To start off, I would like to begin to mention that this week has been a whirlwind of changes! From being told that moving off campus would be temporary and have to find new strategies to navigate my classes online to now doing the rest of the semester online, I am out of breath, to say the least. Although, I am glad that the school is doing what is necessary to keep us safe and ready to return in the Fall!
With that being said, I am glad to have my mind taken off of Corona related things, and focus my attention on interesting stories like the “Mr. Daisy and the Apple Factory.” First off, what struck me about this story was the amount of extra information that Daisy added. From the drastic and fabricated differences of reading the transcript to listening to the “Retraction” podcast, I felt like there had to be something wrong with Mike Daisy to want to purposely allude all of the false details that he did.
After reading and listening to both, I attended the class discussion on Wednesday to hear what others had to say and I read my peer’s comments in the Slack channel. After articulating my own opinions, I compared them to others and found that there was a general feeling of deception from Daisy.
I enjoyed this activity because I felt like I could relate it back to the Web Literacy project that we did and reflect on how important it is to always check the credibility of your sources. Although we may not initially think about the reliability of the news sources and just believe what they say, we should because millions of listeners took into account what Daisy said which impacted them in some way.
My answers to the suggested questions:
Your initial reaction to the first story: My initial reaction to the first story was that it contained some of the same elements of what goes into making a phone from the phone story game we interacted within the class. As I continued to read, I began to feel for the underage workers and the man that lost his hand while assembling Apple products. I looked at my own Apple products and felt a sense of guilt wondering what if something I own caused another human being harm.
How your interpretation of that first story changed after listening to the “Retraction” story: After listening to the podcast, I felt cheated. By actually listening to the excerpts of Mike Daisy retell his story and having the knowledge of knowing that it is fabricated, it made me cringe. Hearing Daisy talk about the events sounded like he was performing rather than reporting on actual news. Daisy’s exaggerated and fictitious claims about what happened on his trip were appalling because he lied about actual people’s experiences at Foxconn. Although the labor laws are not the best, Apple is not the crook that Daisy’s story made them appear.
Does it matter that Mike Daisey lied about the details if the essence of his story is true: It does matter because if Daisy is going to venture out and claim to have experiences that he did not actually have, he should not have gone on a news podcast and spewed out the same lies for tons of listeners to hear. With that being said, not only does that retract the credibility of Daisy, but the news source that allowed for his story to be shared. Additionally, the podcast contains millions of listeners who heard Daisy’s story, believed it, and formed their own opinions against Apple. Although the topic of working conditions in China is always controversial, Daisy took it to another level and took a claim for experiences that he never had.
How does the presentation of the “Retraction” story in an audio format help get its point across? What role does editing play?
When I was listening to the podcast, I enjoyed how they added a prologue with the original host from the former podcast to explain what happened and assured listeners that they were going to get to the bottom of Daisy’s lies. By actually being able to hear the remorse in Glass’s voice, the podcast definitely boosted their credibility to the situation. Also, the way the podcast was broken down into carefully thought out sections, displayed to me that the news platform was determined to make up for their mistake and do it right. Overall, I liked how they made a full circle and were able to report on the treatment of Apple workers and the conditions of the factories.