My choice of podcast is The Guardians podcast on Spotify. Titled, where does the world go from here?
- The audio paper affords performative aesthetics.
The podcast, in the beginning, had introduction music, synthesisers playing to create a futuristic atmosphere based on the topic of climate change. It creates an interesting aesthetic. The way the performer speaks as well inclines a more newsworthy podcast than an extremely performative one. I also enjoyed the field recordings used when speaking about the summit in Scotland, when speaking about the crowds they used actual crowd recordings.
2. The audio paper is idiosyncratic.
I wouldn’t say this specific podcast is idiosyncratic. But I would say I also don’t listen to enough podcasts to establish whether or not there is anything immensely unique to this podcast. One thing perhaps is the use of going back and forth between live interviews almost like a radio show, which then goes back towards actual recordings and sound effects, music to set the scene.
3. The audio paper is situated and partial.
I would say this podcast is situated and partial. It’s situated on our current time and understanding of climate change. The reasons why climate change is important and also an uncertain future. It’s very situated. Partial as well, the speaker is contrasting against the person being interviewed.
4. The audio paper evokes effects and sensations.
The use of sound effects and music evokes sensations and has powerful effects. Even the way the narrator speaks, in contrast to the person being interviewed who has a more confident voice speaking with authority. The narrator speaks at times with emotions of sadness and anger towards the narrator almost as if she is the issue. I think the overall production for this podcast was designed specifically to evoke emotion over this topic that is currently really important. The summit in Scotland.
5. The audio paper is multifocal; it assembles diverse and often heterogeneous voices.
This podcast could have better use of heterogeneous voices. Although I agree to an extent with this podcast. I think it really skewered towards the anti-big business and coal usage. Again it’s not that I disagree with this statement but more that it didn’t bring a balanced argument. Didn’t discuss the other side, why don’t the big business what to get rid of it? Is this actually realistic?
6. The audio paper has multiple protagonists, narrators and material agencies.
I would say this podcast does this very well. There are multiple protagonists, interviewers and narrators. Usage of sounds and recordings to build atmospheres. Sound design and music. Perhaps the narration could be improved as it does change, but not a lot. It’s mainly the male voice throughout asking questions and one could ask potentially why that is? I think it could perhaps be a systematic patriarchal choice, patriarchy usually has the idea that the man rules the house and society. So we should always have a man asking the questions and being the overall narrator.
7. The audio paper brings aesthetics and technology together in mediation.
This podcast uses masters and mixing. Recording and production to its uses. Music production and sound editing. Recording, samples and other techniques. I think it does it well, in contrast to this point it hits the nail on the head. Specifically with the mixing and mastering.
8. The audio paper is a constituent part of broader ecologies.
I would say this podcast only touches on this point. It does reflect the topic of global warming to wider countries and cultures. Using recordings of other countries leaders speaking about what global warming does. How it affects different countries differently. But also doesn’t really touch to much apart from the use of samples/recordings.