Podcasting as public archaeology

Abstract

When was the last time you talked with a non-specialist about archaeology? Did they mention the latest journal article they read, a piece they saw on the news, or something they saw on social media? If I had to guess, I would say they brought up one of the latter two – that has certainly been my experience. As one of the hosts of the Women in Archaeology Podcast, I spend considerable time thinking about how to best communicate with the public about archaeology. The public we communicate with includes the general public, other archaeologists, and students. If we are committed to engaging in truly accessible and public archaeology that ‘engages the public in order to share archaeological findings and/or promote stewardship of cultural resources’ (McDavid 2002, 2), we need to consider our audience, where they are getting their information from, and how best to effectively communicate with them. Even with the best of intentions, archaeologists have often struggled to accomplish this goal. Difficulties in effectively communicating with the public primarily come down to two factors: mode of delivery and style of delivery. Academics and professionals are accustomed to lecturing, giving conference papers, and writing reports, articles, and books. These modes of delivery inherently limit one’s audience. Only people who can physically be present at a talk, can afford to purchase sometimes exorbitantly-priced books or journal articles, know how to access reports, and have the time to dedicate to finding and engaging with these materials have access. There is a profound burden of interest and ability on the public that is not conducive to widespread communication and dissemination of knowledge. Even if talks are recorded and put online, and published material was freely and easily accessed through open access journals, there would still be this issue: the style of delivery. Think about the last journal article you read or conference presentation you attended. How often did you hear someone use jargon, such as CRM, NHPA, NAGPRA, neoliberalism, transfer wear, sherd, lithics, or Clovis point without any explanation of what they are? There are innumerable words and phrases that are rooted in archaeological theory or history that make perfect sense to a trained archaeologist and have a place in professional settings. Those same words will not have the same meaning to the public and can be either off-putting or lead to confusion over what is being said. A recent survey by the Women in Archaeology Podcast found that listeners of archaeology podcasts were highly put off by shows that contain lots of jargon (Slotten 2021). The problem arises when archaeologists forget who their audiences are and speak to the interested public as if they were trained archaeologists. Unfortunately, this is a widespread problem as academics and professionals often lack the skills to effectively communicate with a broader audience (Birch 2013). As a co-host and co-creator of the Women in Archaeology Podcast I can assure you that podcasts offer the possibility of changing how archaeologists engage with the public.