Is "Serial" Serious?

A nonfiction investigative audio narrative hosted by Sarah Koenig

Serial tells the a story about the gruesome murder of Hae Min Lee, and the controversial backlash that has followed the trial. The audio podcast is hosted by Sarah Koenig, an American journalist and recent staff producer of the television and radio program This American Life. Koenig introduced the idea of presenting a serialized narrative that unfolded over time and was separated into a season of episodes. The series consists of twelve lengthy episodes that present this story in a "linear" format that releases week by week. The idea for the podcast to be releasing information as it becomes available is incredibly innovative and was very well-received by the audience. However, the show has recently been under scrutiny for being exploitative, manipulative, violat[ing] journalistic ethics, and approach[ing] the case involving people of color from a position of white privilege.

Hae Min Lee, the victim

Adnan Syed, the convicted

At the resolution of the case, Adnan Syed, Hae Min Lee's previous boyfriend, was found guilty of first degree murder and kidnapping that resulted in a life sentence in prison. Syed professed his innocence throughout the case but to no avail. The knowledge of the events that led up to the murder are extremely controversial and are reliant upon foggy and faded memories. Many different people were interviewed and brought in to question by the police and hardly any of the stories match up in any sense. The most influential story in this particular case comes from an acquaintance of Adnan Syed, Jay Wilds. His story became the basis of the investigation on Syed. The following timeline represents the events as told by Jay Wild.

Jenn, as mentioned in the timeline, is located in the cell phone records of Syed's phone and eventually led the police to Jay. He reluctantly admitted that he was an accessory in the murder of Hae Min Lee and led the police to the victim's abandoned car. 

The investigation included accounts from more than a dozen people. However, some of those people offered stories that conflicted with not only each other's accounts but also things that they had personally said earlier. The greatest offender in altering previous claims came from Jay, the most influential person in the case. Over the course of the trial Jay met with investigators and detectives a maximum of six times, and each story he presented conflicted with something he had previously claimed as true. Jay claimed that Syed left school that day, January 13th, 1999, in a car with Lee and proceeded to strangle her in a Best Buy parking lot just a few minutes from school. 

The distance from the Best Buy parking lot and Woodlawn High School

However, another classmate of Syed's, Asia McClain, said that she saw him in the library on the same day at nearly the exact same time. This time conflict would leave an almost impossible window for Syed to have left and kill Lee by 2:36 PM, the time of the murder as professed by Jay. Though this McClain alibi presented a decent defense for Syed, the information was never used in court. The previous are just a few of the questionable conflicts that arose during the case, however, this blog is meant to discuss the ethical appeal of the podcast, not the trial. 

Now that the bare bones of the case have been laid out in front of you, it is time to decide whether or not this podcast presented the story in the correct light. I will save you the time and tell you ahead of time, it was not. As interesting as it can be to present a nonfiction murder case in a journalistic and entertaining way, it is nearly impossible to do so in an unbiased manner. In the case of this show specifically, it was a "do or die" situation. The podcast medium has been consistently declining in recent years and these producers were looking for a way to revamp it. This idea was born in the search for a way to increase viewers and ratings. If the show was created to attract an audience, wouldn't the creators do everything in their power to gain or, at least, retain viewers? Yes, and that is exactly what they did. 

The Lee-Syed case happened more than fifteen years ago. All of the facts, or what we know as facts, have already been presented, and we know the outcome. However, the show presents the story in an order that relates more to the plot of a Law and Order episode more than it follows the plot as it actually occurred. The show would continuously manipulate the audience to believe certain stories of a handful of people involved without presenting the actual truth. Koenig held back certain information until the end of the show just to build tension and appeal to the audience. One critic claimed that, Serial at times becomes as much about Sarah Koenig and her stream of consciousness investigating the case, as it is about the case. People need to remember that this is not a fictional murder mystery. This story follows the case of a living breathing person that had family, friends, and a bright future. It makes me sick to my stomach that this story is exploited in such way just for the sake of entertainment. The journalistic integrity of Serial initially appeared strong, but after just a small amount research one can argue that the journalistic integrity is nonexistent. 

Aside from the fact that this podcast manipulated and exploited this story, its treatment of race is insulting. One theory that Koenig explained in episode eight of the series makes an incredibly racist claim about the main suspect, Jay, and the jury that decided the fate of the case. Koenig explicitly stated that Jay, an African-American, was given the favor in his argument because of the amount of African-Americans in the jury. “You have an urban jury in Baltimore city, mostly African American, maybe people who identify with Jay more than Adnan, who is represented by a community in headscarves and men in beards..." Though that could possibly be a conflict of interest, the fact that Koenig projected that statement on international airwaves is mind boggling. Aside from the racial implications on African-Americans, the podcast is constantly commenting on the religious relationship between Lee, a Korean, and Syed, a Muslim. Some sections of the podcast were presented in such an irreverent manner that I questioned the intellect of the producers.

The Jinx, the popular HBO series that follows the evidence of three murder cases against Robert Durst, found an appropriate medium to present the story. Granted, in that case the filmmakers were finding evidence and clues as they were creating the show. In The Jinx, the filmmakers found incriminating evidence that otherwise may never have been discovered by the authorities. The families of the victims in The Jinx were constantly a part of the creation of the show and added a very interesting perspective on the case. However, in Serial, the family of Hae Min Lee wanted nothing to do with the podcast and outwardly opposed it. 

Serial was a groundbreaking innovation in the fact that it was the first podcast to create a nonfiction serialized murder narrative. However, the steps that were taken to ensure the success of the show are insulting. The amount of information that had to be withheld, altered, or removed completely take away from the validity of the case presented. It needs to be more widely understood that this is a nonfiction story in which real people were injured, deceived, and punished. As much as I would love to learn the true events that took place on January 13th, 1999, I believe too much deception has occurred for any reliable case to be presented. 

Works Cited:

http://www.theawl.com/2014/11/serial-and-white-reporter-privilege

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/26/1345786/-The-mystery-and-controversy-of-Serial#

http://serialpodcast.org/season-one/1/the-alibi

http://www.salon.com/2014/11/17/from_the_greatest_podcast_ever_made_to_shamelessly_exploitative_an_introduction_to_the_serial_backlash/

http://serialpodcast.org/posts/2015/02/update-court-of-special-appeals-will-hear-arguments-in-adnan-syed-case