In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Tune In: NPR’s All Things Considered covers AutoAdmit

Jill

The show starts at 4pm EST, and the segment on AutoAdmit will air at 5:20 EST today. I was interviewed for it, but I have no idea what the totality of the story will be, or what the reporter will use from my interview. Hopefully I won’t sound like a complete idiot.

The audio will be available online here after 7pm.

UPDATE: I just listened to it and I do kind of sound like an idiot. I speak with a weird cadence, and say “you know” constantly. I swear I don’t talk that way in real life. The story is good anyway.

23 thoughts on Tune In: NPR’s All Things Considered covers AutoAdmit

  1. Hopefully I won’t sound like a complete idiot.

    Look who your opposition is. It’s not possible.

  2. Some momentary live-blogging: Volokh sounds annoying. Jill, you sounded just fine. Cohen is whining about censorship and talking about how hard it is for Ciolli to find other work. (Shocking, that.)

    Overall, the piece seems fairly bland. I was hoping for a bit more depth.

  3. I too was hoping for a little more, but you sounded great… it’s great to hear that this is getting the attention it deserves.

    was that violins I heard in the background for Ciolli?

  4. I actually found this blog about a week ago and had been reading up on the AutoAdmit law suit… I was surprised (in a happy sort of way) when I heard it on NPR. You came off sounding good, did they cut anything out of your interview you wish they hadn’t? I thought they were sort of wishy washy about the whole thing.

  5. So I tried to listen and they had a stupid pledge drive during the peice. Well now I”m definetly not donating! (I’m sure they’re going to miss the spare 20 bucks I might have had.)

  6. I thought they did a pretty good job. You sounded very articulate and reasonable to me. I thought the final (mild) zinger against Ciolli was satisfying and tipped the piece slightly in your favor.

  8. The UCLA guy’s counter argument was pretty ridiculous.

    Good job, Jill. And best of luck.

  9. Yeah, I thought you sounded fine. I didn’t pick up on a weird cadence or really notice the “you knows,” which didn’t seem all that frequent.

  11. Jill, you sounded good. I couldn’t help listening for the “you knows”, since you flagged them as an issue, and I still didn’t notice that many.

  13. Jill, you didn’t sound like an idiot, You were just fine. But I do agree that you didn’t sound like you.

  14. You sounded fine. People always sound weird to themselves when they hear themselves on the radio!

    I thought it was a pretty crappy piece, though. That’s not at all your fault, but I thought it had annoying faux-balance, and it didn’t really bring any startling (or even, you know, slightly original or interesting) insight to the situation.

  15. Bart: I thought you might not remember our conversation earlier, Mom, so I took the liberty of recording it. (Plays tape.) “Mom, can Otto live in our garage?” “Yes.”

    Homer: Marge, why did you agree to that?!

    Marge: That’s not my voice!

    Homer: Oh, everyone says that when they hear themselves on tape.

  16. Jill,

    You were perfect, although you do “sound” different than you “read”. However, nobody except professional speakers would sound as polished as you do in your blogging. And if you did sound like that, they wouldn’t have had you on as you wouldn’t be “smart young law student”, you’d be “polished speaker” and if they would have wanted polished speakers they would have put on one of their own (not because they are polished speakers, but because they think they are). Your manner was perfect for the show and really got the point accross in an accessible yet very smart way.

    OTOH, I didn’t get what that Leiter (sp?) guy was saying about market revenge (sounds like something a righty-tighty would say … has their two favorite things: markets and vengeance!). While, if the tiny violins are to be believed, Ciolli will have problems with his career (and for good reason — he’s shown that if he’s put in charge of people, he’ll be impotent in keeping them from embarassing the firm), but how would the jerks who wrote the comments have problems? All they’ve shown is that they are agressive pricks and, alas, in our society, being an aggressive prick is rewarded. Ciolli’s defense, OTOH, is that he’s a Nice Guy(TM) … and we know how our society treats passive-aggression.

    As to the “they’re anonymous” issue — seems to me that some of the threats made are against criminal law. And they are to “terrorize”, which makes the threateners, by definition, terrorists, nu? So how come the same arsenal used to go after criminals and terrorists can’t be used in this case? According to the right, the constitution is “quaint” anyway … seems to me if there was a will by those in the government, they could track these people down without any fancy new laws (and shouldn’t conservatives be against fancy new laws of any sort?).

    But of course, you’ll see this used as a wedge to interfere with internet privacy/anonymity (sp?) …

  17. I happened to catch that story yesterday before I even read this, so I didn’t know that was you. But no, you sounded great. Actually I remember thinking “I’m so glad this woman doesn’t sound like an idiot” because I feared that might give people the wrong idea. So great job! Too bad the story kinda sucked.

  19. cohen sounded like a jerk that couldn’t be bothered to moderate. you sounded great. i agree that the piece was hardly in-depth enough to my taste, but at least the issue’s getting some more attention.

  20. you sounded great Jill. Volokh sounds like the tool he is. And Cohen came off terribly- whinny and confused, he’s been “spending a lot of time lately thinking about whether he has a responsbility to moderate”. Too little, too late. And the zinger at the end was that fact the Ciolli is having a hard time finding work “might feel like Justice” to the women who had been targeted. It was a good way to end, and I thought it was a fine piece.

  21. I just happened to be in the car when the thing was on and was taken by surprise “Woot! I know this person on the radio!”

    I think they did a good job with the story overall. And you sounded great!

  22. I’m sorry, I haven’t listened to it yet, but I followed the link and noticed a mini article called “Protecting Your Online Persona” and it pisses me off. I see these articles all over the place and it really upsets me. They say stuff like “Don’t post pictures on the web” “Don’t ever write anything that could ever be taken out of context and used against you” “Check your reputation regularly to make sure no one’s ruining it.”

    It’s the same kind of BS women hear their whole lives, “Don’t go out alone at night or you’ll get raped,” “Wear a wedding ring in foreign countries even if you’re single,” “Don’t wear miniskirts or anything remotely ‘provocative’ because that entices men to harass you.”

    It’s not your fault if someone defames your reputation online. It’s their fault! They’re the assholes.

  23. I thought the piece slightly blew off your concerns, Jill, and those of the two women bringing the suit. But, I was glad they covered it.

    Speaking of your voice, though… a few days ago there was a piece on NPR (on Marketplace, Listen) about professional (white collar) women “having” to take voice coaching to take the “edge” off their voices. To deepen them, so they will get taken seriously. I was apalled at the story: a) women can’t be taken seriously unless their voices are “deeper”? and b) why are women so infantilized that many of us (unconsciously?) speak in such high pitched voices?

Comments are currently closed.