SPEAKER_00 0:00

Hey guys, just a heads up. In this episode, we're going to talk about terrorism, familial loss, and grief. Just want you to know before you listen.

SPEAKER_01 0:08

I'm Michelle. I've spent over 25 years in media and education.

SPEAKER_00 0:12

I'm Gina.

SPEAKER_01 0:13

I've spent over 15 years in tech and policy. We met because we were both working to make social media a better place to be from different angles.

SPEAKER_00 0:20

I had just started Meta's Global Information Ecosystem Program.

SPEAKER_01 0:24

And I was the executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education.

SPEAKER_00 0:29

We became friends because we're both obsessed with media. News, books, films, TV, and yes, digital content.

SPEAKER_01 0:36

We talked for hours about it, not always agreeing, but always learning from each other.

SPEAKER_00 0:41

There is so much media these days. And we wanted to create a space to process it and work through what it all means for our culture, our politics, and how we understand the world. And we're hoping you do too.

SPEAKER_01 0:52

This is Did you see with Gina and Michelle. Hi, Michelle. Hey Gina. What's up? How are you? I'm okay. It's been a week. We'll talk. Yes, oh, indeed. So we need to pause our regularly scheduled program for just one second because it's South by Southwest EDU panel picker time. Woo! South by Southwest EDU is a massive, amazing conference that happens every year in Austin, right before the broader South by Southwest. And both Gina and I have spoken there before. And this year we have proposed our own session that we're super excited about. Yes, it's called Who's Actually Anxious: A Dialogue with Gen Z. This will be a live recording of the Did You See podcast, where we will feature two incredibly brilliant youth advocates, Maximilian Molovidov and Katie Ma, for an honest discussion about social media and youth well-being. Now, we need you to vote for our panel because that's how it works. I also want to do a shout out to two other proposals, one from Gina on designing institutional workplaces that help experts participate effectively and safely online, and one for our favorite media literacy organization, the National Association for Media Literacy Education, that is for K-12 educators integrating media literacy in their classrooms. So there's three important proposals, three that we need your votes for. So we're going to share all of this in our show notes. And we are very, very grateful for your support.

SPEAKER_00 2:32

Thank you for your support. So, Michelle, did you see that Nara Smith, who is one of the most known Tradwife influencers, is now pushing back on being called a trad wife? I have to admit it, I did not see this. Tell me more. It's all over my feed, but probably because I keep watching it. So Nara Smith is known for cooking foods from scratch while being very glammed up. One of her most famous videos is about one of her kids asking her for a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. And so she makes the bread, the peanut butter, and the jelly all from scratch, and hours later she gives it to presumably some very hungry children. Okay, that's hysterical. She's got over 12 million followers on TikTok and has done some collabs with Hannah Nealeman, who is probably the most famous trad wife influencer. And this week, Nara Smith went on the Call Her Daddy podcast, pushing back really hard on the Tradwife moniker. Okay, that's fascinating. We've spoken before on our yesteryear episode that trad wife influencers aren't really trad wives because they are working business women and they're often the breadwinners of their households. Absolutely. And they're earning their money and building their brand around cosplaying a narrative that puts women into very traditional gender roles where their purview is just the home and child care and they don't really work outside of the home.

SPEAKER_01 4:04

I love the use of the word cosplaying there. That's a really potent way to explain it.

SPEAKER_00 4:09

Now the critique is that because the cultural zeitgeist is shifting away from that with the affordability crisis and with the conversation about women's access to care, that being a trad wife just isn't that cool anymore. And so it's a strategic shift where Nara Smith is now saying, Well, I'm not a trad wife, I'm actually a working mom.

SPEAKER_01 4:32

It's kind of significant, especially since we did talk about that trad wife uh ecosystem. This could be a like a shift in all of this.

SPEAKER_00 4:41

Yeah, and I think it's a good reminder for people that when we see creators online, a lot of the times they're really just playing a character. And so when it's politically or financially expedient for people to present a certain way, in this case as a trad wife, then they will, and once it's not that lucrative anymore, they'll try to adjust. Yeah. I think there is a really interesting question here about the chicken and the egg. Was she creating this character as a response to the cultural moment? But then also through her content, it's kind of reinforcing and benefiting from it, which can cause harm because of all the influence that it has politically and culturally. So I think there's a really interesting conversation that's happening there and definitely one to keep an eye on. Well, I am confident that you are going to keep an eye on it.

SPEAKER_01 5:31

Oh, I will. I'll keep you updated. How about this? Did you see David Ellison's opinion piece in the New York Times called In Defense of the Paramount Warner Deal? I did.

SPEAKER_00 5:43

Honestly, this case is so complicated.

