In a search for the truth, eyewitness accounts should basically be ignored. Memory is terrible, and even his memory at the time seems to lack a true smoking gun. As of now, hearing a podcast dismiss an eyewitness account is a welcome change from the "true crime" reliance on them.

Besides that, it seems that both sides had a different expectation on what the topic was going to be. It's understandable that Mr. Yang felt hurt afterwards, and it also makes sense that the interviewers would get frustrated in that situation. A good solution would have been to find a platform for Mr. Yang's story after the miscommunication was realized, but the event seems to have went ugly fast.

Cool. I'm going to disregard any memory of having read this comment, or any of the ideas it attempts to present as facts. My memory is terrible, and if I did remember it, that would likely disprove everything you just said.

You helped me realize that I should only believe what I tell myself is true, rather than what I might mistakenly remember.

Good thing I won't remember writing this. It would be weird remembering a moment when I was right, but having to disregard it as wrong, because I tell myself I'm wrong, plainly, and in the face of my own memories.

Interesting read! It however does not shock me. That episode is, with your context, as much about truth for them (radiolab, living in US and trying to understand how they could produce chemical weapons) as about the truth of the Hmong. What they're living is a world where formal education says the truth. It would be nice if they would admit that a bit, and be more respectful to the interviewee.

I think this is probs my true of all media. Decent enough "info"tainment, but completely befallen to the presenters biases, shot-comings, and ignorance.

I doubt that unbiased, accurate journalism can exist outside of extremely narrow fields (Even then, who knows)

Not only was that a great story about mythology and fake tales that comes from war, it humanised and told the story of the Hmong.

What is the point exactly? Fox news is telling the Hmong's story better?

To be fair the story is amended, so you really need to link the original since it might have been worse?

[edit] Link to her story - https://apexexpress.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/22813-kao-kalia... (about 10mins in)

To be clear Yellow Rain is fake, this is an incredibly important story to be told. To be a westerner and believe in the Yellow Rain is nuts and should be laughed at, but how does one talk to a Hmong person about it?

Post WMD's, we still have Vietnam using Agent Orange in known propaganda, we know Rohingya refugees are lying at times but we don't know how much. It's important stuff.

How they treated the interviewee(The Uncle) was shitty, especially in the earlier version but at the end of the day this interview talked more about the Hmong story than the other shitty news outlets like Huffpo and created more thought.