Mm-hmm

... and the problem that we have in the podcasting world of the, like, I'll do my own research expert.

Ultimately, I think there's a conversation to have with platforms about their responsibility, and even for shows to be saying, "We are interested in fact-checking and offering evidence," so that at least you, you might have s- as a consumer of information, you might have some way to distinguish places that are just asking questions and platforming folks that may have very not evidence-based experiences from, from other sources.

All of that to say the fact that scientists who are, who are in the academy and have peer-reviewed work, they just don't make great guests all the time, right? Like, that thing of, like, if we could only be clear and just cut right to the point and say the thing, there is some value to making people aware that, that ...

I don't know, the ...

I'm really interested in the conversation you guys were having about the, like, the space for the audience and the hesitation-

Mm.

Um, so it's funny, I carry these kind of, like, losses with me from that editorial process, but they're really successes in some ways, right? Where you're like, "Actually, sometimes the best thing [laughs] you can do is kill a story." Um, where you're like, "Maybe we aren't the people to tell this.

And so one of our experiments with Blue Lab, where we have the luxury of time, because we're not a station or a program, we have the luxury of time on our hands, is to see how can we build relationships with scientists and other communities so that on the science side, they will start to invite us into the messiness of their work and their lives.

Yeah, so when we connected last week to talk about this panel, one of the things that I was reflecting on was how much of early radio lab we were trying to find those scientists who would let us in and give us access to have a messier conversation where they could appear as whole human beings, right? Like that was always something that was really interesting to us.

I think particularly when, you know, We were talking about climate change and these controversial places.

That's a concern.

I've been thinking a lot about misinformation and the problem that we have in the podcasting world of the, like, I'll do my own research expert.

Ultimately, I think there's a conversation to have with platforms about their responsibility and even for shows to be saying, we are interested in fact-checking and offering evidence so that at least you might, As a consumer of information, you might have some way to distinguish places that are just asking questions and platforming folks that may have very not evidence-based experiences from other sources.

All of that to say, the fact that scientists who are in the academy and have peer-reviewed work, they just don't meet great guests all the time, right? Like that thing of, like, if we could only be clear and just cut right to the point and say the thing...

things came out, frankly.

And so one of our experiments with Blue Lab, where we have the luxury of time, because we're not a station or a program, we have luxury of time on our hands, is to see how can we build relationships with scientists and other communities so that on the science side, they will start to invite us into the messiness of their work and their lives.

Yeah, so when we connected last week to talk about this panel, one of the things that I was reflecting on was how much of early Radiolab we were trying to find those scientists who would let us in and give us access to have a messier conversation where they could appear as whole human beings, right? Like that was always something that was really interesting to us.

I think particularly when, you know, We were talking about climate change and these controversial places.

That's a concern.

I've been thinking a lot about misinformation and the problem that we have in the podcasting world of the, like, I'll do my own research expert.

Ultimately, I think there's a conversation to have with platforms about their responsibility and even for shows to be saying, we are interested in fact-checking and offering evidence so that at least you might... have, as a consumer of information, you might have some way to distinguish places that are just asking questions and platforming folks that may have very not evidence-based experiences from other sources.

All of that to say, the fact that scientists who are in the academy and have peer-reviewed work, they just don't meet great guests all the time, right? Like that thing of like, if we could only be clear and just cut right to the point and say the thing.

before things came out, frankly.

Mm.

Um, so it's funny.

I carry these kind of, like, losses with me from that editorial process, but they're really successes in some ways, right? Where you're like, actually, sometimes the best thing you can do is kill a story.

Um, where you're like, "Maybe we aren't the people to tell this.

This is, we don't need to weigh in on this thing," right? [laughs] Um, we don't have enough clarity of, like, what our editorial purpose is here, and maybe it's something that we sort of keep, keep in the incubator and try and figure out a, a way to get to eventually.

We did sometimes pay outside folks to listen to things.

We always invited lots of people into the, into the editorial meetings to come, um, give feedback and, you know, sometimes that, that became kind of formalized.

Yeah