October 17, 2025 • 23 mins
Holly asks follow-up questions about a paper Tracy mentioned in the episodes this week. Tracy talks about the use of the Nintendo 3DS as a Louvre guide.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to Stuff You Missed in History Class, a production
of iHeartRadio, Hello and Happy Friday. I'm Tracy V. Wilson
and I'm Holly Frye. We did our Unearthed installment for
the autumn of twenty twenty five all week long this week.
(00:22):
We sure did.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
We did. What should we talk about first, Holly, So, at.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
The end of the first episode, you talked about a
study about the way that bias factors into reporting on
historical and specifically archaeological finds.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
My question throughout all of that, because I have not
read this paper. Yeah, was there any weight or factoring
given to language? So these what they were looking at
was that were published in these the specific set of
(01:05):
peer reviewed journals, which I could be mistaken. I do
think those are all in English. I do not know
if any of them published articles that are not in English.
And I don't recall if I don't recall if like
there was a language specification in the paper. But that's
(01:25):
kind of my question what makes it into those journals? Right?
So that's so, so it starts out with a bias already. Yeah, Yeah,
and that is something that the paper did not really
look at that much. And I'm not to be clear,
I'm not dogging on the paper writers. I'm just saying
the bias layers go even deeper, right right. I was
(01:46):
curious about where they started from.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
So one of the things that had a lot of
thoughts when I was reading this, and one of the
things that I think is absolutely true, uh, is that
it the the uh layers of what's at fact at
what factors are going on here do definitely involve like
they start prior to even submitting the paper to a journal,
(02:15):
Like it involves like who is doing research, where are
they doing it? Can they get funding for that research?
Does that funding require them to publish? Are their factors
in how that publication has to happen, or where are
the places that people would like to do work safe
(02:38):
for researchers and specifically a lot of the time safe
for researchers from somewhere else. Like there's so many factors
that go into like before before the paper even gets published. Yeah,
and I think some of that uh. As I was
looking at this paper, I was kind of sort of
surprised because when I am working on these, I feel
(03:02):
like there is a huge disparity involving the entire continent
of Africa. There's a lot of research that is involving
northern Africa and especially Egypt, but I don't see nearly
as much stuff about the rest of the continent. Right.
But then, in terms of what this paper looked at,
(03:22):
which was comparing the publications in the journals to whether
it gets mainstream news coverage, like that wasn't as pronounced
because they were starting like they were comparing peer reviewed
publications to news articles and not like comparing the world
of archaeology to what gets published in one of these journals.
(03:44):
Does that make sense? Yes, so, yeah, there's many layers
involved with this. I as far as I know, those
journals are published in English, which means that you know
that somebody doing the research would need to be writing
in English, able to translate, or have resources to have
(04:08):
a paper translated by someone with archaeological knowledge.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
So one of the things that happens somewhat regularly is
that I will have bookmarked a news article that sounds
really interesting that is from China or Japan or.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
India or Vietnam.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
And what I have is like a really brief article
in the English language version of a mainstream newspaper published
in one of those places, but I'm not able to
figure out, like, was there a journal article about this?
Where can I find that journal article? Can I find
(04:55):
more information beyond this one like three to four paragraph
news store? And sometimes I just can't, like I can't
trace back the details that are in the news story
to find more information from like a university that might
be writing about the research as press releases or a
paper or something like that. So there are multiple intersecting
(05:16):
layers that go into all of this. We have talked about,
or I have talked about before about how I started
really trying to focus on research that is collaborative and
community led when it comes to indigenous peoples as much
as possible, and that winds up excluding some things from
(05:38):
the show a lot of the time, because as a field,
archaeology has sort of approached a lot of indigenous peoples
around the world as like objects to be studied rather
than human beings who are here and present with us
(05:58):
on Earth. And so a lot of times when I
see an article that seems really interesting that it's about
something involving an indigenous community, my first question is, like,
did you ask are the people living here today, do
they want this work to be done and are they
involved in it? And like that those are all questions
(06:19):
that were just the were not part of this study.
