|
My question is this: The night of the 12th Adnan calls Krista from the cell tower near his house (which is also near the school and Best Buy) and talks to her for about 20 minutes. You can see he tried to reach her earlier in the day and she wasn't home (three second calls). He then immediately calls Hae from L608C, which is much further south along I95, heading into downtown Baltimore. Clearly he called Krista while driving, as there's only a minute or so between calls, then called Hae. Hae's not there, the call is only 2 seconds. He calls Hae almost exactly a half hour later from downtown Baltimore, then a half hour after that from a tower near Jay's house (which is along 695, he could just be driving home) and they talk for about 2 minutes. Presumably this is when Adnan gave her his number. There aren't any more calls until he phones Jay the next morning around 10:30. So what was Adnan doing driving into downtown Baltimore at midnight on a school night? What's that about? edit: the phone call list and interactive map are here http://serialpodcast.org/maps bad day fucked around with this message at 12:53 on Oct 25, 2014 |
#
¿
Oct 25, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:05 |
|
|
I've lived in China since '08, and MLM is perhaps bigger here than it is in the USA, due to some of the social characteristics of Chinese society. They even put warnings about pyramid schemes up on the walls in university classrooms. The government has tried to crack down but you can't effectively ban a business model. The interesting thing about Wake Up Now is how it's geared specifically towards people of color. A lot of the rhetoric reminds me of these NY/NJ recovery types I met in South Florida, who all worked in peripherally shady industries like telemarketing. I mean, I'm surprised by this but companies like Cutco are much, much worse.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
There's always a social benefit to being a cult member, though. People wouldn't buy into these things if they didn't feel like it was improving their lives somehow. Be it closeness with family, a sense of brotherhood and belonging, the feeling of financial self-sufficiency, or of others' respect. It's cheaper than paying people. If this guy spent all his time doing Wake Up Now, what exactly was he doing in that time? Watching YouTube videos? Posting about Wake Up Now on social media? Trying to get other people to join? Because if you look at what they "sell" - it's an energy drink, some web services. Maybe they do web referrals, and that's the big source of income? Their "deal stream" just sells a bunch of random crap at minor discounts - kids' ties, crockpots, baby bottles, PS3 controllers, blenders, Windows tablets. Then they have "apps" like WUN Speak which has lots of promotional material that doesn't say which languages are offered, and if you look at everything else they "sell" it just sort of evaporates. So it's an organization that thrives on paying people to get other people to sign up? I mean, Amway ostensibly forces their members to buy products, or encourages them to buy in amounts they cannot possibly sell. Wake Up Now doesn't appear to sell anything of value. edit: real text from their real website Wake Up Now posted:Volume for Team Payouts bad day fucked around with this message at 14:23 on Jan 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
Knifegrab posted:I totally think her being harassed is the real deal. That poo poo happens and its awful. Its quite rampant and problematic for women on the internet and in the games profession. I am of the opinion that the people who attract this much ire play at least some part in their victimhood, that some essential quality about them causes total strangers to despise them. For example the whole Zoe Quinn thing started because she acted like a typical Livejournal poster and started poo poo with the random people on the Internet, talking like a "indie game designer" when she basically wrote a CYOA about depression. Then the boyfriend thing happened, and people who already had a bone to pick with her jumped at the opportunity. Everything since snowballed from there. Of course, she will claim the boyfriend was the start of the thing, but there's years of Twitter screenshots to the contrary. She was a terrible drama queen with awful self-important opinions long before that happened. Anyway people who attract exactly this much hate for a prolonged period of time are not being hated for their popularity or opinions but rather some sort of attention-seeking aspect of their personality that is eminently hate worthy. Look at how people irrationally hate Michael Moore, for example, or Kim Kardashian. Justin Bieber, for example - his face is legitimately punchable and he sings songs! What can anita sarkeesian do, besides post videos produced by her boyfriend, give interviews where she plays victim, and beg for money on the Internet? And I think that's the crux of it really, nearly all of the gamergate victims are... Drumroll please... People who beg for money on the Internet. I think, when it comes down to it, anyone living that sort of lifestyle will attract an inordinate amount of hate mail, male or female, feminist or non. And I admit that I am a terrible person but I do not have a Patreon account and know how to start a business without crowd funding and/or hitting my friends/the Internet up for cash. So that automatically makes me better than everyone mentioned in this post except for Kim Kardashian, Michael Moore, and Justin Bieber. bad day fucked around with this message at 02:42 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:"They