Truth Or Doubt?: Sarah Koenig's Serial

858 Words2 Pages

Truth or Doubt?: Conscious versus Subconscious
Sarah Koenig’s riveting 2014 podcast series Serial investigates the muddled case of Adnan Syed, a teenager who was accused and convicted of murdering his ex-girlfriend, Han Min Lee, fifteen years ago. In order to do so she must speak to those whom were close to Adnan and involved in his day to day life. However, this yields a problem because whoever was close to him wanted to believe he was innocent but their intimacy may have tainted their statements about his character. When Koenig interviews Saad and Rabia, Adnan’s best friend and his older sister, they obviously take the viewpoint that he is innocent; however, through their curious phrasings and tendency to oversell his eminence, their doubt …show more content…

The fact that Rabia starts all of the descriptions of Adnan with the phrase “he was,” presents each description as fact. Her repetition of this phrase causes the listener to believe it to be true. She represents his characteristics in a catalogue: “He was an honor roll student, volunteer EMT. He was on the football team. He was a star runner on the track team. He was the homecoming king. He led prayers at the mosque”. This listing off resembles an advertisement, her primary intention being persuasion. Rabia lists her examples in a repetitive manner in order to reinforce her beliefs onto the listeners and essentially drill her ‘proof’ into their heads. Within a mere six lines of dialogue, she mentions the way the community viewed him, twice. Her use of the community specifically viewing Adnan as a “golden child”, indicates to the audience that many people around Syed viewed him in this way and that it would not be outrageous for the subject listening, as well as Koenig, to join the masses in this …show more content…

When Rabia begins speaking of Adnan the sentence she leads with is that “He was like the community’s golden child”. By using this phrase, Rabia is connoting that he was considered perfect, which is a very bold statement to claim. After she elaborates upon her description Koenig later fact checks her “accolades” as any reporter would. She finds that Rabia “was mostly right, though she sometimes gets a little loosey-goosey with the details”. Rabia would have successfully convinced Koenig, as well as the listeners at hand, of Adnan’s reputation by simply describing him as a ‘boy with potential’ or as one ‘generally known to be respectable’ but by choosing to pronounce him a “golden child” specifically, she identifies him as impeccable, and thus incapable of committing a crime. Rabia personally knows that her descriptions are not entirely true, being that she was close with him, however, she still chooses to make use of them despite their inconsistencies. Not only does she go forth with them, but she chooses to falsely summarize him as a “golden child”, despite knowing that he was not in fact perfect. Rabia could have chosen to just state the facts as they really were, in the less

More about Truth Or Doubt?: Sarah Koenig's Serial

Open Document