Because I'm an old foagie and it hasn't yet sunk in for me how long ago 2000 was.
I've read a lot about this case. You're acting as if just because I haven't heard the podcast I have no interest in it or knowing anything about it. That's clearly false. My entire post was that a podcast shouldn't define the discussion around this case, as it so clearly does.
I don't trust the podcast, or any podcast, to tell us about a criminal case in such a way that we would be qualified second guessing a judge or jury. It's a stylized presentation. It must be written a certain way to bring in listeners- the producers' and journalists' jobs/careers depend on it. The goal is primarily to entertain. There are no controls, no deliberative processes put in place that we would put in place of the goal was to inform listeners so that we could make a judgement or opinion about the case, as opposed to being entertained. Listening to it doesn't make you a juror, and I have no desire to be.
There are good reasons to think the podcast is biased. First of all, the defendant and his family participated in the story, as did another witness favorable to the defense. Meanwhile, none of the family members of the victim participated, despite strenuous efforts to get them to do so. One witness favorable to the prosecution only gave a public interview after his home address was given out in reddit. Second of all, there would be no "story" if Koenig had concluded that the verdict was right. Whens the last time you heard of an investigative journalism piece or advocacy piece that concluded "all is well." "After all those episodes, I concluded that the system worked." That would be a boring story. Koenig was incentivized from the start to reach the conclusion she wanted. Third, there's the fact that she literally comes out and says she thinks Adnan is innocent. That's a clear endorsement of one side in an ongoing dispute. Fourth,
people who have heard the podcast have said that it is biased. I don't have to watch Obama's SOTU to have an opinion on his proposals, or know if the speech was a success or which party's policies were advocated. I may still listen to it, but I don't think itll resolve the concerns I've raised here.