SPEAKER_01 5:46

It is so complicated. And to remind people, also from an earlier episode of Did You See? We discussed billionaires and media mergers and we brought up the Ellison family. Larry Ellison is the co-founder of Oracle, which is this massive tech company, and he's one of the world's richest individuals. And David Ellison, who wrote this op-ed, is Larry's son. He's the head of Paramount Sky Dance. And right now, the issue at hand is that Paramount Skydance is trying to buy Warner Brothers and they are hitting a lot of legal hurdles. The best part are the public comments on the op-ed. Oh, I haven't seen those. I'm so impressed with how people are following this story and are understanding the risk of mergers for consumers, especially news consumers, which kind of brings us to why something like this matters. Media monopolies themselves pretty much destroy competition and innovation. And the bigger the monopoly, the more the consumer and the user loses. But even more important with this particular deal is how it impacts the news business and how this merger will put CNN and CBS under the ownership of the same company. Right. And what's interesting is that in the op-ed, Ellison makes the case for why he can be trusted with the news. But if you read the comments, you'll start to see how people are pushing back on that because of what has already happened at CBS News since the Paramount Skydance merger. We can have a very long conversation about this, but it's a story that we should continue to pay attention to, especially because the merger has been approved in other countries. I do think that we need to think really critically about when billionaires get to have their peace. And that as a public we should be commenting and pushing back and being heard. Yeah, absolutely. And look at what people do, not what they say. Exactly. Okay, let's get to the meat of it, Gina. Let's get to it. Gina, did you see the series Bombing of Pan A103 was number two on Netflix this week?

SPEAKER_00 8:03

I did see that, and I watched it last weekend, and I was thinking about you the whole time and thinking, wow, this must be so bizarre for Michelle.

SPEAKER_01 8:12

It absolutely is. And for those of you who don't know, let's give you some context. So the bombing of Pan Am 103 is a six-episode limited series that focuses on the very true story of the December 21st, 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 people. The series focuses on the investigation, the work, and the compassion of the Scottish people, as well as the victims' families and their quest for justice over the decades. Most importantly, my father was aboard Pan Am 103 on that tragic day. And while I am no stranger to media content about the bombing, this particular series is certainly the biggest and most mainstream fictionalized content about the tragedy that ever existed. And it's been an incredibly mind-blowing experience to witness the reaction and the response. But I know that this show had to be also really super weird for you, Gina, and really hard. So I think we probably should back up and start the conversation by talking about when we first met in person and kind of what we learned about our personal stories.

SPEAKER_00 9:32

Yeah, definitely. So we had been working together for a while before we ever actually met in person. You were at the National Association for Media Literacy Education. I was at Meta. You were living in New York. I was living in San Francisco. And we met in person for the first time at Meta's office. And I was just doing some small talk with you and asked you about your background and how you got into media literacy. And when you told me your story, I remember that I just started crying, which is nothing new because I cry a lot on a big cry baby, but I don't often cry in work meetings. And it was what you had said, it showed that we really share a very specific kind of trauma. And that trauma is airplane-related terrorism. So when I was 25 on Christmas Day 2009, I was a passenger on Northwest flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit, which had an al-Qaeda-associated attempted suicide bomber on board. He had hidden explosives in his underwear, so he came to be known as the underwear bomber. And he was fortunately not successful because of many factors, including the courage of our flight crew and fellow passengers, and we were able to land safely without any major injuries.

SPEAKER_01 10:55

I remember that day so well because I remember like tears in my eyes, you telling me the story, but then having this overwhelming feeling like, oh, we're gonna be friends forever.

SPEAKER_00 11:08

Yeah. It was the moment I imprinted on you. Like, yeah, we're stuck with each other.

SPEAKER_01 11:14

We're in this category of, you know, the things that no one thinks are actually happening. Right. We are people that those things happen to. Yeah. And I know that's not eloquently said, but it is a very rare group, and we were immediately bonded.

SPEAKER_00 11:30

And it's one of those things where, as much as it is discussed, it's also very strange to insert your own experience into those kinds of conversations. I have a lot of chats with people who care a lot about public safety. I've done a lot of work in companies, for example, with law enforcement, where we talk about anti-terrorism, about screening for safety measures. And it's always something that is talked about in a theoretical way. Yes. That is just hard to know when to introduce it or if it's ever appropriate to, even though it's the thing that we're talking about.

SPEAKER_01 12:09

Well, what I find kind of interesting about the fact that this came up when we first met in person is that I don't bring it up immediately all the time. And I think it's also so interesting because you're one of the only people outside of the Pan Am community where I understand like hesitation to watch anything that has to do with plane crashes. Uh, also like really sensitive to like jokes about plane crashes and all of these things. I get that, and you get that. And that's really kind of a wonderful bond we have in some way. It is. Well, thank you for bringing that up. I think it is really important context because it also like you watch the show, and I know how hard that was for you to watch content of this nature, and it just means so much that you were willing to like try to separate yourself for a moment to be able to consume this type of content.

