Speaking of Race Podcast Review

Speaking of Race: Race and Intelligence

Part 1

Part 2

          Speaking of Race is a year-and-a-half-long project by the University of Alabama where three professors get together and discover the history of race through podcasts. Their four-part series about race and intelligence explores the history of eugenics, intelligence testing, and the lasting debates about the possibilities of genetics links between racial groups and general intelligence. Immediately, however, the hosts take a clear stance, claiming that intelligence has thus far been impossible to fairly or comprehensively quantify, and they even note that its future research is likely to remain unfruitful. As they are all professors of science, anthropology, and the like, their credibility as hosts is significant, and it is obvious that they expect their audience to be aware of such through repeated references to their experience and education. Thus, their bold historical claims and biased implications are intended to be met with serious consideration.

          Such aforementioned historical "claims" are frequent, though often unexplained. Much of the podcast consists of the hosts reading off of a script, telling narratives about the history of the scientific community's foray into intelligence research. With personal anecdotes, quotes, and light comments occasionally thrown into the mix, the hosts keep the program restricted and tightly-organized, rarely forming genuine discussions involving the clashing of ideas and the models of debate. Perhaps this format was intended to disguise the program as one that is purely informative and unbiased, but unfortunately, such a possibility is voided by the hosts' likely unintentional implications. By repeatedly referencing well-known historical figures and emphasizing the little-known facts to disparage their reputations, the hosts show clear intentions in forming the opinions of the audience. With constant labels of "racism" thrown at figures with either unclear or nonexistent premises, the hosts not only belittle the social intelligence of their listeners but also promote close-minded views of academic dissent.