True crime stories have become extremely popular and entertaining, especially in media as well as in written work. These interesting and complex stories have brought a large audience to podcasts specifically as a way for audiences to stay more connected with the stories they are hearing. Podcasts are becoming increasingly popular due to their convenience as well as the ability to engage in other tasks while simultaneously listening. In addition, podcasts can be more compelling than simply reading an article because the audio engages the listener better than simply reading words on a page. Listening to a person talk contrary to reading is a connecting and humanizing experience because you’re able to hear things like tone. Podcasts are also a form of entertainment that provides the listener with information in a more enjoyable way.
In the article and podcast of the Golden State Killer, each form of media describes and portrays the story of the case in different manners. The article is much more detailed than the podcast itself, giving a first-person perspective of the case. Because the author of the article was trying to discover the identity of the killer, the focus is a lot on the evidence as well as witness accounts of the case which makes the article feel less like a story. The podcast on the other hand is a lot more engaging in my opinion because of the way the case was portrayed. The podcast felt like a story being told from a more objective point of view which led to a compelling account of the case. In addition, the podcast went into less detail meaning it focused more on his killings directly instead of going through evidence. The article was more about informing the listener about the case while the podcast was still informative but with more entertainment.
Personally, I think podcasts are more effective in relaying information to the listener compared to articles although they are both valuable pieces of media.
Word count: 328
I liked your observation about the podcast being told from a more objective point of view, as opposed to the article. The ability to have actual voice clips and emphatic narration makes it feel more fact-based. The podcast can have people involved in the case make appearances that might go into more detail than someone else trying to summarize their work. It will be interesting to see how the two mediums evolve over the next couple of years.
I agree with your assessment that the article went into much greater detail of the case and the podcast got to the point quickly. I also agree that being able to hear the tone of the podcast made it very engaging. However, I feel like all the details of the article as well as the perspective of the author made this more like a story for me than the podcast.