Serial, is a Podcast produced by an investigative journalist and a former reporter for the Baltimore Sun named Sarah Koenig. Serial is a spinoff produced by the WBEZ 91. 5 Chicago radio station and This American life. This specific podcast addresses the 1999 case of Adnan Syed vs The State of Maryland. In this case, Adnan is being accused for the murder of his former girlfriend Hae Min Lee. More than fifteen years later, this case once again sparked controversy when aired in 2014 through the podcast.
In Serial, reporter Sarah Koenig intended to seek justice for Adnan by portraying him as innocent, which listeners an tell through the three rhetorical appeals; ethos, pathos and logos which she presents throughout the case along with interviews, evidence and personal statements. In the first episode of Serial, Koenig begins to present Adnan’s credibility to the audience in order to portray his innocence. During episode one Koenig interviews a longtime friend of the family and a highly credible lawyer by the name of Rabia Chaudry. During this episode one interview, Rabia (2014) states “He was an honor roll student, volunteer EMT…
He was the homecoming king. He led prayers at the mosque” (7:43). Koenig goes on to interviewing arious personalities such as close friends and family thorough the series who say positive things about Adnan’s character. Koenig also gives details about Adnan’s exemplary character by giving examples of how he remains a role model even in prison. In episode 9, Koenig (2014) states “… he got one called the Distinguished Gentleman’s Award for your consistent display of character, mannerism, self-control, and ability to manage adversity, signed by the warden”(41:17).
Not only does this strategy portray the use of ethos but it also gives the audience an understanding of who Adnan is as a person. Reporter Michael Smerconish from the Philadelphia Inquirer, mentioned in his report how Koenig’s “interest lies in giving voice to the convicted killer” (Smerconish, 2015). He follows this claim by quoting Koenig’s description of Adnan and his incapableness of murdering Hae. This reporter also makes an interesting observation of Koenig’s use of ethos. Smerconish states that, “In virtually every episode, Koenig targets Jay’s credibility with circumspection” (Smerconish, 2015).
What Smerconish means by this, is that Koenig often calls Jay a “liar” and also attacks his story and all of the inconsistences it has to do with Adnan. By oing so Koenig’s not only building up Adnan’s credibility by supporting his alibi but is also discrediting Jay’s story. This in return leads the audience to believe Adnan’s story of innocence over Jay’s story of conviction, which is her overall intent. In the case of Adnan Syed vs The State of Maryland, facts and evidence made all of the difference when convicting Adnan guilty.
Throughout the Serial podcast, Koenig uses the logical appeal of the case to her advantage by revealing all of the negligence, corruption and the flaws in the state’s evidence file. In the third episode of serial Koenig (2014) states, “Right near the body was liquor bottle from which they got cellular material and never tested. And a rope that was never tested” (16:55). Given the fact that Hae was manually strangulated, when Koenig intentionally mentions that the rope was never tested as a potential murder weapon; she is revealing how negligent the state was in handling the evidence properly.
Another argument Koenig makes against the state’s evidence file, is how inconsistent their most “reliable” piece of evidence remained throughout the entire investigation. This important piece of evidence is known as Jay’s ever changing story of what happened the day Hae was murdered. In episode four Koenig (2014) states, “Jay also tells this story at trial… So, at least, say, six times he’s told what happened. And each time, some details shift… some are significant and confounding” (23:14). Furthermore, to reveal how corrupt and mishandled the state’s case was, Koenig suggest that Jay was corroborating with the police.
In episode eight Koenig (2014) states, “… he was massaging his story to fit what the cops wanted to hear” (14:59). Koenig further suggest that the corroboration between Jay and the police was to place Adnan at the scene of the crime. This is because in episode eight Koenig (2014) states, “.. he cops never searched Jay’s house… they never subjected him to a polygraph.. maybe that’s because he was on their team now” (17:21). This not only potentially discredits the state’s evidence against Adnan, but it also leaves the audience under the impression that Adnan was wrongfully convicted.
By strategically using logos to seek justice for Adnan, Koenig manages to refute the state’s evidence against Adnan, which in return supports her overall intent of proving his innocence. Throughout Serial, we hear a number of voices express pity, sadness and concern for Adnan and the unfortunate situation he’s confined in. One of the voices that is o remain strictly unbiased in order to prevent the audience from siding with Adnan, is that of reporter Sarah Koenig. Throughout the entire podcast we hear Koenig constantly interact with Adnan over the phone.
During these conversations she ignores protocol when she strategically uses pathos in order to influence the audience to feel outraged for Adnan’s sentencing; which in return evokes an overall feeling of injustice. In these conversations, we hear Koenig express affection towards Adnan. During episode six Koenig (2014) states, “My interest in it honestly has been you, like you’re a really nice guy… I like talking to you” (39:45). This use of pathos not only shows Koenig’s preference towards Adnan, but it also incites the audience to become emotionally connected to Adnan as well.
Although, Koenig’s intent was to portray Adnan as innocent, many including Audie Cornish a creator of All Things to Consider for the National Public Radio, was puzzled by Koenig’s emotional attachment to Adnan. During an interview Cornish questions Koenig about this attachment as she plays the previously mentioned audio from episode six. Cornish (2014) then asks, “Listening back, do you think you did a good enough job policing yourself? ” (3:09). Koenig then replies, “I think I did a good job olicing myself.. I like Adnan, I really do” (3:13). Cornish (2014) then expresses her opinion as well as that of the listeners by stating, “. ait journalist aren’t supposed to say that” (3:32).
Koenig then reassures not only Cornish but also her listeners that “I think that’s fake.. if journalists, reporters who spend a lot of time on a story, are honest with themselves, we all have feelings about our subjects” (3:34). By stating so, Koenig is not only reassuring her feelings towards Adnan, but is laying the foundation for the audience to think it’s okay for them to like Adnan as well. This specific use of pathos not only helps the udience emotionally connect to Adnan, but it also creates a bias, which in return creates a sense of innocence towards Adnan and a plea for justice.
Overall, I feel like Sarah Koenig successfully convinced me in a rhetorical way of Adnan’s innocence. Although, she did not necessarily imply that Adnan is innocent, she revealed enough of his character, flawed evidence and emotion, which made me come to this conclusion. The most compelling rhetorical appeal for me was the use of pathos. Koenig from the start seemed emotionally attached to this case which made it interesting because it is not a typical aspect from reporter to show an emotional preference.
With that being said, I also think Koenig was an unfit candidate to not only report on the case but also remain the mediator for both sides of the story. This is because she favored once side over the other, which is one very important detail I would had taken out of her investigation, if I were Koenig. In conclusion, I think if I were in Koenig’s shoes and was asked to take the case, I would. This is because there is enough doubt in the state’s case against Adnan that would leave anyone sleepless at night wondering, could Adnan really be guilty of portraying such a horrific crime?