How Brown
02-26-2009, 05:58 AM
Thanks very much to Magpie for his effort in replying to the questions.:kiss:
**********************
1. Can we expect more individuals using the internet to host their own "podcasts" outside of the original pioneering effort... Rippercast?
Yes, I think it's possible. Not sure it would necessarily be a good thing, mind you. I have to admit to not being enamored of the idea of podcasts in general--I personally would rather see a first rate podcast like Rippercast be the one and only than seem a plethora of TTQ podcasts popping up like crabs.
2. Being pretty well versed in media yourself, what would you like to see occur in the future with a program such as Rippercast? The addition of other features such as "weekly trivia" ? The development of visual as well as audio feed? How about having Stewart Evans or Paul Begg or Doc Fido provide episodes for specific aspects in the Case...totally scripted and prepared in advance to disseminate to the civilian world and for us?
I doubt a videocast would be worth the work it would take for a subject that predates video and therefore has few resources to work with. What might be better (and for all I know may be possible) would be to find a way to synchonize still images to an audio presentation (perhaps with Powerpoint) so that visual elements (maps, photos, documents, charts etc.) could be presented and discussed. Visuals for the sake of having eye-candy don't really do much for me.
Audio documentaries about specific subjects would be excellent too, as would podcasts of lectures from W1888 meetings, conferences and what have you.
3.If JMenges could make it happen...would you like to see him attempt to bring those who posit new suspects on Casebook or here on on their own in the media... on to the Rippercast to dissect the candidature of said individual? Say "yes" or I'll punch you in the nose.
Yes! For sure.
What I'd like is for the fine Rippercast crew to solicit questions from listeners, put them to the victims....er...guests as politely as possible, and then make sure they answer them without dancing around them or disappearing!
As a personal example, when Michelle Dresbold (who is a charming woman for whom I hold no personal animus btw) was here, I asked her two basic questions about her Ripper theory: were her conclusions based on her study of the letters as a document examiner or as a graphologist? And what was her evidence for claiming that the Ripper used a sabre-like weapon? After a couple of vague non-answers, she simply disappeared from the forum. I'd like for someone like JMenges to ask her the same question and ensure that she either answered them or admitted that she didn't wish to answer them (which of course is an answer in and of itself).
4. Are you working on any new Ripper related articles or being a bum? Elaborate,sor....
I was working on an article about how Maybrick's doctors basically cured him to death. Unfortunately not one, but two hard-drive meltdowns, combined with casebook's crash resulted in the loss of everything I'd gathered so far:( I've also been working on a couple of non-Ripper articles, my blog, and my book of kiddie's poems.
5. Do Ripper tours,such as those conducted by Phil Hutchinson and Richard Jones, provide the BEST starting point for a civilian to become acquainted with the Case in terms of facts and perhaps launch them into the field? Or are documentaries,such as the 1996 episode with SPE on Tumbelty or the recent Jones-conducted documentary with Mr B offer a better way?
No, and no.
As much as I think Ripper Tours are great, I also think (and I hope Phil will correct me if I'm wrong), people don't go on them to be educated so much as entertained. While I'm sure they will inspire some people to take an interest in the case (which is an excellent thing), I doubt there's any way most of them would absorb anything but the basics about the case.
As for documentaries, the are hindered by:
1) Time constraints
2) An overriding need to maintain interest, usually at the expense of accuracy and detail.
3) While many of them feature solid, credible experts in the field, most of them are produced and written by people who are more interesting (and experienced) and making documentaries than about the Ripper.
On the other hand a documentary made entirely by people with an interest in the case (ie the writers and director as well as the on-camera talent) might be an different story for sure!
**********************
1. Can we expect more individuals using the internet to host their own "podcasts" outside of the original pioneering effort... Rippercast?
Yes, I think it's possible. Not sure it would necessarily be a good thing, mind you. I have to admit to not being enamored of the idea of podcasts in general--I personally would rather see a first rate podcast like Rippercast be the one and only than seem a plethora of TTQ podcasts popping up like crabs.
2. Being pretty well versed in media yourself, what would you like to see occur in the future with a program such as Rippercast? The addition of other features such as "weekly trivia" ? The development of visual as well as audio feed? How about having Stewart Evans or Paul Begg or Doc Fido provide episodes for specific aspects in the Case...totally scripted and prepared in advance to disseminate to the civilian world and for us?
I doubt a videocast would be worth the work it would take for a subject that predates video and therefore has few resources to work with. What might be better (and for all I know may be possible) would be to find a way to synchonize still images to an audio presentation (perhaps with Powerpoint) so that visual elements (maps, photos, documents, charts etc.) could be presented and discussed. Visuals for the sake of having eye-candy don't really do much for me.
Audio documentaries about specific subjects would be excellent too, as would podcasts of lectures from W1888 meetings, conferences and what have you.
3.If JMenges could make it happen...would you like to see him attempt to bring those who posit new suspects on Casebook or here on on their own in the media... on to the Rippercast to dissect the candidature of said individual? Say "yes" or I'll punch you in the nose.
Yes! For sure.
What I'd like is for the fine Rippercast crew to solicit questions from listeners, put them to the victims....er...guests as politely as possible, and then make sure they answer them without dancing around them or disappearing!
As a personal example, when Michelle Dresbold (who is a charming woman for whom I hold no personal animus btw) was here, I asked her two basic questions about her Ripper theory: were her conclusions based on her study of the letters as a document examiner or as a graphologist? And what was her evidence for claiming that the Ripper used a sabre-like weapon? After a couple of vague non-answers, she simply disappeared from the forum. I'd like for someone like JMenges to ask her the same question and ensure that she either answered them or admitted that she didn't wish to answer them (which of course is an answer in and of itself).
4. Are you working on any new Ripper related articles or being a bum? Elaborate,sor....
I was working on an article about how Maybrick's doctors basically cured him to death. Unfortunately not one, but two hard-drive meltdowns, combined with casebook's crash resulted in the loss of everything I'd gathered so far:( I've also been working on a couple of non-Ripper articles, my blog, and my book of kiddie's poems.
5. Do Ripper tours,such as those conducted by Phil Hutchinson and Richard Jones, provide the BEST starting point for a civilian to become acquainted with the Case in terms of facts and perhaps launch them into the field? Or are documentaries,such as the 1996 episode with SPE on Tumbelty or the recent Jones-conducted documentary with Mr B offer a better way?
No, and no.
As much as I think Ripper Tours are great, I also think (and I hope Phil will correct me if I'm wrong), people don't go on them to be educated so much as entertained. While I'm sure they will inspire some people to take an interest in the case (which is an excellent thing), I doubt there's any way most of them would absorb anything but the basics about the case.
As for documentaries, the are hindered by:
1) Time constraints
2) An overriding need to maintain interest, usually at the expense of accuracy and detail.
3) While many of them feature solid, credible experts in the field, most of them are produced and written by people who are more interesting (and experienced) and making documentaries than about the Ripper.
On the other hand a documentary made entirely by people with an interest in the case (ie the writers and director as well as the on-camera talent) might be an different story for sure!