Afternoon Inquisition 11.25

As most of you know, and some of us Skepchicks remember, we recently released our first “podcast.”  What you may not know is that we just recorded our second podcast, for release early next month.

We’re kind of keen on the idea of a more regularly scheduled podcast, and I thought I’d spend today’s AI asking what you fine folks would like to hear in such a thing.

If the Skepchick bloggers were to podcast regularly, what topics would you be interested in hearing on the show?*

*This is not Field of Dreams people, and I’m so totally not Kevin Costner.  Just because I’m asking, and you’re telling, I can’t promise anything.  (Well, nothing like Ray Liotta looking totally dorky in a old timey uniform, anyway, but who could?)  Nonetheless, I’d love to hear your thoughts.


A B Kovacs is the Director of Døøm at Empty Set Entertainment, a publishing company she co-founded with critical thinker and fiction author Scott Sigler. She considers herself a “Creative Adjacent” — helping creative people be more productive and prolific by managing the logistics of Making for the masses. She's a science nerd, a rabid movie geek, and an unrepentantly voracious reader. She doesn't like chocolate all that much.

Related Articles


  1. I’d be willing to do some short audio interviews with book authors to include in the podcasts if our readers/listeners are interested in that instead of or in addition to the written interviews.

  2. @a.real.girl: No, you’re not Kevin Kostner. You’re much cuter to this guy. ;-)

    I think that we should get that psychic guy from the other thread to channel Carl Sagan for us so we can interview him for the podcast. ;-)

  3. i would like to see an interview with some of the othere blogers like PZ, vjack, or ebon. i think it would be good to have all of you and them in a disscusion together.

  4. I’d love to have a Skepchick Podcast, but there are two suggestions I’d like to make:

    1 – Cover different things than every other science/skepticism podcast. I listen to about a dozen things about science and it’s tiresome to hear the same five stories throughout the week. Whether you do this by following Some Canadian Skeptic‘s suggestion and doing more local stuff, or by using Rebecca‘s radio show as a template and following a more story-telling model, the best thing you all could do would be to differentiate yourselves in content and style.

    2 – Keep it no longer than an hour: Now, I’m something of an exception when it comes to podcast diet. I listen to over six hours worth of podcasts every day, going so far as to schedule them and plan the playlist around my workday. I’m sure other people have more unscheduled time in which to listen to longer podcasts. But the podcasts I tend to like most (except SGU) keep things around 45mins – 1 hr. Much longer than that and you’re inviting me to skip to the end by half way through.

    Otherwise, just make it your own and keep the fun attitude and snark of the site intact.

  5. @Expatria: Seconded – 30 mins to an hour is a good length. Just long enough to last my trip to school (either one way or round trip). I would stay away from topics covered by things like SGU and try something fresh. I’m sory not to have more specific suggestions, but if I were that smart I’d have my own podcast. :P

  6. Seeing that we are a younger generation than many of the other skeptical podcasts, I would like to see a skeptical podcast that discussed and dealt with making change. Let’s discuss opportunities for making change in science education, the media, web, etc. We can also have a healthy serving of youth skeptical banter ( as opposed to the SGU’s doses of fanny packs, larping and über-geekdom). I love the SGU but let’s get something that tla younger generation can relate with.

  7. Nothing boring, no editing and lots of interesting and amusing stuff. So if you’re not having fun doing it, don’t.

  8. @Sam Ogden:

    Also, 16-year-olds can’t hold their hard liquor as well as they think they do. :) But maybe give them 5 minutes, recorded separately, to include inside the podcast.

    I have access to a Skepchick who was talking about this recently. I haven’t thought much about it myself, because nothing I come up with will be as good as the Skepchick Collective Hive will dream up. But I sort of like the idea of each week one Chick take the lead and talk about something they’ve been looking into lately, and the rest of you can ask questions or talk about long-term implications, or wherever it leads.

    Also… nekkid.

  9. Whatever you do you need to promote women in science and encourage girls to get interested in science and pursue scientific careers. I’m sure you’d do that anyway just by having a podcast in general but I think it would be good to have a little segment specifically about women in science every now and then anyway.