The study was just really about, like what are trends
and potential biases involved in like the gap between peer
review journals and news articles. Another thing that was quoted
a quote that I had pulled out from the article
that I did not wind up getting into in the
(06:41):
episode itself, because I just I felt like that was
getting a really long was quote skewed coverage maybe particularly
charged for archaeology, a field with large public interest that
generates understandings about past cultures with real or imagined descendants.
(07:01):
When mischaracterized archaeological data can fuel harmful ideologies. And so
what this part of it was about was the misuse
of archaeology to like support racist narratives. We have talked about,
you know, people trying to argue that Britain and Northern
(07:26):
Europe Norse countries as a place that was historically exclusively white,
which is just not true. But how archaeological findings about
say vikings can be used to try to support these
racist ideologies that are not grounded in any kind of fact.
(07:50):
I also think it's possible for archaeological data to be
presented in a way that's not mischaracterized at all, but
is also used to harm to fuel harmful ideologies, which
is like as just a made up hypothetical example, we're
here in the United States going through just as we
(08:12):
talked about in the show, just ongoing assaults on the
fields of history and the idea that we should be
accurately reflecting the past, including the many ways that things
have gone really wrong. And I think it's totally possible
to look at an archaeological site of say a colonial community,
(08:35):
and say, oh, it looks like this colonial community had
a bunch of different people from a bunch of different
races and ethnicities, and based on this evidence, it seems
like everybody was living a pretty egalitarian, equality based lifestyle,
and then trying to use that to like undermine the
(08:59):
fact that they're there was a lot of slavery and
genocide and equality going on. But like then this hypothetical,
made up thing that could have been particularly true like
for this one community, Like we are living through an
era of the federal government trying to create narratives using
(09:20):
history and by extension, archaeology and I think it's it's
so easy for me to imagine things that can be
picked out of you know, the of history and historical
documents and archaeological research and all of that that straightforwardly
(09:41):
correctly interpreted findings can then be used to further hateful agendas.
And I was like, this explanation of this has become
incredibly long. Let's narrow down the focus of the discussion
of this paper to be a little more, uh, a
(10:02):
little a little more on the what the core of
it was was, which was this comparison of peer reviewed
articles to news coverage other random stuff that I had
written down one of the news articles that I had
(10:25):
found that I had bookmarked that I was going to
put in And then I was like, I think this
might be of interest only to me, which is that
the Louver has stopped renting out Nintendo three DS's for
their audio and video tours at the museum. Yeah, when
you were at the Louver, did you get one of these? Patrick?
(10:47):
And I did, and it was really cool. Keep in
mind I went to the Louver when we were all
there in Paris with my gaggling group of friends. Okay,
we're not we want to talk to each other. We
want to come into the car. We're not going to
sit there and listen to headsets. So funny to me,
So whenever, ninety percent of the time, I would say,
(11:07):
when Patrick and I go to a museum together, we
get the audio tour. And when we were in Paris,
to get the audio tour at the Louver, you had
to give them your ID because they were renting you
a Nintendo three DS.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
And because of the.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
Location awareness abilities of the three DS, it knew where
you were in the museum and it could pull up
contextually relevant stuff for youah. And there were also places
that had like a three D counterpart to the object
that you were looking at. So like, let's say you're
looking at one of the statues that has lost various
(11:42):
pieces of it in the millennia since it was made.
The three DS could have on the screen like a
three D overlay view of what all the pieces were.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
It was really really cool.
Speaker 1 (11:55):
And so when I saw this article, I was like, oh,
we're going to talk about that, and I was like,
I don't think that's relevant to like ninety percent of
the people who would be listening to this, especially since
there was no indication of what is replacing it at
the louver, Like, what is They've stopped issuing them as
part of this, but they have not said, like, what
(12:16):
is the next thing that will be available as some
kind of audio or video tour.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
Yeah, it makes me wonder if they're going to go
with an app. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
So many places now have apps or just QR codes
on the wall that you can look at with your phone. Yeah,
which is also really cool and I think helps to
make museums.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
In some ways more accessible.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
I would say the typical person coming to a museum
who's an adult probably has a phone and hopefully earbuds
with them and can be a little easier, especially if
you already have accessibility settings on your device that help
you with things that might be a little easier than
like the the units that you carry around with plug
in ear phones. Uh.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
I don't love being in public with headphones on.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
It makes me super uneasy. Yeah, because I'm like, if
there's an emergency and I don't hear it, Yeah, listen.
