenig says that she doesn't think racism was a significant factor in Adnan's conviction even though the episode goes on to demonstrate several ways that people were treating him racistly that made the case against him more compelling. Admittedly it is hard to read exactly how she felt because she obviously has edited in these sections of people being racist and therefore felt they were relevant. But she skirts the issue and even at the end seems to think that since they're not being blatantly racist it probably didn't affect his case that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel I did an incredibly poor job articulating my thoughts re: Serial on the podcast. I apologize for that. The last thing I want to do is come across as someone who just spouts off opinions about what I'm "supposed" to think as a *good intersectional feminist* 

 

With that said, I think the Awl piece does a fair job of representing my issue with Serial. I don't think Serial is poorly made or thoughtless, by any means. If it existed in a vacuum where a sort of cultural tourism for white people re: the lives of people of color didn't exist, it would be all good, basically. But it does exist in that context. And I do feel mildly uncomfortable with its packaging as *entertainment* in that context.

 

Koenig does do admirable original reporting in the podcast. There's a great deal of value to Serial, and I don't want to imply otherwise. And my point about it making people aware of just how deeply, deeply fucked out criminal justice system is still stands. 

 

I heard about Serial a few weeks in, when it was already established and popular. As I had it explained to me, I was turned off on it for the same reason I am really against television shows like Hoarders. Without having listened to it, the premise as explained sounded like exploitation of people's lives in the service of entertainment but hiding in the guise of education or journalism (or I don't know... therapy? for Hoarders. What a repulsive show). It didn't even have anything to do with any specifics of the people being portrayed.

 

Having listened to some of it, I THINK it's trying to operate on a level above that, but even without the cultural and racial undertones that surround it, I'm still a bit uncomfortable with the offering as a whole (or at least the idea of it) for that reason. I am all for journalism and discovery, but sensationalizing aspects of people's lives for someone else's gain really rubs me the wrong way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never heard anything aired on (or related to) public radio that hasn't been straight-up racist ("Do Afghan children have human rights?" "I know who Jay-Z is therefore I know everything there is to know about hip-hop.").  My co-workers are all obsessed with that digustingly-named radio program, but that Awl article is not encouraging.

 

Poor Jake got no love for "You're gonna tell this jiff story quickly...?"  I thought that was clever.

 

And I thought that header image was from Serious Sam—so much of those games take place in ruined temples.

 

And Serious Sam 3 is only three years old—newer than Dragon Age 2!  The demo for that game was fine but it was sort of a shrug, saying, "Yup, you can still make a Serious Sam game in this new decade and it will be a Serious Sam game."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard about Serial a few weeks in, when it was already established and popular. As I had it explained to me, I was turned off on it for the same reason I am really against television shows like Hoarders. Without having listened to it, the premise as explained sounded like exploitation of people's lives in the service of entertainment but hiding in the guise of education or journalism (or I don't know... therapy? for Hoarders. What a repulsive show). It didn't even have anything to do with any specifics of the people being portrayed.

Having listened to some of it, I THINK it's trying to operate on a level above that, but even without the cultural and racial undertones that surround it, I'm still a bit uncomfortable with the offering as a whole (or at least the idea of it) for that reason. I am all for journalism and discovery, but sensationalizing aspects of people's lives for someone else's gain really rubs me the wrong way.

That's a good summary of my issues, plus the aforementioned discomfort with Koenig's skepticism of any racism being at work here.

Honestly, I think the This American Life model falls apart when it takes on true crime. It's one thing to have the show be some journalist's reaction to a story when that story is one man trying to memorize the physical location of every area code in America. It's another when it's a middle-class white girl reacting to a poorly-understood but evidently still-raw crime that touched and touches two minority communities. Whatever her intetest in it, it's not her story to tell, some might understandably say, and her attempts to tell it as her story through the imposition of her presence and neuroses in the reporting makes me a little uncomfortable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good summary of my issues, plus the aforementioned discomfort with Koenig's skepticism of any racism being at work here.

Honestly, I think the This American Life model falls apart when it takes on true crime. It's one thing to have the show be some journalist's reaction to a story when that story is one man trying to memorize the physical location of every area code in America. It's another when it's a middle-class white girl reacting to a poorly-understood but evidently still-raw crime that touched and touches two minority communities. Whatever her intetest in it, it's not her story to tell, some might understandably say, and her attempts to tell it as her story through the imposition of her presence and neuroses in the reporting makes me a little uncomfortable.

