Started Serial during a long car trip a couple weeks ago, not sure if I'm ever going to finish it. It's one of the most manipulative pieces of quasi-journalism I've ever come across. really don't understand everybody's obsession.
This is the thing. I loved serial. I also love those hour long murder mystery shows that could have been done in 10 minutes if they stopped fucking recapping it. I like the journey, I like the story, I like seeing people's motivations for murder and I love calling out the storytellers for their failing as a being a trustworthy journalist. It's a weird set of mental gymnastics I do in order to enjoy them while also being frustrated with them but oh well. I realize it's not 100% true, it's one sided, it's manipulative, it's all of that. But I still like hearing the story and trying to figure out what the police saw, what they didn't see, what characters are going to come out, etc. I also like calling out plot twists far in advance. Maybe I'm weird.
I finished it, and really thought it was meh at best, then I started seeing people super hyped on it on some sites and twitter/IG, and that just didn't make any sense at all. It was not really that good, and just felt more like the interior monologue of some death row fetishist after a while. Granted, I don't think the producer was really that naive or anything, but she sure as shit was doing everything wrong when it comes to examining due process.
You know, I really want to like The Intercept because they keep going with more on this story, but they're a laughable group as they're showing here. They go on for a whole page about how Serial presented a biased argument by framing the story, and then frame this whole article as "she's wrong, she's wrong, the JURY WAS RIGHT! THERE'S NO NEW EVIDENCE!" So they make claims of biased framing... with biased framing.