My whole life is situational awareness, So I'm like, I
don't want to. I'm very Uh, It's infrequent that I
will listen to headphones. Even on a flight, I'll subtile
it and sit there and be on my.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
Reading. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Yeah, I don't know what that's about. I don't know
what part of me is like, you're going to miss
something important? If if it's kind of the same part
of my anxiety that doesn't like taking like prescription grade
pain reavers because I'm like, I will not be prepared
in an emergency.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Yeah. Right.
Speaker 1 (13:55):
Another note that I had jotted down about this is
not of an earthed, was two things about the Song
of Wade. One one of the researchers involved with this
was named James Wade, not related to the Song of Wade.
But boy did it make various reading about this confusing
(14:17):
to me because there would be references to Song of
Wade and Wade the character, and then James Wade the researcher,
and every once in a while I was like, wait
a minute, who are you talking about? Here? Are we
talking about a poem or a living person. Also, as
someone who has for my entire life had bad handwriting,
boy do I empathize with the idea that some some
(14:40):
scribe working with a document that was in both Latin
and Middle English might have just made some unclear writing
choices that people later were like, what does this say?
Although theoretically if that person had bad handwriting, they wouldn't
be a scribe.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Well, they might have just been tired.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Maybe, or they may have a aready given notice and
they're kind of coasting on a short time or day, Like,
what are they gonna do? Fire me? I'm just gonna
whip through this as quick as I can. Let's throw
in some mythological creatures and really check it up. Yeah, yeah,
(15:28):
I guess. The last thing that I wanted to talk
about is from the very beginning of the two parter
where I had to read something the President put on
Truth Social, which I ask you ahead of time, and
I say, you would rather not. I'm pretty game for
most stuff, but I was a girl.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
I can't do it. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
So what I wanted to talk specifically about, one of
the portions that was in all capital letters of this
truth Social post was about how the United States cannot
be woke because woke is broke, and so I just
want to talk about the word woke for a minute.
(16:11):
The first time I remember seeing anyone use the word woke.
I do not remember exactly which incident this was because
there have been so many, but it was probably ten
ish years ago and was one of the many incidents
we have had in the United States in which police
(16:34):
killed an unarmed black person and there was horrifying video
of what had happened. And on Twitter, because this was
back in the earlier era of Twitter, someone tweeted they
(16:55):
were a black person, you could tell from the tone.
Speaker 2 (16:58):
That they were, were tweeting two.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
Other black people, and said, if you are just waking up,
stay woke. And so the idea was, if you are
seeing this and you're really absorbing what is happening for
the first time, and you're horrified, stay stay present with this,
stay aware of what's happening. And so this is a
(17:26):
term that has been used, uh primarily among Black Americans
for a really long time, with those kinds of ideas
being awake and aware to what is going on around you, right,
it's like situational awareness at the meta level. Yeah, and
to like the world that we are living in and
(17:50):
to like the realities of that world and and and
the harm that it causes, specifically to black people. And
so the fact that people have taken that term and
turned it into political correctness version two point zero to
(18:12):
criticize anybody who tries to use like progressive language, or
to try to be inclusive in terms of how they
talk about things like sex and gender, to be racially progressive,
to be anti racist, to be any of that. The
fact that it's become this weird insult about a lot
of the same things that people used to yell at
(18:34):
us about being two PC over Yeah, it just makes
me really angry. Yeah, And I will say this, some
of the problem comes from the appropriation of language like
that by well intentioned white people, sure who then adopted
into their vernacular probably misuse it a lot.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah, And that.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
Makes it easier for people with nefarious intent to then
twist the meaning, which is why I think it's super
important for people to be careful about trying to be cool.
And I'm putting that in quotes. That's definitely in scare quotes.
But like appropriation of language, there's a reason that we're
(19:19):
so nitpicky about it, and that's an example of why.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
There's also at this point an increasing body of research
on things like social media and linguistics, how we use
different language, and how things are being covered in media
and talked about in media. That is remarking on a
like a big disparity between what progressives are actually saying
(19:51):
and what conservatives are saying they're saying, and it's like
what conservatives are saying progressives are saying saying is driving
the bus rather than what is actually being said. So yeah,
I did not like having to read that true social
post on the show. But I also felt like it
(20:15):
was an important part of context for the letter to
the Smithsonian, which read on a just straightforward surface level.
