This week we hashed out the little details in the narrative that weren’t complete. We realised there were parts of the story where we all had different ideas about what happened/ who did was/ why so we solved those issues. After elaborating our narrative we worked on our production timeline. We need figured out what we are going to release and when, in a way that makes sense to the audience but isn’t obvious. A way that gives the information and tools they need to solve the case themselves.

This has been a long time coming; we attempted to do this at the very start with not much luck. This attempt was much more successful, I think that having successfully developed the narrative first made it easier. That was we can work backwards and it will give us a better idea of the gaps in evidence we need to fill.

As Lena and Ben suggested in our pitch I looked at the Serial website to see what method they used to release their information and took some inspiration from that.

I focused on writing articles from 1901. Writing is definitely not my strong suit and I struggled to use ‘old’ language, I found it easier to write them in modern language and then come back to them and adapt them to language more suited to the 1901 era, I didn’t want to make them too ‘old timey’ though because we are still appealing to the modern audience and we want to make it interesting for them without them having to struggle to understand what the articles say. We need to find a balance between making the artefacts interesting but also making them believable so the audience feels really involved.