Zooming in the narrative behind an audio story of fact-checking
More or Less, a BBC radio program, breaks down and examines statistics used in news and in our daily life.
“Are natural disaster on the rise?” is an explanatory audio chapter, part of the BBC Radio 4 program More or Less. The presenter is Tim Harford, who is, at the same time, the main character.
That is, then, a story about his process (movement) on checking and understanding figures. In fact, Harford uses “I” and “you” in his narrative and he does not hide his production. He allows us to know when the ideas come from listeners, his questions, and research or when he does not find the answer and looks for another source.
By doing this, according to the Senior producer of Radiolab Soren Wheeler, the presenter is being “authentic” and inviting the listener to “question, stumble and discover something new along with you”.
MIMESIS TO IMAGINE
The story began with a ‘loyal’ listener who has a curiosity about figures related to natural disasters and its connection to climate change. It was a written question, but the radio team verbalized it, not diegetically by the presenter, but by a different person. That is also used when telling the conclusion of Oxfam’s study.
Other mimetic resources are the interviews with experts, the quote of the General Secretary of the United Nations, Antònio Guterres, and the CBS news about the hurricane. These last two are both archive elements.
By using this strategy, More or Less data story escapes from a totally diegetic narrative, breaks with monotony, and gives a chance to mimesis (Rosemary Huisman, “Narrative concept” 2005), which pushes the story forward and allows listeners build their own images.
A study from Emma Rodero, a professor at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona quoted by The Atlantic, shows that “using voice actors who tell the story exclusively through dialogue, stimulate listeners’ imagination more than a typical ‘voice of God’ narration”. And that also benefit to the listeners’ interest in the story, according to her findings.
A MATTER OF ‘TIMES’
According to Julian Murphet’s definition (Media and Narrative, 2005), the ‘time of the story’ broadcasting by BBC covers since the 1970s, when the formula to measure hurricanes was set, until now (September). However, its ‘plot time’ refers to the journalistic research, which is told in 12 minutes ‘screen time’.
This ‘anisochronic’ text (following Murphet’s term) plays with ellipsis and summary to increase the speed of the narrative. The team builds the story by choosing elements or summing up ideas.
Once selected, they order the elements in a chronological way taking into account the plot time (the journalist’s search), but in an anachronic way from the story time, using what Gérard Genette, quoted by Murphet, calls analepsis (“narrating something that has happened before the given moment”).
To reveal his findings, the presenter goes back in the story-time to look for answers, as it is shown when he arrives at the original source of the figures. But the lookout is presented as a chronological sequence of actions, which leads to a specific end.
A TRAIN WITH DESTINATION
Through BBC presenter’s questions, findings, and reflections, listeners have the feeling of being “on a train that has its destination and then he’s going to find something”, in words of Ira Glass, from This American Life.
There is an objective in Harford’s speech and, since the beginning of the story, “everything you’re saying, from the first sentence to the last, is leading to a singular goal”, said Andrew Stanton in the TED Talk “The clues to a great story”, who considers storytelling as a “joke telling”.
Stanton added, “probably the greatest story commandment, which is ‘Make me care’. Please, emotionally, intellectually, aesthetically, just make me care”.
Why does the story about natural disasters care? According to Mark Blaine in The Digital Reporter’s Notebook (2014), because of its quality, its novelty (“old story in a new way”, Julie Shapiro, Executive producer of Radiotopia), and its usefulness for its audience.
The context, given by the recalls of press headlines using the figures analyzed or the connection with the then current hurricane, contributes to understanding why people are hearing the story. These are also details in the story which help the users’ imaginary.
And there is another reason, which could be understood as a metanarrative from the program. People are listening to this kind of stories because they want to check figures used and heard in their daily lives.
Paul Zak, the director of the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies at Claremont Graduate University, told The Atlantic that “some sort of stressful challenge or conflict” is needed to get the emotional and intellectual engagement of the audience.
“We only want to give attention to something when it matters, when there’s something going on”, he says, and he adds that stories need to be character-driven, what means having “someone to empathize with”. In that case, the presenter.
NOT HUMANITY, BUT IMAGES
The aim of More or less is analyzing, clarifying, breaking down, “and sometimes debunking” statistics. It is important to keep that in mind.
This program does not use figures to tell a story about people represented in those data. Its stories are about listeners (represented by Tim Harford) looking for answers about these numbers. So, from this point of view, it would not be justified in introducing, for example, victims of the disasters.
However, more archive and/or sounds shots (recording from several disasters) could be included, as well as more examples “to help your audience ‘see’ the story” (Shapiro), through those details. Sounds, says Rodero, “also caused listeners to pay more attention”.
The text also risks to “tell” too much. That is an homodiegetic narration in first-person, with a notorious presence in the narrative. He guides, he makes commentaries and he makes the questions.
This presence and the speed of the narration could have a negative effect, if there is no chance for the listener to have their own thoughts or if the storyteller does completely the job of decoding messages for the audience.
“The audience actually wants to work for their meal. They just don’t want to know that they’re doing that. That’s your job as a storyteller, is to hide the fact that you’re making them work for their meal”, Andrew Stanton.