But I can see people being like, this sounds reasonable,
though they're saying it's collaborative and forward.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
Looking, like I don't know.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
But also I go back to the thing that like
the Smithsonian should not be getting that letter right right
from the White House period.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
End of discussion. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:43):
Also, anytime I have gotten a letter or an email
instructing me of something and telling me that this instruction
is collaborative, I'm like, that's that's not what collaboration means.
Accurate collaboration is not you tell me to do something
(21:03):
and then I do it. Yeah, anyway, would you like
to end on a note that is my ding dongeri.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
I would love that.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
I love any and every time that Unearthed features the
Antikitterer mechanism because I love it to begin with, as
you know, that's extremely my jam, but also because now
I can just you know, in my head it's like
Pavlov's dog. The bell rings and I just hear the
incredibly incredibly appealing MAT's Michelson saying a dictata, and I'm like, okay,
(21:35):
I'm good for at least the next ten minutes my
dopamine needs are handled. Great, Oh, yay, yay. I will
make sure every single time. Well, since since this five
year project of dives to the Antikit Thrier shipwreck as over,
I'm not sure what the next finds related to that.
Surely someone else is in line put their next shot
(21:56):
at it. Yeah, I will make sure to always include
that I think I just heard a siren. Everything's fine
at my house if anyone is alarmed. Whatever's coming up
on your weekend, man, boy do I hope it is
just as amazing as possible. If you like to go
outside and sit in the warm grass, and there's warm
(22:18):
grass you can go sit in, I hope you get
to do that and then check yourself for takes afterward.
If if you're more of an inside kid and you
want to spend some time playing video games or watching TV.
Boy do I hope you have the best video game
and TV watching time. We will be back with a
(22:39):
Saturday Classic tomorrow. We will have something brand new on Monday.
Stuff you Missed in History Class is a production of iHeartRadio.
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Welcome to Stuff You Missed in History Class, a production
of iHeartRadio, Hello and Happy Friday. I'm Tracy V. Wilson
and I'm Holly Frye. We did our Unearthed installment for
the autumn of twenty twenty five all week long this week.
(00:22):
We sure did.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
We did. What should we talk about first, Holly, So, at.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
The end of the first episode, you talked about a
study about the way that bias factors into reporting on
historical and specifically archaeological finds.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
My question throughout all of that, because I have not
read this paper. Yeah, was there any weight or factoring
given to language? So these what they were looking at
was that were published in these the specific set of
(01:05):
peer reviewed journals, which I could be mistaken. I do
think those are all in English. I do not know
if any of them published articles that are not in English.
And I don't recall if I don't recall if like
there was a language specification in the paper. But that's
(01:25):
kind of my question what makes it into those journals? Right?
So that's so, so it starts out with a bias already. Yeah, Yeah,
and that is something that the paper did not really
look at that much. And I'm not to be clear,
I'm not dogging on the paper writers. I'm just saying
the bias layers go even deeper, right right. I was
(01:46):
curious about where they started from.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
So one of the things that had a lot of
thoughts when I was reading this, and one of the
things that I think is absolutely true, uh, is that
it the the uh layers of what's at fact at
what factors are going on here do definitely involve like
they start prior to even submitting the paper to a journal,
(02:15):
Like it involves like who is doing research, where are
they doing it? Can they get funding for that research?
Does that funding require them to publish? Are their factors
in how that publication has to happen, or where are
the places that people would like to do work safe
(02:38):
for researchers and specifically a lot of the time safe
for researchers from somewhere else. Like there's so many factors
that go into like before before the paper even gets published. Yeah,
and I think some of that uh. As I was
looking at this paper, I was kind of sort of
surprised because when I am working on these, I feel
(03:02):
like there is a huge disparity involving the entire continent
of Africa. There's a lot of research that is involving
northern Africa and especially Egypt, but I don't see nearly
as much stuff about the rest of the continent. Right.