deserved it" is the post-facto justification. "I disliked them so I sicc'd the internet on them" is so blatantly obvious that it's a part of SA. The worst page on the internet was running more than a decade and a half ago; Lowtax and the 2000s had enough restraint (or lacked the anonymity) to call the police to people's houses. I agree with you - but at the same time there still seems to be a participatory element in exactly who gets targeted. They are, on the whole, self-promoting "internet personalities" who devote a considerable amount of time and effort to public life. I admit to being a bad poster, but I also don't claim to be important, or that my opinions are inherently valid, or better than yours. You're free to disagree with me - I'm just talking about my own observations. Notice I am neither using my real name nor begging for money. It's really easy to use the "asking for it" criticism as a thought-stopping device (by subconsciously equating online backlash with rape) but you must admit the victim plays SOME part in attracting trolls, when they are trying to use the internet as a means for self-promotion. People like Chris-Chan attract trolls because they compulsively post their private matters online; sites like Jezebel thrive because they deliberately try to generate false controversy. Choosing to post your masturbatory Pokemon fantasies online or working for a company whose business model is based on generating as much clickworthy internet ire as possible - these actions will have predictable consequences. I feel like the gamergate trolling is terrible, and would never participate, but I feel like the culture of victimhood thrives on this sort of phenomenon as a means of self-promotion. There's some sort of broader internet culture war between corporate real-name web 3.0 users and more traditional IRC/BBS/Chan type users, and this more indicative of that divide than some sort of magic window into the rape culture. Also it seems like gender and race politics on college campuses have gotten really confusing, much more so than 5-10 years ago. I have spent this time living in the developing world and it seems like white America has gotten so fat and wealthy they've run out of actual problems to complain about, and have graduated into hand-wringing over stuff like microagressions and nongendered bathrooms. (old man shouts at sky) Anyway feel free to call me an rear end in a top hat or send me threats, it's not like I haven't already been bought a million My Little Pony avatars.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
Is it normal for This American Life to recycle so many stories in one year? I've been listening to TAL for years but other podcasts only recently, and it seems like the majority of TAL episodes in 2014-2015 have been repeats of other podcasts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2015 08:48
|
|
|
What I mean is this year TAL has featured the first episode of Serial (also available in other podcast form) the first episode of Invisibilia (also available in other podcast form), the first two episodes of Startup (also available in other podcast form) and a number of episodes that basically republish content from Planet Money, Radiolab, and other podcasts in the iTunes top ten. For example there's an AMAZING recent episode of Reply All called Why Is Mason Reese Crying - I'll bet you a dollar it winds up as part of a TAL episode sometime in the next 12 months. I've been listening to This American Life for 10+ years - I have probably listened to every single episode except for that one nobody has. I don't remember such a large proportion of content being taken from other radio shows and podcasts. I definitely remember some episodes that were Planet Money compilations, or featured Radiolab stories, or a short segment from The Moth, but I don't remember them being such a large proportion of TAL's output. Of course, in that time I did not listen to many other radio shows and podcasts, so maybe I just didn't notice. I've actually been wanting to post about this for months, though I never got around to it - am I wrong? Did the last 12 months feature as much republished content as they've always had? It seems like every other time I download a new episode these days I'm like "wait I listened to this last week" or "huh I downloaded this today as a different podcast" and am kind of missing the experience of listening to new TAL stories on my walk home from work. If it HAS always been this way. Man, what a lazy show. I've been giving them too much credit. bad day fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Apr 9, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2015 17:19
|
|
|
Antifreeze Head posted:If you mean the Mike Daisey one that was later retracted No, there's a very early episode that isn't in the TAL archives and you can't find it in any of the user-created archives on file-sharing services or YouTube because apparently nobody kept a recording of it. Also, does anybody have the URL that takes you directly to the TAL mp3 files? A few years ago someone sent me a link where you can just add the episode number to the end of the url and listen to/download that specific episode instead of streaming it through their site. I live in China and the TAL portal doesn't work that well here, but the episodes themselves are not blocked by the firewall because they are hosted on a different server.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