  10. Whatever you end up doing-just let your awesome personalities show. It could have been the booze, but that last podcast was fun to listen to. Imagine educational possibilities!

  11. I’m excited for the podcast, I’m going on to I-tunes to order it now. Hey, I have a suggestion, could you spend some time on nano-technology, it’s an area of science that I’m obsessed with right now, and I think more people should hear about it.

  12. @somethingwitty

    That’s funny that you say that. I work in the Nanoscience Research and Technology Center here at UCF. I’m doing undergraduate research.

  13. Something about Skepchick that seems to work well so far is the Afternoon Inquisition. I wonder how you could incorporate something like that … ?

  14. Oh, and another idea….and it’s slightly tied into an entry by Phil Plait today,

    There are LOADS of us trying to make a blogger-name for ourselves, and I think that our readership would grow if more people just knew about us. So it would be a boon to the skeptic-blogger community if this (wonderful) site would help the grass take root. Maybe the occasional interview, or a small-skeptic-site of the week/month/whatever, or something to help get our words out there.

  15. @Eliot89

    Awesome, I think it’s an area of science that has not become “popularized” yet, but when more people see the capabilities of the technology people will be amazed.

    If you have any tips on readings or websites let me know.

  16. Just finished listening, I wanted to rename my band Tang Residue, but everyone in the band is a teacher, so there might be some bad consequences if we did.

  17. well how about some girly stuff too? Like cosmetics or is that salon hair stuff really worth the extra price? How are we being used by the media to pay for stuff we don’t REALLY need?

  18. How bout an occasional segment by What’s the Harm Tim Farley. You could also debunk products like Head On or that stuff you put on your feet that supposed to remove toxins while you sleep. Might be interesting to find out what the product contains that the manufacturer says works and then go into what it really does (or more likely doesn’t do).

  19. Satire! Have a segment in which you call on the spirits of Twain and Swift to “demonstrate the fallacies inherent in a woo woo world view through humor”. Please, let us laugh at the idiocy sometimes, pretty please with a cherry colored aura on top …

  20. I feel a good format for the show would be to start out with a thoughtful and interesting discussion, over drinks of course, in which you discuss current events and skeptical issues of the day. After a few drinks though, I imagine the show will quickly devolve into a half hour of tang and poop jokes.

  21. Can you guys have guests?

    I’d like to see you interview Richard C. “Hyper-dimensional” Hoagland.

    Every time he says “Hyper-dimensional” everyone takes a drink.

    It’s probably not worth the trouble and frustration but it’s a funny thought.


  22. @somethingwitty: Truthfully I don’t. Basically I’ve been reading articles that are really specific to what I’m working on. You’re right in that it hasn’t really received as something very popularized yet. That’s why I was a little surprised you were so excited by it. It’s great that you are and I wish more people were but it’s still surprising.

  23. @Rodney:

    If they can get Hoagland, that would be awesome.

    But if they get him, they need to make Phil Plait a temporary honorary Skepchick, for at least the length of the podcast.

  24. @Eliot89: I think I’m so excited, because it really catches your imagination, and that is not something that people really attribute to science. From what I hear (I’m a teacher) most people; students and parents, have a negative attitude that science is cold and boring, which is of course, completely wrong, and something everyone with some relation to teaching or actually working in scientific research and development need to combat. It’s funny, because I teach language arts, but still end up discussing science a few times a week.

    Anyway, Nanotech, is a great way to have people use their imaginations when it comes to science, because of all the possiblities for medical and technological breakthroughs, and the simple fact that we can work at such a small scale is quite mind-boggling.

    Okay, I’ve stepped off my soap box.

  25. Other satire segments could include “Advertisements you would hear if psychics were real” like the TSA soliciting for Airport Security Clairavoyants or plastic surgeons specializing in palms (Is your love line a bit thin, call Dr. Hand, the palm reading, plastic surgeon). or “Psychic Audio Mockumentaries” like the time generic psychic talks to your sinful, late Uncle Albert – “He seems in pain. He’s saying … no, not the pitchfork … not there … for the love of … arrrghhhhhhh … is that Barney … is he about to sing … noooooooo!” Does that mean anything to you?

    Just a thought.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button