SPEAKER_00 13:06

Well, and it's important, and it's important for us to have these kinds of conversations. And I know that it was hard for you to watch this content. I mean, I think we were texting about how often we had to pause. And I share my experience because it is part of our friendship, but it's also context for how I experience this kind of content. So we are gonna focus this episode on the Netflix series and the significance of based on a true story kinds of narratives. So, Michelle, for people who aren't familiar with the general facts of the Pan Am 103 tragedy, can you just walk us through it?

SPEAKER_01 13:44

Yes, I'll give you kind of a broad strokes timeline. So on December 21st, 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was leaving London's Heathrow Airport and headed to JFK in New York City. It was a Boeing 747 known as Clipper Made of the Seas. And when it leveled off at 31,000 feet at 7:03 p.m. Greenwich Mean Time, there was an explosion, and the plane carrying 259 men, women, and children broke apart and fell onto the town of Lockerby, Scotland, where 11 residents were killed. There's a lot of significance to this story, but one thing that I do want to mention is that Pan Am Flight 103 was carrying 35 college students going through the Syracuse University Division of International program abroad. And that's significant because the age of those students, all in their early 20s, and the impact it had on those families and the university is just important to the story of Pan Am 103. The other thing to note is that the scale of the crime scene was 845 square miles. This was a massive undertaking to understand what happened to this plane. And it took seven days for them to determine that it was a bomb that had been placed in luggage that caused the explosion. So that announcement came on December 28th. So in November 1991, after determining it was a state-sponsored terrorist attack by Libya, the US and UK indict two Libyan intelligence officers, Abdelbaset al-Magrahi and Al-Amin Khalifa FEMA for the bombing. And it took nine years to have a trial, and this was a complicated scenario in which a special Scottish court was built in the Netherlands. And so the trial began at Cam Zeist on May 3rd, 2000, 12 years after the crash. A year later, on January 31st, 2001, Al McGrahe was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. FEMA was found not proven. In August 2009, eight years later, McGrahi was granted compassionate release from a Scottish prison. Scottish Justice Secretary authorized the release because doctors diagnosed Al-Magrahi with terminal prostate cancer and estimated that he had three months to live. He survived for nearly three years, dying in May 2012 with his family beside him. In December 2022, Abu Aguila Mohamed Massoud, the alleged bomb maker, was taken into U.S. custody. And believe it or not, there's a trial that starts August 31st in Washington, D.C. Almost 38 years since the bombing. The bombing of Pan Am 103 was the deadliest terrorist attack against Americans before 9-11, and it is still the deadliest terrorist attack in the history of the United Kingdom. This story is complicated, and there are 270 lives whose stories can be told. Our personal story and the story of my dad gets told quite a bit and it gets a lot of attention. One, because we're willing to speak and we're comfortable sharing our story. Everyone's story is unique. But this is ours. So my father was 45 when he boarded Pan Am 103. We had been kind of a transatlantic family for a couple of years, with him working in the UK, me spending some time in high school there, and just a lot of back and forth. So he was coming home at that time for Christmas. And it took us three and a half years to go to Scotland. So when it happened, we did not feel a connection to Scotland. We did not feel a connection to the crash site. I think in a lot of ways we were very overwhelmed with our own grief and what was happening in our own home. When we did go to Scotland, we discovered two really kind of mind-blowing facts. One, that my dad was the passenger that was found furthest from the center of the crash. Every human soul who had been lost was mapped as best they could on the map of the crime area. And my dad's body was found far away from any others. So he was far away from all the news footage that we had seen over and over again. Well, and as a reminder, we're talking about a massive, massive area. Yes. As you can imagine, six miles from the center of a crash scene is quite a distance. And on that first trip, we met the people that found my father on their farm, Minsk Farm. We met Hugh and Margaret Connell, who have just grown to be such significant parts of our healing and our story. And what we learned that trip was that they had actually discovered my dad 20 minutes after the crash. So they had heard debris coming down. Oh wow. The moment they saw the debris, they realized it was a passenger plane and they were searching for victims. And they came across my father very close to their main home on the farm. The story is told in the Netflix piece. The kindness that they showed my father then and my family when we met them is something that is life-changing, you know, absolutely life-changing. So it's that connection and that story, that personal way of connecting the American families to the Scottish people with our story is something that gets told a lot because it is a really special example of that bond. And for us, it was very clear that we wanted this particular part of the story heard, that we had heard so much about the crash, the violence, the investigation. And it was like, how can we rise up the stories of the Scottish people who were so kind and compassionate to all of us? So that's really why our story gets shared in these types of media content. But of course, it's also our desire to have it be heard because obviously a lot of people went through a lot of similar situations, but not everyone is as comfortable speaking about it.