I had a professor who was publicly ousted for mass plagiarism. He'd been on the NYT bestseller list and written many seminal mass-market books on his field. The whole thing seemed very weird and pathological to me, as he could have simply quoted the other authors in his work. He was basically borrowing sentences and short paragraphs from other people, over a period of 20-30 years and got in an early version of an online kerfuffle. Someone looked into his work, publicly disgraced, fired on the spot. What's funny is his books are still good. There was nothing wrong with them in the first place. For some reason he was just fond of attributing work to himself that was directly quoted from other authors, and even though it made up a small portion of his total output it was pretty much omnipresent throughout his academic career. But it's not like these were academic books, even - he wrote stuff published by Penguin and Random House. Anyway the whys and wherefores of phd students is beyond most people - I have known grad students who went completely off the deep end in a wide variety of ways.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
axolotl farmer posted:Yeah it was a good one. I tried to like Mystery Show but, wow, such useless and uninteresting "mysteries".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Yeah what the gently caress, eh? For REALLY bad conversation faking check out Limetown/Tanis/Black Tapes Podcast.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
Yeah I dig the stories of all three podcasts I mentioned (plus The Message) but they all lack believable voice acting. I think using the Serial format to tell a fictional story has lots of potential and we might end up with a podcast along the lines of House of Leaves that reaches Serial-level EPIC PODCAST EVENT status. But they're gonna have to hire real actors.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
The number of repeats and segments from other podcasts in the last year has soured my opinion of This American Life.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Sarah Vowell has the worst voice though. I even agree with people who complain about people complaining about women's voices; she has the most annoying voice ever. She and David Sedaris should make horrible chalkboard nail babies and unleash them upon the world.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
In the case of Sarah Vowell it is not anything in particular she does, just the nature of her voice in general. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr2nGLhZcuE But I like her books.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
Kings Of Calabria posted:For anyone on the fence about Planet Money, listen to the latest episode from the last day or two - it's about public servants who we all thought were heroes but are really just schlubs RAKING IN THE CASH for doing NOTHING most of the time. They showed up to an emergency call for no reason and rushed by our intrepid reporter and her fake-rear end accent! They asked for $75/year from all the six-figure tech guys buying $2m bungalows, gently caress them. I didn't take that away from the episode at all.. What I understand is that we simply have fewer fires these days but various psychological reasons (i.e. Hero Worship) prevent us from realistically budgeting for fire departments. The current status quo is that most firefighters spend most of their time doing things that have nothing to do with fires, and wasteful policies that send a huge fire truck on every 911 call, fire or otherwise. So the firefighters would be happier if they spent more time fighting fires, and the communities would be better off spending those resources on something they actually need. But that would mean fewer firefighters, fewer "heroes" to worship. This is a big problem with people in fields like police, military, and health where everybody is a hero and people think they should accept all of the monies to continue being heroes. In reality, though, these are jobs, not unlike other jobs.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
That last episode completely changed the context in which I saw some of these people. I empathize with The Florida Cousins more than anyone else now. I don't know who the victim is in this story though. Maybe that old lady.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
TL posted:I was feeling that way about the Florida cousins until Rita said the mortician should have cut John's nipples off to get the titty rings. She believed they were lying to her - that they were going to steal them for themselves. Think about it - you have this aunt who lives with her crazy son who put all his money in gold bars, started hanging out with sketchy rear end dudes, and when he wound up killing himself she's stuck looking after the aunt who has no money because the gold was stolen or didn't exist to begin with, and this one dude keeps breaking into the property and stealing what little poo poo still has value. To me, in that situation, the whole thing would be a gigantic pain in the rear end I have been saddled with. So yeah if I want to keep his titty rings then the coroner should give them to me. He literally just cut the dude open and sewed him back together - and he can't get the nipple rings out? Really? My immediate reaction would be they are some redneck rear end thieves. I dunno, I just kinda sympathize. It's harder to relate to Tyler knowing the sadomasochistic aspect of their relationship.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