But then, in terms of what this paper looked at,
(03:22):
which was comparing the publications in the journals to whether
it gets mainstream news coverage, like that wasn't as pronounced
because they were starting like they were comparing peer reviewed
publications to news articles and not like comparing the world
of archaeology to what gets published in one of these journals.
(03:44):
Does that make sense? Yes, so, yeah, there's many layers
involved with this. I as far as I know, those
journals are published in English, which means that you know
that somebody doing the research would need to be writing
in English, able to translate, or have resources to have
(04:08):
a paper translated by someone with archaeological knowledge.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (04:13):
So one of the things that happens somewhat regularly is
that I will have bookmarked a news article that sounds
really interesting that is from China or Japan or.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
India or Vietnam.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
And what I have is like a really brief article
in the English language version of a mainstream newspaper published
in one of those places, but I'm not able to
figure out, like, was there a journal article about this?
Where can I find that journal article? Can I find
(04:55):
more information beyond this one like three to four paragraph
news store? And sometimes I just can't, like I can't
trace back the details that are in the news story
to find more information from like a university that might
be writing about the research as press releases or a
paper or something like that. So there are multiple intersecting
(05:16):
layers that go into all of this. We have talked about,
or I have talked about before about how I started
really trying to focus on research that is collaborative and
community led when it comes to indigenous peoples as much
as possible, and that winds up excluding some things from
(05:38):
the show a lot of the time, because as a field,
archaeology has sort of approached a lot of indigenous peoples
around the world as like objects to be studied rather
than human beings who are here and present with us
(05:58):
on Earth. And so a lot of times when I
see an article that seems really interesting that it's about
something involving an indigenous community, my first question is, like,
did you ask are the people living here today, do
they want this work to be done and are they
involved in it? And like that those are all questions
(06:19):
that were just the were not part of this study.
The study was just really about, like what are trends
and potential biases involved in like the gap between peer
review journals and news articles. Another thing that was quoted
a quote that I had pulled out from the article
that I did not wind up getting into in the
(06:41):
episode itself, because I just I felt like that was
getting a really long was quote skewed coverage maybe particularly
charged for archaeology, a field with large public interest that
generates understandings about past cultures with real or imagined descendants.
(07:01):
When mischaracterized archaeological data can fuel harmful ideologies. And so
what this part of it was about was the misuse
of archaeology to like support racist narratives. We have talked about,
you know, people trying to argue that Britain and Northern
(07:26):
Europe Norse countries as a place that was historically exclusively white,
which is just not true. But how archaeological findings about
say vikings can be used to try to support these
racist ideologies that are not grounded in any kind of fact.
(07:50):
I also think it's possible for archaeological data to be
presented in a way that's not mischaracterized at all, but
is also used to harm to fuel harmful ideologies, which
is like as just a made up hypothetical example, we're
here in the United States going through just as we
(08:12):
talked about in the show, just ongoing assaults on the
fields of history and the idea that we should be
accurately reflecting the past, including the many ways that things
have gone really wrong. And I think it's totally possible
to look at an archaeological site of say a colonial community,
(08:35):
and say, oh, it looks like this colonial community had
a bunch of different people from a bunch of different
races and ethnicities, and based on this evidence, it seems
like everybody was living a pretty egalitarian, equality based lifestyle,
and then trying to use that to like undermine the
(08:59):
fact that they're there was a lot of slavery and
genocide and equality going on. But like then this hypothetical,
made up thing that could have been particularly true like
for this one community, Like we are living through an
era of the federal government trying to create narratives using
(09:20):
history and by extension, archaeology and I think it's it's
so easy for me to imagine things that can be
picked out of you know, the of history and historical
documents and archaeological research and all of that that straightforwardly
(09:41):
correctly interpreted findings can then be used to further hateful agendas.
And I was like, this explanation of this has become
incredibly long. Let's narrow down the focus of the discussion
of this paper to be a little more, uh, a
(10:02):
little a little more on the what the core of
it was was, which was this comparison of peer reviewed
articles to news coverage other random stuff that I had
written down one of the news articles that I had
(10:25):
found that I had bookmarked that I was going to
put in And then I was like, I think this
might be of interest only to me, which is that
the Louver has stopped renting out Nintendo three DS's for
their audio and video tours at the museum. Yeah, when
you were at the Louver, did you get one of these? Patrick?
