Podcast Analysis
For this paper, you will evaluate a radio podcast as a form of public history, using specific examples from the podcast and making connections to relevant parts of our readings. Ultimately, make a central argument or point about the effectiveness of your podcast as a form of public history.
Begin by reading RonaldGrele's article, "Whose Public? Whose History? What is the Goal of a Public Historian" and Susan Porter Benson, Stephen Brier, and Roy Rosenzweig's "Introduction" in Presenting the Past. Next, listen topodcast of your choicefromBackstory .
Click on "episodes" for a list of and access to all podcasts.Backstory is a nationally broadcasted radio program on a range of topics and events in U.S. History hosted by a group of professionalhistorians.
Begin your paper with a very brief description of your podcast: What podcast did you listen to and what major topics and themes did it cover? What central questions about the past is the podcast asking?
The bulk of your paper should be an evaluation or analysis of the podcast as a form of public history. Make sure your evaluation takes the form of a central argument-stated at the beginning of the paper-about your podcast's effectiveness as a form of public history.
Questions to help you evaluate your podcast (you do not have to answer all of these in your evaluation, but use them to think critically about the podcast as a form of public history):
What types of listeners was the podcast trying to reach, what methods didit use to engage its audience(s), and didit do so effectively?
What central argument is the podcast attempting to make, is that central point backed up with appropriate evidence, and does the podcast seem to have a larger purpose?
What types of sources and resources does the podcast use to tell their story and connect with their audience?
Consider, for example, who was interviewed (historians, journalists, community activists, the public, etc.) and the sources employed (songs, poetry, reading of primary sources, etc.).
Does the podcast present various or conflicting interpretations of the history topic under review?
How is the podcast different from a scholarly book used in a university history course?
How does the podcast illuminate or complicate issues raised by Grele, Benson, Brier, and Rosenzweig? Engage with the texts for a stronger analysis.
Grele writes, "Thus the task of the public historian, broadly defined, should be to help members of the public do their own history and to aid them in understanding their role in shaping and interpreting events." Ultimately, in whatways did your podcast, as a form of public history, meet that goal?
Paper Instructions
Length: 750-1,000 words