I'm sure absolutely everyone interviewed on this show signed the requisite legal documents. Also when you say something to a reporter "off the record" that reporter isn't obligated to keep it a secret - if you want to keep it secret you don't tell the reporter to begin with. It just means you don't want to be directly recorded or quoted. Paraphrasing is fine. Reporters aren't lawyers or priests and they're not up to some holy standard of mirandizing everyone they speak to before an interview. Honestly it seems like most of these people are happy enough to get the attention. If they were recorded, they signed forms. edit: I agree with many of you in that the self-insertion in this series is not good. The reporter is always the least interesting person in these stories and their role should be minimized as much as possible. bad day fucked around with this message at 04:12 on Apr 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
It seems like they'd all hang out sometimes and do that stuff to him together. It definitely recontextualizes a lot of earlier recorded conversations.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
If you think S-Town was out ethics you clearly aren't familiar with modern documentary television programming. I don't really understand why people so strongly object to grey ethics in podcasting when there are entire industries within the mainstream media that do nothing but stalk and harass celebrities 24/7. It just seems like a weird place to be drawing an ethical line considering literally everything everyone else is always doing. bad day fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Apr 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
outlier posted:There's at least one person who the reporter doesn't know the name of, which would indicate that not everyone signed off. What are the guidelines for this sort of thing? I don't know about audio but if you film people you need a few signatures to use the footage commercially. I think the format downplays the fact that this audio was captured over a rather long period of time (my impression is years?) so it's easy to view this as forensically picking apart some crazy dude's life but John reached out to the reporter over a period of years and invited him to become part of his life. Do these guys hanging out in a secret bar at a tattoo shop fully understand the implications of appearing on an internationally famous podcast? Should a lawyer be present to tell them what they should and should not say? In what way would that be journalism? I'll admit standing outside Richard Simmons' house with a boom box is going too far. To me, this story about John humanized everyone involved. That's the most a documentarian should hope to achieve in depicting his subjects; anything else is a form of lying or fabricating the story. quote:It's very much the NPR style, isn't it? And I found the reporter a bit fake as well. Definitely. It's become a trope in podcasts and is even worse on the ones that do this for no reason. I tried listening to a new serial murder podcast last month and they spent more time introducing each other than talking about the killer. Nobody listens to podcasts about serial murderers because they love hearing about the people who make the podcast. My observation is that a lot of people try to copy the wrong elements about popular shows. Koenig and her assistant were the least interesting part of Serial. I listen to NPR in the car and like to play a game where I see how long it takes them to shoehorn some minority or immigrant group into a story where they don't belong. I swear they'd do a story on bees and it'd be about a Muslim Somali refugee family raising bees in Brooklyn, which they'd connect back to the travel ban. I know they are playing to a generational audience and eventually the Chapo Trap House guys will be running All Things Considered, but it's just kind of silly how they instill neoliberal value signaling into every last millisecond of airtime.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
I really don't care if the stories I listen to at work confirm my values or highlight the plight of oppressed and disadvantaged peoples. I just like good stories. S-Town was a good story - I can tell because some parts of it kind of upset me and are still running around the back of my brain, days later. A really good radio story unpacks in your mind. You think about it afterwards. This is what I like about TAL. NPR weekday shows are the exact opposite - if there's a big storm somewhere they'll do a story about the family of gay Tibetan throat singers who run a Montessori school there. It's a good format, I guess? Do people actually like it? I'm a big Planet Money fan which is strangely exempt from this rule (because it's a podcast?). bad day fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Electoral Surgery posted:MURICA See, this is stupid because that's not what I'm saying. This is a format they use because it tests well with their base demographic. It's just another example of how marketing techniques have leaked into news content. I could care less about where people are from I just think it's lame to have such an obvious moral agenda and try to pretend it doesn't exist. Not only that but I'm really not interested in what people who think they need to teach me values have to say. Unfortunately there's nothing else halfway decent on the radio. bad day fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Apr 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:05 |
|
|
Yeah, my impression is it's a sort of selection bias where producers know what stories get aired and specifically tailor their reporting to maximize personal success. I'm not saying it's some kind of NPR conspiracy but the end result is rather silly at times.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 17:13
|
|