(10:47):
And I did, and it was really cool. Keep in
mind I went to the Louver when we were all
there in Paris with my gaggling group of friends. Okay,
we're not we want to talk to each other. We
want to come into the car. We're not going to
sit there and listen to headsets. So funny to me,
So whenever, ninety percent of the time, I would say,
(11:07):
when Patrick and I go to a museum together, we
get the audio tour. And when we were in Paris,
to get the audio tour at the Louver, you had
to give them your ID because they were renting you
a Nintendo three DS.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
And because of the.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
Location awareness abilities of the three DS, it knew where
you were in the museum and it could pull up
contextually relevant stuff for youah. And there were also places
that had like a three D counterpart to the object
that you were looking at. So like, let's say you're
looking at one of the statues that has lost various
(11:42):
pieces of it in the millennia since it was made.
The three DS could have on the screen like a
three D overlay view of what all the pieces were.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
It was really really cool.
Speaker 1 (11:55):
And so when I saw this article, I was like, oh,
we're going to talk about that, and I was like,
I don't think that's relevant to like ninety percent of
the people who would be listening to this, especially since
there was no indication of what is replacing it at
the louver, Like, what is They've stopped issuing them as
part of this, but they have not said, like, what
(12:16):
is the next thing that will be available as some
kind of audio or video tour.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
Yeah, it makes me wonder if they're going to go
with an app. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
So many places now have apps or just QR codes
on the wall that you can look at with your phone. Yeah,
which is also really cool and I think helps to
make museums.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
In some ways more accessible.
Speaker 1 (12:39):
I would say the typical person coming to a museum
who's an adult probably has a phone and hopefully earbuds
with them and can be a little easier, especially if
you already have accessibility settings on your device that help
you with things that might be a little easier than
like the the units that you carry around with plug
in ear phones. Uh.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
I don't love being in public with headphones on.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
It makes me super uneasy. Yeah, because I'm like, if
there's an emergency and I don't hear it, Yeah, listen.
My whole life is situational awareness, So I'm like, I
don't want to. I'm very Uh, It's infrequent that I
will listen to headphones. Even on a flight, I'll subtile
it and sit there and be on my.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
Reading. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Yeah, I don't know what that's about. I don't know
what part of me is like, you're going to miss
something important? If if it's kind of the same part
of my anxiety that doesn't like taking like prescription grade
pain reavers because I'm like, I will not be prepared
in an emergency.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Yeah. Right.
Speaker 1 (13:55):
Another note that I had jotted down about this is
not of an earthed, was two things about the Song
of Wade. One one of the researchers involved with this
was named James Wade, not related to the Song of Wade.
But boy did it make various reading about this confusing
(14:17):
to me because there would be references to Song of
Wade and Wade the character, and then James Wade the researcher,
and every once in a while I was like, wait
a minute, who are you talking about? Here? Are we
talking about a poem or a living person. Also, as
someone who has for my entire life had bad handwriting,
boy do I empathize with the idea that some some
(14:40):
scribe working with a document that was in both Latin
and Middle English might have just made some unclear writing
choices that people later were like, what does this say?
Although theoretically if that person had bad handwriting, they wouldn't
be a scribe.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Well, they might have just been tired.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Maybe, or they may have a aready given notice and
they're kind of coasting on a short time or day, Like,
what are they gonna do? Fire me? I'm just gonna
whip through this as quick as I can. Let's throw
in some mythological creatures and really check it up. Yeah, yeah,
(15:28):
I guess. The last thing that I wanted to talk
about is from the very beginning of the two parter
where I had to read something the President put on
Truth Social, which I ask you ahead of time, and
I say, you would rather not. I'm pretty game for
most stuff, but I was a girl.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
I can't do it. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
So what I wanted to talk specifically about, one of
the portions that was in all capital letters of this
truth Social post was about how the United States cannot
be woke because woke is broke, and so I just
want to talk about the word woke for a minute.
(16:11):
The first time I remember seeing anyone use the word woke.