SPEAKER_00 20:50

I think that this international connection is also what makes this story so astounding in the context that this was in 1988. So today you and I are recording this together, and I'm in Germany and you're in the United States, and it's just a regular everyday thing. But at that time, passengers from 21 different countries were on the flight. The investigation involved teams from the US, Scotland, England, and Malta. The trial was happening in the Netherlands. So we're really talking about such a complex network of people that have to work together and support each other and build those connections without all of the technology that we have today.

SPEAKER_01 21:37

Yes. And I think that that's a really important aspect of this particular tragedy and terrorist act, is that it left from England. It crashed in Scotland, but it was an American airliner. The story of Lockerby, the story of Pan Am 103 is really a story of the collective. It is the story of Of investigators from all over the world coming together. It is a story of the Scottish people coming together. And it is a story of the victims' families coming together. That's what this awful tragedy has shown is the power in the collective. And I think that's one of the reasons that family members are a lot more comfortable with this Netflix series than we have been with other iterations of the story.

SPEAKER_00 22:27

Yeah, and that's something I'd love to hear more about because there has been so much content, if you will, about Pan M 103. There's obviously been a lot of news reporting, but also documentaries, dramatizations, podcasts now as well. And we've been friends for a while. And I've honestly hesitated to watch a lot of it because I know that a lot of it out there has been sensationalized or is questionable in quality. And the bombing of Pan M 103 Netflix's series, this is the first piece that you've recommended that I've been able to watch. So I'd love to hear more about what made this series feel different to you.

SPEAKER_01 23:10

I do want to just clarify that it was first made for BBC and then Netflix had the rights to it. The first thing that made this series feel different to me was the approach of the people that were making it. We were connected to the researcher, I think in 2022. So it was a long time ago. And at this point in time, I've been doing this media cycle for so long. I can tell honestly within five minutes what the intent of the person that has reached out is. And I can tell by the questions that they ask, by the way they present themselves, and by the type of story they're trying to create. And immediately I knew the researcher had the intent I wanted them to have, which is we're gonna showcase how hard this investigation was, how hard people worked, we're gonna get to the truth of Libyan's involvement. We don't see that often enough. And it is really easy to sensationalize this story, and it has been sensationalized, and there's lots of theories. So their intent really mattered. What I think they did really well is they did capture how complex the investigation was. They did capture the generosity and the warmth of the people in Lockerbie from the moment it happened. They did capture the American families and the fight for justice and this undying effort to remember those that were lost. Like those four main things they were able to capture. The pacing and the tone were respectful and sensitive. I appreciate how they present different theories, but then kind of build the case that was actually built against Libya.

SPEAKER_00 25:17

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 25:17

It is hard because this is still a fictionalized rendition, right? What we have to remember about based on a true story narratives is that there isn't a need for the creators to stay close to the truth. Like they have artistic license to change the story. So to be working with people that are making a fictionalized story and yet still feel really committed to getting as close to the truth as possible is really special. What I can say is I have no idea how to answer the question, is this show good? You cannot, from my perspective, assess this material that way. Right. But clearly people are watching it. And that in itself is fascinating to me because we really thought it was gonna kind of like not really make a lot of noise in the US. And it's really kind of interesting that people are are watching. I know that this is a lot because you're talking to me, but I'd really love to know like what did you think of it? Well, I thought it was good.

SPEAKER_00 26:23

I really enjoyed it. You did? Yeah, I enjoyed it as a part of entertainment and also education. Okay. This case, like we've talked about, is so complicated. And because we are friends, I have tried to educate myself about Pan Am 103 without bombarding you with a million questions. And so I've read a lot of pieces about it. But if I'm honest, there are so many countries involved, so much time has passed, so many different theories, and it's been really hard for me to really understand the case. And so there's something about watching the dramatization, even though I know that there is creative license that's being taken with it, that has helped me to really feel like I understand the basic nuts and bolts of what's happened here. And I think part of that is the slower pacing of the show. I like that it's kind of more of a procedural. I felt like it was very clear that there was a Scottish team behind this production. I loved the way that they presented the Scottish people and the humanity that they showed in this tragedy. Even though they were going through this tragedy as well. There were 11 people in Lockerbie who died in the crash. They showed so much heart and soul, really, to all of the victims' families.

