Hello 3.5 readers.
Have you ever listened to the podcast, “Serial?” In the first season, the hose, Sarah Koenig, presented the case of Adnan Syed and illustrated that how it is possible for all the evidence to be laid out in a case and for people to still be unsure of whether or not a defendant is innocent or guilty.
Koenig has a knack for storytelling style journalism and keeps things lively and moving.
Produced by the creators of This American Life, Serial is back for a second season. This time the individual under scrutiny is Sgt. Bo Bergdahl.
You might remember he was a major news story last year. In 2009, he walked away from his post in Afghanistan and six soldiers died while looking for him.
Last year, he was returned to the US after a prisoner swap with the Taliban that led to four major terrorists in captivity going free.
This is a tough one. My blog is not political…at all. But I do enjoy good story telling and Sarah Koenig is a master at it. She definitely knows how to end every episode on a cliffhanger that keeps her audience coming back for more.
So here’s what I propose. If you’re listening to Serial, stop by here once a week and let’s chat about the latest episode, hash out the info and the evidence and try to figure out what’s going on.
Not gonna lie – I might pull the plug on this. My hope is you all won’t get too political. Were the wars in the Middle East right or wrong? I hate this politician or I like that politician or whatever…not really up for debate here.
The crux of this season seems to be around Bergdahl telling his story and admittedly, as of the end of the first episode, it sounds pretty lame.
Briefly summarized – he claims he ran away because he had to create a “DUSTWUN” or a missing soldier situation in which the top brass pays attention. He claims he had to do this because his unit was poorly managed and hoped this would get him an audience with someone with a high rank that could do something about his complaints about his unit.
I have to admit, that sounds like a pretty fishy story. “I was 23 and I was scared and so I made a dumb mistake and ran away. I’m very sorry for the six people who died looking for me.”
To me, that would be more sympathetic than, “I was afraid my poorly managed unit was going to lead to people getting killed….so I ran away….um, and got six people killed.”
Anyway, let’s be civil (NOT POLITICAL) and look at it from an academic approach. If you listened to this first episode, do you believe Bergdahl or do you think he’s full of a smelly substance?
I’ll say up front I believe he’s in the latter column. My fear is that this guy is basically trying to save himself by impugning the character of a unit that tried to save him when he went AWOL (six of whom died in the process.)
And I get it. I’ve never served in the military. Who am I to criticize anyone? But, like I said, I’d be sympathetic to “I was young and scared and made a mistake” but hearing him talk as though he is “Jason Bourne” strains credibility.
Cliffhanger for next week – um, it sounds like Sarah is going to call the Taliban on the phone to interview them. Who knew they were even listed in the phonebook?
Check out Serial Podcast for more.
NOTE: To reiterate, please refrain from the nastiness of politics. I’m not looking for comments to the effect of “I HATE REPUBLICANS!” or “I HATE DEMOCRATS!” and so on.
The podcast is interesting to me because, as she did in the first season with Syed, Sarah presents two sides of a case and leaves it up to the listener to make his/her own conclusions.
So in other words, we’re not talking about the politics of war – instead, we’re presented with a case. A soldier walked away from his unit, got 6 people killed during a search for him, his release led to four dangerous people being freed.
Is Bergdahl guilty? Yes or no and what about the evidence/interviews presented in the podcast make you think that way?
Bookshelf Battle 