I do not remember exactly which incident this was because
there have been so many, but it was probably ten
ish years ago and was one of the many incidents
we have had in the United States in which police
(16:34):
killed an unarmed black person and there was horrifying video
of what had happened. And on Twitter, because this was
back in the earlier era of Twitter, someone tweeted they
(16:55):
were a black person, you could tell from the tone.
Speaker 2 (16:58):
That they were, were tweeting two.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
Other black people, and said, if you are just waking up,
stay woke. And so the idea was, if you are
seeing this and you're really absorbing what is happening for
the first time, and you're horrified, stay stay present with this,
stay aware of what's happening. And so this is a
(17:26):
term that has been used, uh primarily among Black Americans
for a really long time, with those kinds of ideas
being awake and aware to what is going on around you, right,
it's like situational awareness at the meta level. Yeah, and
to like the world that we are living in and
(17:50):
to like the realities of that world and and and
the harm that it causes, specifically to black people. And
so the fact that people have taken that term and
turned it into political correctness version two point zero to
(18:12):
criticize anybody who tries to use like progressive language, or
to try to be inclusive in terms of how they
talk about things like sex and gender, to be racially progressive,
to be anti racist, to be any of that. The
fact that it's become this weird insult about a lot
of the same things that people used to yell at
(18:34):
us about being two PC over Yeah, it just makes
me really angry. Yeah, And I will say this, some
of the problem comes from the appropriation of language like
that by well intentioned white people, sure who then adopted
into their vernacular probably misuse it a lot.
Speaker 2 (18:57):
Yeah, And that.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
Makes it easier for people with nefarious intent to then
twist the meaning, which is why I think it's super
important for people to be careful about trying to be cool.
And I'm putting that in quotes. That's definitely in scare quotes.
But like appropriation of language, there's a reason that we're
(19:19):
so nitpicky about it, and that's an example of why.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Right.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
There's also at this point an increasing body of research
on things like social media and linguistics, how we use
different language, and how things are being covered in media
and talked about in media. That is remarking on a
like a big disparity between what progressives are actually saying
(19:51):
and what conservatives are saying they're saying, and it's like
what conservatives are saying progressives are saying saying is driving
the bus rather than what is actually being said. So yeah,
I did not like having to read that true social
post on the show. But I also felt like it
(20:15):
was an important part of context for the letter to
the Smithsonian, which read on a just straightforward surface level.
But I can see people being like, this sounds reasonable,
though they're saying it's collaborative and forward.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
Looking, like I don't know.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
But also I go back to the thing that like
the Smithsonian should not be getting that letter right right
from the White House period.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
End of discussion. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:43):
Also, anytime I have gotten a letter or an email
instructing me of something and telling me that this instruction
is collaborative, I'm like, that's that's not what collaboration means.
Accurate collaboration is not you tell me to do something
(21:03):
and then I do it. Yeah, anyway, would you like
to end on a note that is my ding dongeri.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
I would love that.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
I love any and every time that Unearthed features the
Antikitterer mechanism because I love it to begin with, as
you know, that's extremely my jam, but also because now
I can just you know, in my head it's like
Pavlov's dog. The bell rings and I just hear the
incredibly incredibly appealing MAT's Michelson saying a dictata, and I'm like, okay,
(21:35):
I'm good for at least the next ten minutes my
dopamine needs are handled. Great, Oh, yay, yay. I will
make sure every single time. Well, since since this five
year project of dives to the Antikit Thrier shipwreck as over,
I'm not sure what the next finds related to that.
Surely someone else is in line put their next shot
(21:56):
at it. Yeah, I will make sure to always include
that I think I just heard a siren. Everything's fine
at my house if anyone is alarmed. Whatever's coming up
on your weekend, man, boy do I hope it is
just as amazing as possible. If you like to go
outside and sit in the warm grass, and there's warm
(22:18):
grass you can go sit in, I hope you get
to do that and then check yourself for takes afterward.
If if you're more of an inside kid and you
want to spend some time playing video games or watching TV.
Boy do I hope you have the best video game
and TV watching time. We will be back with a
(22:39):
Saturday Classic tomorrow. We will have something brand new on Monday.
Stuff you Missed in History Class is a production of iHeartRadio.
For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff You Missed in History Class News
Hosts And Creators
Holly Frey
Tracy Wilson
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.