SPEAKER_01 27:54

And I think I'm so glad you brought that up because I'm seeing, you know, the public reaction is really interesting. Like my niece the other day showed me all these threads about people watching and really appreciating the show. And most of the comments are like, thank you, Scottish people. Thank you for your kindness. There's just no words to explain what Scotland means to us and what these people mean to us. And so we are so glad, we as my family, but also we as in all of the families, are so grateful anytime we're able to showcase that. And I appreciate that you saw that in the piece. I also really appreciate that you brought up that it was a Scottish team because if it's okay, I'd love to talk about this article you forwarded to me, which was an interview with the director who is Scottish born. One of the things that is significant with him directing this piece is that he has a personal connection to this story. He was 15 when it happened, and he has memories of the impact this tragedy had on his country. So you know that he's going to handle it differently than people that don't have a personal connection. But they asked him some questions about the responsibility of the work. And I was really impressed with his answer. So they asked him, as a Scottish director, how did it feel to be given the responsibility to work on this story? I love the word responsibility. I think that's really key because it is a responsibility. You are telling the story of real people's lives. And he writes, there's a massive responsibility, mainly because there are living families, all the victims, their children and grandchildren, and they're very active. All the police and the FBI who were involved, most of them are still alive. Yes. There are a lot of people to engage with. That was a huge responsibility. Yes. That matters that he feels that way. As the director, he is thinking about that weight as he develops this series. And he later says something that I think is really powerful. And I have to give credit to the interviewer. Right. And they ask him, How did you choose what to keep off camera? That question is so good. Yeah. It is so good. It is such a media literacy question. Yes. Because sometimes it matters more what they don't show, right? And he says, this is not a thing that happened 100 years ago. It happened 35 years ago. So we wanted to be respectful. So we didn't feel the need to show in great detail the horror that was going on because we realized that if you showed the possessions, the luggage, things like that, people can get the sense of it. One of the things that I wish could happen in the industry is I wish there were ways to tie in based on a true story narratives with conversations like this with the director. Like I wish it was some mandate. Yeah. That directors had to explain what their intent was, why they made the changes they made, why they made the choice.

SPEAKER_00 31:13

Yeah, some kind of director's note. I feel like people are just so interested in the sensationalism of it so often. Or there's this idea that in order to get people watching, we need to show more gore, or we need to outdo the last film that did really well or something. And I think that this is a really great example that you don't need all of that to reach an emotional core of a story.

SPEAKER_01 31:43

Yes. And I think it's a real disservice to audiences that there isn't more discussion about the uniqueness of this particular genre, the based on a true story narrative. As a director, as a writer, you don't have a mandate to keep close to the story. You are making a fictionalized series. It is much more egregious for documentary filmmakers and journalists to spin, to twist the truth. These guys have complete artistic license to do what they want. But I think that audiences don't know how to watch this type of content. And they make so many assumptions and watch these pieces as if they're watching a historical take, that they're watching a documentary. And it is so important that we understand the distinction between that. Because again, the truth is they don't have to change what they're doing, the people that are making based on a true narrative content, but we have to change how we're watching it.

SPEAKER_00 32:51

Have you ever seen any production company or studio have any kind of guidelines or frameworks for based on a true story content that they're producing?

SPEAKER_01 33:02

No, I've seen a lot of development of documentary guidelines. And there's a lot of work actually being done on treatment of subjects in documentaries, which I'm obviously all for because I've had some really difficult experiences with documentary in terms of twisting story. But there isn't a lot done in the based on a true story narrative. And I just would love to see that happen. And it brings me to the disclaimers that are on this particular show. Yes. They could have easily just written based on true events, based on a true story, but they chose not to. In front of each episode, there's three title cards. The first one reads, What follows is based on extensive research and interviews with the investigators, victims' relatives, and residents of the Lockerby community. The next title card says hundreds of investigators on both sides of the Atlantic were involved in the case. Here they are represented by a small number of key characters. And finally, some characters have been created and merged and scenes added for the purpose of dramatization. This is so great.

SPEAKER_00 34:20

Yes. Best practice.

SPEAKER_01 34:22

So great. Yes. Because they're saying we really tried. Like we did restart. Yes. We are gonna share a lot of stuff that is within the truth. But this is a TV show, and we had to combine characters and we had to merge scenes, and you have to remember that when you're watching it.

SPEAKER_00 34:40

In a way, I feel like they're honoring their team's work as well by acknowledging it and saying we had to condense this for story and narrative purposes. But there was a lot of research and interviews that went on behind the scenes that you guys aren't seeing.

