Recently, we (Mahesha, who’s done wonders that I have yet to achieve with getting interviewers to the podcast, and myself) were asked about transcribing podcasts. While we understand the merits of transcribing our podcasts for student use, I can safely say that we will not transcribe podcasts for the very forseeable future. It goes against one of the core ideas of the podcast, to connect debaters with the evidence, not replace it with thirty-minute interviews that provide perspective, not in-depth knowledge. 

Ultimately, it is every debater’s responsibility to know what the source text of an author means, and that is achieved via reading the person’s books and papers, not these interviews. The podcast is a means to understand what a debater should be doing anyway, researching and brainstorming themselves. 

But for those of you that wish to use the podcast’s content, you should review the MLA format for audio citations. We will not go as far to say you cannot use the podcast, but we do heavily frown upon it. 

Also, I have recieved mail about the “unfair” distribution of podcasts. Here’s the deal: If we cannot find interviewees for a topic, we cannot create a podcast on it. We understand the PF topic at the NCFL was not covered, but as it was an already obscure topic, it is rather difficult to find professionals. I am engaging in talks with Mahesha to not cover the National Catholic Forensic League topics in the future, due to the limited lead time to the tournament. It is simply not effective to present interviews that cannot cover resolutions that a limited number of people will ever debate as opposed to the NFL.