 

I've heard similar responses to the "it's not her story to tell" misgiving about Serial, but then again, wasn't she asked to tell the story by Adnan's family?

 

For all the doubts I have about using true crime as entertainment, I think we might be having a different discussion about the podcast if Sarah's investigations led to a clear exoneration of Adnan, There would always be criticisms about the process, but as in sports, a good result tends to wash away any criticisms, a bad result attracts them even if the process was correct.

 

Of course, criticism about the investigation's treatment of minority communities started before the final episode, but I tend to think that if the key people involved were white then we wouldn't be having this exact conversation. I think we would still be having a conversation about treating tragedy as entertainment (which isn't new), however introducing minorities tends to lead to a skewing of the examination to a different place. I don't that's necessarily a problem - being cognisant of how you might be harming minorities, even unintentionally, is an important process. I'm just not sure it's as pertinent as the argument against true crime as entertainment, and the problems with having anyone's life brought under intense internet speculation and scrutiny, especially when they didn't invite it.

 

This is all said from the point of view of a non-american who doesn't have to deal with that society's ills (although we obviously have our own), so perhaps that's why the more universal issue speaks to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting talk on Serial this week - I'm glad Chris pulled Danielle up on her point, I don't think the success of serial in any way comes from the fact that Adnan and Hae are from minority backgrounds, its the at times bizarre details of the case, and Sarah and co's examination into it. If the victim and the accused had both been white I don't think it would have impacted its success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I agree with the analysis that him being not white didn't matter. I haven't had time to read the linked articles so I need to read up on that but I have a different point to address on the matter. If you accept that people involved in the case suspected, incarcerated and convicted Adnan in part because of latent racism against him. Why wouldn't you think that people doubt his innocence for the same reason while listening?

 

There's so little real/concrete evidence against him in this case that subjective judgement was a big part and I have my doubts about the case feeling so ambiguous if it had been a nice white american boy that got put in jail when he was 17. A massive draw in the show was the mystery and uncertainty, but if people's inherent bias had just made them believe he was wrongly convicted, then a lot of that is eliminated off the bat.

 

The fact that Adnan is different also makes him feel more like a stranger that the audience doesn't know so they have less empathy view his case in a more distant way. They don't feel like he had the same experiences as them so they're both more likely to believe things being alleged and at the same time they feel more like they're just voyeurs observing this 'other' kind of person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good summary of my issues, plus the aforementioned discomfort with Koenig's skepticism of any racism being at work here.

Honestly, I think the This American Life model falls apart when it takes on true crime. It's one thing to have the show be some journalist's reaction to a story when that story is one man trying to memorize the physical location of every area code in America. It's another when it's a middle-class white girl reacting to a poorly-understood but evidently still-raw crime that touched and touches two minority communities. Whatever her intetest in it, it's not her story to tell, some might understandably say, and her attempts to tell it as her story through the imposition of her presence and neuroses in the reporting makes me a little uncomfortable.

 

The other side of this is if it's not her story, whose story is it to tell? I realize I'm viewing this from the position of white privilege, and I can't view it any other way, but I think if a story is attempted to be addressed straight up and done with journalistic integrity (any story, not just this one), any journalist should have the "right" to tell it. If one thinks the story is worth being reported, then it should be told. It just has to be handled the right way.

 

 

An aside because people have brought up being "other", it's sometimes weird to me being Jewish in America. I'm a white guy that doesn't look Jewish (if you know what I mean, you know what I mean). So 95+% of the time I'm the regular, privileged, white, middle classish male, and then this tiny percent of the time I'm an "other". Adnan to me doesn't feel like an other like I guess he does to many people. His religion makes him relatable to me, frankly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the few times Sarah touched on racism were surprisingly quickly dismissed.  For how readily she questioned most everyone's stories it was odd to seemingly brush off that idea and also conclude that the police work was generally solid when most of what we heard seemed to indicate the opposite.  

 

I agree with Danielle that its interesting to look at the criminal justice system and disheartening to see how awful it all is portrayed.  The only solace I can take is that apparently a train wreck of a case like this doesn't seem to be the norm.  My question to some of the folks who have serious issues with the existence of the program though is what changes would you have made to make it acceptable or should it just not have existed?

