Throughout the last ten months, I’ve changed some aspects of my project as and when the need arose or I discovered there’s a different/better way of doing something – things that couldn’t really be planned for beforehand but could only be encountered through experimentation. This has largely been thanks to my co-participants’ insights as well as what I’ve learned from mistakes. Since co-creation of knowledge is such a fundamental part of my project, I wanted to retain this emphasis in my final thesis too. I’ve quite uncomfortable privileging my own interpretations and opinions throughout the project. I tried to mitigate this more or less in the podcast episodes themselves (with varying degrees of success). However, ultimately, it will be me analysing the project and writing the thesis.

I’m still considering alternatives to the traditional academic thesis. With my supervisors’ and transfer examiners’ support, I had submitted an application the doctoral college to present my final thesis in the form of a podcast (supplemented by a blog). However, this wasn’t permitted. Even though the alternative format has been rejected, I’m still determined to find a way to write the thesis in a way which makes it accessible to non-academic audiences, without the potentially intimidating structure of traditional PhD documents. Besides making it more easy to read, I also want to experiment with ways in which to give my co-participants’ voices and perspectives as well as the non-academic texts I’ve been reading (memoirs, anthologies, online articles among others) equal space and respect as I would academic literature and my own analysis.

My original plan was to analyse the episodes and then share this analysis with all my co-participants in order to get their interpretations, comments and/or critiques. I envisioned this feedback to not act as research data but as something I could include in the final thesis alongside my own analysis – highlighting their voices as well as my own. While I still see the merits in this idea, I’m very aware of the time and brainspace constraints of this project – both for me and my co-participants. I was trying to figure out the best way to both share this analysis in an effective and efficient way with my co-participants + have them share their thoughts about it with me in the best way for the needs of the project. This is complicated by the fact that all my co-participants – nearly 20 of them – have their own different schedules and priorities. All of them may not want to contribute in this way. Even if they did, they might not be able to commit the time and resources necessary to make this idea possible – especially considering the pandemic and the political situation. It would be highly unfair of me to expect anyone else to be willing and able to care about this idea in an effort to make the research more democratic. And, as one of my supervisors pointed out, I will have spent much more time with the data and will have much more space to describe my thoughts. The co-participants will not. As my supervisor further pointed out, I shouldn’t incorporate their feedback merely as a token gesture; if it can’t be done meaningfully, it might be better to change my original plan.

Text says: It doesn't require me to hate you because you have a different opinion.

In lieu of this advice (and my struggle with finding a good way to go ahead with my original plan), I’m considering asking all my co-participants to send brief reflections of their experience participating in the project and planning and recording our episodes. If they prefer, I could provide loose guidelines about the sort of things they can talk about (for example, what worked, what didn’t, what would they change next time, did the episode have an impact on any future media consumption/conversations/ideas); but otherwise, I would leave it entirely up to them so that they can share anything they feel like. They could share an audio recording of their feedback – between 2 to 10 minutes – or write or illustrate or present their ideas in any format they choose. Going back to my original plan, I would then include this feedback in my thesis, interwoven with the rest of my discoveries and conclusions. This wouldn’t be compulsory at all and would depend entirely on the willingness and ability of each co-participant. After recording our last episode, my two co-hosts (and friends) offered to do this themselves and would be very happy to help. My supervisors did warn me that there may not be enough room in my final thesis to incorporate this; but that it was nonetheless a good idea to get in touch with my co-participants for any future papers, chapters or conference presentations. Personally, I would just love to know what they thought so it could also help with future podcast episodes (I’m still planning a Season 2) and to provide me with a fresh perspective I wouldn’t otherwise have thought of.