The podcast “In the Dark” is about Jacob Wetterling, a boy who was abducted on a rural street in Minnesota in 1989. Like many podcasts about a crime mystery, the narrator, Madeleine Baran, delves deeply into the stories of everyone involved to try and uncover the truth. However, one thing that distinguishes this podcast from others is that it focuses on the issues with law enforcement, and why it took 27 years to solve the murder. Grasping the emotions of the viewers with personal interviews of family and friends of the victim, Baran attempts to connect the dots of the crime while engaging listeners.
While podcasts are most often a form of entertainment, “In The Dark” delves deeper into the issues surrounding the criminal justice system and its social implications. In this way it is almost educational. Although I have only seen a handful of episodes, it is clear that Baran focuses on answering the question: “Why didn't police solve the crime while it was still fresh, when the victim had a chance of being alive?” She researches these issues with the listeners and gains an understanding of why everything happened the way it did. Through the words of Baran herself, she wants to investigate “powerful people or institutions who are potentially misusing their power or are doing things to harm people who have less power than them.”
How Baran attacks this question is rather interesting. Because the abduction of a child is an emotional subject, she uses a certain amount of pathos to get her listeners invested in the story. Often when we hear about law enforcement issues on the news, it is hard to “feel” the impact since we are not personally invested or affected. What Baran is trying to do is bring the audience into every detail and every emotion of the people affected by this crime, and put us in the shoes of those whose lives are completely in the hands of law enforcement’s decision. By doing so, she can bring to light deeper issues within criminal justice, and throughout the podcast she discusses the issues surrounding the trial: everything that did not add up. For example, she discusses the racial issues and biases involving the conviction of Curtis Flowers, who was found guilty for the crime despite the belief of his innocence within the black community. Baran proceeded to analyze the gray area in the case, while also discussing whether or not Flowers was wrongly convicted.
A lot of news and crime can be sensationalized, especially murder mystery stories, in order to grab the attention of the audience. I believe, however, that Baran specifically tried to stay away from this hyperbole. Baran seldom puts her opinion in, and does not stretch the facts. She gives concrete evidence in the form of data, people's recollections of the day, and police reports.
There are some similarities between “In the Dark” and “Serial”, a breakthrough murder mystery podcast that quickly became a cult favorite. It was different than a lot of podcasts in that its episodes were well thought out and story-like. It drew in viewers through “Combining the drama of prestige-television-style episodic storytelling, the portability of podcasts, and the reliability of ‘This American Life’...” (Larson). You can read more about “Serial” in the New Yorker here (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/sarah-larson/serial-podcast-weve-waiting). Both podcasts are riveting and deal with a criminal case. But while “Serial” is certainly popular, the current political climate sets “In the Dark” apart from it because it delves into the controversial topic of police work and ethics in such detail.
One detail that adds interest to the story of Jacob Wetterling is that the mystery has been solved. A man named Danny James Heinrich, a Caucasian male, confessed to the crime and is now serving 20 years in jail. One might think that this would make the story less interesting. However, it is actually the opposite. While the police eventually arrested Heinrich, and he led them to Jacob’s remains, it doesn't explain why the police didn't find them earlier, or why they didn't solve the crime faster. The focus of the podcast becomes the issue of law enforcement, and how their procedures affected the families and communities impacted by the crime. Overall this podcast is not only captivating, it also delves deeply into issues surrounding law enforcement.
While podcasts are most often a form of entertainment, “In The Dark” delves deeper into the issues surrounding the criminal justice system and its social implications. In this way it is almost educational. Although I have only seen a handful of episodes, it is clear that Baran focuses on answering the question: “Why didn't police solve the crime while it was still fresh, when the victim had a chance of being alive?” She researches these issues with the listeners and gains an understanding of why everything happened the way it did. Through the words of Baran herself, she wants to investigate “powerful people or institutions who are potentially misusing their power or are doing things to harm people who have less power than them.”
How Baran attacks this question is rather interesting. Because the abduction of a child is an emotional subject, she uses a certain amount of pathos to get her listeners invested in the story. Often when we hear about law enforcement issues on the news, it is hard to “feel” the impact since we are not personally invested or affected. What Baran is trying to do is bring the audience into every detail and every emotion of the people affected by this crime, and put us in the shoes of those whose lives are completely in the hands of law enforcement’s decision. By doing so, she can bring to light deeper issues within criminal justice, and throughout the podcast she discusses the issues surrounding the trial: everything that did not add up. For example, she discusses the racial issues and biases involving the conviction of Curtis Flowers, who was found guilty for the crime despite the belief of his innocence within the black community. Baran proceeded to analyze the gray area in the case, while also discussing whether or not Flowers was wrongly convicted.
A lot of news and crime can be sensationalized, especially murder mystery stories, in order to grab the attention of the audience. I believe, however, that Baran specifically tried to stay away from this hyperbole. Baran seldom puts her opinion in, and does not stretch the facts. She gives concrete evidence in the form of data, people's recollections of the day, and police reports.
There are some similarities between “In the Dark” and “Serial”, a breakthrough murder mystery podcast that quickly became a cult favorite. It was different than a lot of podcasts in that its episodes were well thought out and story-like. It drew in viewers through “Combining the drama of prestige-television-style episodic storytelling, the portability of podcasts, and the reliability of ‘This American Life’...” (Larson). You can read more about “Serial” in the New Yorker here (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/sarah-larson/serial-podcast-weve-waiting). Both podcasts are riveting and deal with a criminal case. But while “Serial” is certainly popular, the current political climate sets “In the Dark” apart from it because it delves into the controversial topic of police work and ethics in such detail.
One detail that adds interest to the story of Jacob Wetterling is that the mystery has been solved. A man named Danny James Heinrich, a Caucasian male, confessed to the crime and is now serving 20 years in jail. One might think that this would make the story less interesting. However, it is actually the opposite. While the police eventually arrested Heinrich, and he led them to Jacob’s remains, it doesn't explain why the police didn't find them earlier, or why they didn't solve the crime faster. The focus of the podcast becomes the issue of law enforcement, and how their procedures affected the families and communities impacted by the crime. Overall this podcast is not only captivating, it also delves deeply into issues surrounding law enforcement.
No comments:
Post a Comment