SPEAKER_01 34:55

Yeah, and that's why I think you have to look at this through kind of a broad lens. You can't look at based on a true story with questions like, did they really say that? Did this person really do that? Because we weren't there, right? The dialogue is always made up. And if you even think about the scenes in the first episode of the Netflix series, which are kind of establishing all the different people that are going to be coming together when the bombing happens, and you see passengers in the airport, nobody knows what happened in the airport. Nobody knows what the flight attendant said to the passengers. We have to wake up a little bit and we have to be much more discerning. It doesn't mean we should disregard it. That's again, like to me, what is powerful about this particular series is it captures the essence. Right. And that is what we appreciate.

SPEAKER_00 35:56

Yeah. Well, and this is something that you wrote about in your Substack piece as well was about how your own family is portrayed in the series, and that there's some scenes that are there to demonstrate the bond between your family and the Connells, but verbatim, the scene that happened, is not real.

SPEAKER_01 36:16

Yes, like the ending scene happens where, you know, my mom's character and Margaret's character together and they talk about spending Christmases together. And that's not true. Like we don't go there for Christmas, but we have been back and forth, right? They have seen us in New Jersey. We have visited them, I think I've been there like 10 times over the decades, if not more, honestly. And for the writers, it was kind of a nice idea to think of these families spending Christmas together. They were really gracious with kind of sharing this back and forth with us and explaining to us why they made the changes that they made.

SPEAKER_00 36:56

Well, I think that's an interesting question about how your family is portrayed. What kind of control or influence do you have in how your story is being told, or whether your story is included in the various films and series? Or was this a really unique situation that you were given this heads up and an opportunity to get feedback?

SPEAKER_01 37:21

It's really complicated because as of this moment in time, we have been part of a lot, right? There is a lot of documentary footage of us, a lot of news footage of us. We were part of this Netflix piece. There's a docuseries coming out on Fox Nation at the end of the month. We're a part of, you know, our biggest control is whether we decide to participate or not. Right. So we have to make a choice when a journalist reaches out, a writer of a television show, a playwright, a podcaster, a documentary, filmmaker, we have to make a choice whether or not we are going to be in the piece. And the biggest struggle with that is the fact that they are going to make a piece about Pan Am 103 with or without us. So even though sometimes our instinct is, I'm not totally happy with what they're gonna do, I'm a little nervous about their approach. But maybe we could help frame things. Maybe our story in this piece will help tell a broader truth. That is the struggle every time.

SPEAKER_00 38:38

The decision is whether you will participate, not whether you'll be in it, right? Because even if you don't participate, they could still include your father or your family in their content, right? Or if you decline, does that preclude them from including your story?

SPEAKER_01 38:55

My dad and his image and all of that is public domain. If a docuseries is being developed and they reach out to us and we decide we don't want to be interviewed, that does not preclude them in using other footage of us, interviews that we have done in the past, them telling the story, even if we're not part of it. So by choosing to be part of it, we have a little bit more say, but not as much to hope, right? So we participated in a docuseries that aired on Sky, I think in 2023. And we spent, I think, three full days with the crew. They came to my apartment and interviewed me and my mom. They came to Brooklyn College, shot my whole class about this. You know, when I tell my story, they did interviews with students. They shot with us for a day in Scotland with the Connells. In the course of four episodes, I think we had about four minutes of screen time. And we had no say in which of those four minutes they were going to show, how they were gonna tell the story, how it was going to feed into the rest of the story. They didn't give us an opportunity to watch. We basically released the rights once we decide to be a part of it. What's interesting that happened was we didn't love what they did. We felt like they highlighted some false theories. They framed the whole piece with the question, do we really know what happened? And right then and there, you're just like, Right. If you're framing it that way and we actually do know what happened, you have other intent, right? But there's nothing we can do except when they asked us to do press for it. So they reached out to us about four days before it aired in the UK and they asked us to do press. We hadn't seen it without even showing it. Without even seeing it. And thankfully, I'm media literate and I'm not talking to the press unless I see what I'm talking about. Of course. So they sent us the four episodes, and me and my mom had 24 hours to watch it, and we decided clearly we are not doing press for this. We are not happy with the story they've told. We are not happy with their framing.

SPEAKER_00 41:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 41:24

This is how complex it gets, right? You get approached about a series, you're a little nervous about their approach, but you're like, let's give it a shot. We think that we can frame things, we can help tell the story. They're doing it anyway, remember? Right. So it's better that we're involved. Then they do it, they show it to us, and we can decide that we're not going to promote it. When they had to edit the series for US broadcast, right? So it was had to be like 10 minutes shorter for each episode. We asked for them to pull our story. Right. And did they? And they wouldn't. Wow. And they felt that our story was important. And honestly, they didn't tell our story poorly. It's like we were happy with our portrayal, but it's the way in which the whole thing is framed and how we're being used in a piece that can be manipulated. That is wild to me. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 42:23

Because it shows that they are thoughtful about how to build a story and a narrative because they are thoughtful about how they portrayed your story and how it fits into what they're trying to do. That's wild to me that they wouldn't even consider your feedback.