 

I think the real life crime angle and fact that there is an actual victim with a family aware of the podcast gives me serious qualms about how much I enjoyed listening.  Still, I'm interested in seeing where they go for next season and if they address some of the issues raised from this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Serial is the latest high profile symptom of a much larger underlying problem in journalism. 
 
I think focusing on it as a specific example ends up ignoring a bigger picture.  Journalism has a problem with minority representation.  NPR is actually one of the best in seeking out diverse talent, better than many other journalist outlets.  But that doesn't always translate to many individual shows.  This American Life (which I know isn't actually an NPR show) has a real diversity problem with its cast and contributors.  If you look at the staff and most common contributors to TAL, I think it's something like 90-95 percent white (I may be wrong here, but I don't think I am)*.  This is something no one wants to talk about, because it's such a beloved show.  But it's been going for 19 years, don't you think in that time Glass and company could have headhunted more diverse talent?
 
So when you ask a question like, "Well, who else is going to report this story?", you're actually a step too far.  Another question would be, why aren't shows and outlets that do investigative reporting doing a better job ensuring that they've hired and attracted diverse talent?  The Daily Show prioritized hiring a more diverse cast a number of years ago after coming under some heavy criticism, and it's paying off.  Prior to making that a priority, Jon Stewart admits they were entirely too white and missing a lot of different perspectives and personalities.  And now Larry Wilmore is taking over the Colbert slot.  So why, when one of the most successful public radio shows of all time decided to tackle a true crime story involving two minority communities, did they decide to assign a bunch of white people unfamiliar with those communities to it?  Sometimes its useful as a journalist to have the outsider perspective, but it can be just as valuable to have the insider perspective. 
 
This dovetails into another conversation about minority reporters getting pigeonholed as the Black correspondent, or the Asian correspondent, etc. A reporter can feel really insulted that they keep getting thrown stories based purely on the color of their skin or their ethnic background. You don't want to fall into a trap of thinking, "Oh, you're Asian, so you must be an expert on Korean immigrant culture." So the solution isn't to say, "Oh, well, we just need people from these communities reporting on them." Stories like this are handled by teams, and we need diverse teams reporting them. And that isn't happening enough.
 
This American Life sells itself as telling the diverse story of the American experience, and yet it hasn't internalized that mission in its own hiring. 
 
*To be fair, TAL has had hundreds of contributors over the years, many from a variety of races and ethnicities.  But I'm speaking about the paid staff and most frequent guest contributors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Dragon Age: Inquisition has trans characters? Are trans characters in that kind of fantasy fiction even a thing? I wanted to hear way more about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a lot of good points said in here about Serial and I think my opinion has remained about the same -- I think Chris and I are pretty aligned on it.

 

A point I wanted to bring up, in terms of how we make really broad comments about representation -- specifically RACIAL representation in the media get flip-flopped pretty conveniently.  I think it's an inarguable point that Adnan's (and Hai's) race matter not just within the context of the story but in his conviction.  The degree to which they impact Serial the podcast and his actual conviction are of course up for debate but it would be erroneous to say "it didn't matter."  I think Sarah said something to this effect.  She, in her guts, didn't think this was a To Kill a Mockingbird-style racial conviction (and I think she was a little careless in her tone when saying this) but at the same time layered in the facts and opinions of the jurors into the series in a way that I found to be honest and responsible.

 

It seems like a big mistake to make statements like "not her story to tell," or "this is bad because of the way we report about minorities, traditionally in the media."  Those don't seem like useful critiques.  When Scott Peterson was on trial for the double homicide of his wife and unborn baby (creating one of the biggest bullshit tv trials of the decade) a few very similar crimes had happened throughout the US, one within a poor latino family, if I remember.  The story then is -- we're only caring about Lacy Peterson because she is a white woman, look what happened here in Arizona and nobody cares.  I don't think that's a useful critique either.  The fact of the matter is there is real thought to be put into the responsibilities of journalists (and just "the media") in reporting vs entertaining AND it's important to consider the politics of representation within the piece but in terms of Serial it seems like the criticisms and petty dismissals get chalked up to a sentence or some unsubstantiated, highly-subjected paragraphs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now