SPEAKER_01 42:41

And to add to it, they were lovely people. Right. We really bonded with them. Like there were a couple of things that they did not put in because we asked them not to. This was before we saw it, right? So that is another complication, right? Is that they were not bad people, but it was clear that they had a job to do that did not sit well with us. And is that their fault? What was frustrating is the system in which it happened. And I kind of started to question like maybe that was one we shouldn't have done. How do you make these decisions? Is still something that's really hard. Yeah. Because what do we want more than anything? We want this to be remembered. We want the people who were lost to be remembered. We want my dad to be remembered. But I think what we realize now more than anything is it's not just about remembering, right? It's about remembering accurately. And that is the tension now. Yeah. But I do feel like if this story is going to continue to be told, if I can have any contribution to it being told accurately, I need to give it a shot.

SPEAKER_00 43:51

Yeah. Well, even stories that are dramatizations are still a kind of documentation of reality. In a way. And it's especially in the way that it connects with viewers. And I'm thinking about younger generations, for example, who may not even have been aware of Pan Am 103 from the 80s and how even dramatizations can be the way that they learn about this event. You want it to be as true in its sense as possible because you know that that's going to form people's understanding, even though they should also understand that it's just a dramatization.

SPEAKER_01 44:31

What I want to bring up is the fact that the Netflix piece is the second based on a true story series that has come out about Pan Am 103 in the last two years. The other one was a Sky and Peacock collaboration called Lockerbie The Search for Truth. This was a pretty high-profile one because it starred Colin Firth and it focused on one man story, a gentleman who lost his daughter on the flight and his quest for justice. And this was a really painful one to watch because it was way more sensationalized than it needed to be. And I think that question that I brought up, the how did you choose what to keep off camera is really key because two major differences in these shows is that the Search for the Truth Colin Firth story showed the passengers on the plane and also showed the plane going down. Showed a lot more gruesome images of bodies. They really dealt with the crash as if it was an action movie. That's the only way I can explain it. And that is why the way that the Netflix piece portrays it was so heartening that you could tell the same story without torturing us with those images that none of us ever, ever, ever had to see. It's completely unnecessary. I couldn't have imagined that 37 and a half years later that we would still be telling this story. Yeah. Forget actually still investigating and trying the perpetrators, right? That is part of the story, too, is just kind of the relentless nature of the coverage and how it's really been for my entire adult life.

SPEAKER_00 46:31

Back to storytelling and back to what do audiences want versus what do they need and what's a true portrayal of something. The reality is this was an extremely complex case, as we've said, that's gone on focades. It's still going. There is this feeling at the end, you do not feel like everything is tied up into a bow. And I feel like a lot of times with stories, people want to have a neat bow tie at the end, and you want to feel like justice is served. One of the themes of this series has been this question of what is justice? Because you can get a conviction, but that's not going to necessarily make you feel whole.

SPEAKER_01 47:15

That is so beautifully said, and a really important part of this story. You know, there's so much of that conspiratorial atmosphere around this tragedy because of the complexity of it. Like people can't wrap their head around the complexity of it. So we're gonna make different theories that seem simpler, you know? Yeah. What people don't realize is that every time those voices get heard, it starts to kind of chip away at truth.

SPEAKER_00 47:49

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 47:49

And for the families who have fought for truth, gosh, there's just nothing more painful than that.

SPEAKER_00 47:55

It's one of those things where it's the more often you see something, the more likely you are to believe that it's true, even if there's no basis for it. And even once corrections get made, you still have this belief somewhere inside of you. So it is super important for people to understand that these are real stories and really complicated investigations that are happening.

SPEAKER_01 48:15

I think that's one of the reasons that I don't stop talking and speaking and teaching about this because I do want people to understand that there are real people behind news stories, behind documentaries, behind based on a true story narrative, that there are real people whose stories are being told.

SPEAKER_00 48:42

So, what is your advice to people like me who love true crime content, or to anyone who's watching these kinds of dramatizations or documentaries or news stories? How can we know if what we're watching is trustworthy or representative of truth?

SPEAKER_01 49:00

I think what's really important to note whenever you come across media content of a historical event, to understand that there is no way that any one piece of media can portray the fullness of the story. The way that it is told is a really important thing to understand. Like we need to understand what we're watching when we watch it. We should always know that there are important things that are missing and that every piece of content has an agenda and a purpose that is unique to that particular piece of content. You know, I would love to be able to give everyone like three to five tips on knowing something's reliable. Just tell us what to do, Michelle. It's complicated. I do want to share though, is to be sensitive to the human beings behind the story. When you're commenting and sharing stuff on social media about really tragic events, like there are people that know those people. Right. These are people's lives. This is someone's tragedy.

SPEAKER_00 50:16

So be a human being about it. Probably have somebody in your life who has gone through some kind of trauma that you don't know about. Yes. And so you should just speak with respect to everyone because you don't know what they've gone through or what their story is.

SPEAKER_01 50:31

And you have to do more of your own digging. Like if you watch this Netflix piece on Pan Am, it should be kind of a starting point of like, oh, okay, so this happened and these are like the broad things that I understand about it. But now let me dive deeper. Let me go to news sources, let me watch other family interviews, let me read this interview with the director before you just share it and say something that is misleading.

SPEAKER_00 51:04

Right. Well, even well-intentioned producers will still have a perspective or are working within a system that restricts them in some way. Sometimes there can be a single piece of media that somehow dictates the public understanding about very complicated things. Even if you see something that does look legitimate, you still need to do your research and consume other things to educate yourself. There's no one single piece of media that's going to be the definitive truth of anything.

SPEAKER_01 51:39

Yes, that is such an important point. Such an important point. We can never tell the full comprehensive story of any historical event in one article, one documentary, one TV series. Like it can't happen. So stop expecting it. I did want to share with you kind of a really heartwarming story. Yes, please. Like I said, this series aired in on the BBC last year. So people in the UK saw it. And the creators gave me and the president of the victims group an opportunity to watch it. Currently, I'm the board chair of the victims group. And so me and Kara, who works as the president, were kind of partners in this. And so we had the opportunity to watch the series so that we could respond if people asked us about it. They didn't have to do that. And again, they did because they wanted us to know what to expect. Right. So in November of last year, I'm at a small lunch place near Union Square in New York City where I live. And I'm sitting with a good friend of mine, and we're just chatting away, and it's lunchtime and it's pretty crowded. It's small, and tables are close together. And a couple gets seated next to us. And I look up, and the gentleman is Connor Swindells. Oh, McCusker. Who plays McGusker in this Netflix series? If you haven't seen the series, he is one of the three stars of the series. And he's also a well-known British actor and has done a lot of really incredible work. And he sits down next to me at this restaurant. And I whisper to my friend who knows a lot about my life, and I said, the star of the Pan Am show is sitting next to us. And there is no way I'm not saying something. Like the universe works in mysterious ways, and clearly I'm supposed to meet this person.

SPEAKER_00 53:44

Yes.

SPEAKER_01 53:45

So I don't know exactly how to approach it. He seems to want to just have a nice meal with who I realize is his wife. But they order and I'm like, I gotta do it now before the food comes. So I tap him on his arm and I look at him and I say, I am so sorry to bother you, but I need to speak with you about the bombing of Pan Am 103. And his face was like, What's happening? And I said, My name's Michelle. I am the chair of the victims group. Um my father was on Pan Am 103, and I saw the series, and I just want you to know that we think you did a beautiful job. And we ended up having the loveliest conversation when I told him that it was my dad portrayed in the scene that he does with Margaret. His wife literally out loud goes, Oh my God, like the odds of the two of us coming into the same place at the same time. And I have to tell you that this is not a particular popular place. And they were in from England for the weekend. Wow. Life works in mysterious ways. And so we have this lovely conversation. Their food came. I was like, please eat. I just want to acknowledge you, whatever. My friend and I go back to chatting. Then, as they're leaving, I look at him and I say, It was so nice to meet you. And he says to me, Can I get a picture with you? Oh, wow. And I said, Connor, I think I'm supposed to ask you that. And I have this lovely picture of me and him. And then I reached out to him when it came out here just to say how lovely it was to meet him and that I stand by my review that he did a beautiful job.

SPEAKER_00 55:31

That's a beautiful story, but it also reinforces what we've been saying that the cast and crew of this production care so much about the story and about the people whose stories they're telling. And that's exactly what he said.

SPEAKER_01 55:46

He said it was so important to us because it was about real people. It was so important for us to tell this sensitively and carefully. And I said to him, I was like, you could tell. You can tell that you were trying to do that.

SPEAKER_00 56:01

So before we go, I guess my last question would be what is it that you would want people to know about Pan Am 103?

SPEAKER_01 56:11

There are a couple of broad strokes that I really want people to understand about what happened after Pan Am Flight 103. And a lot of it has to do with the victims of Pan Am Flight 103, the family organization that started in 1989 and the work that these families did. And I say these families because we were not involved at the beginning. We were very much focused on our own grief and loss. But there were many families that stood up immediately and fought not only for the investigation to go forward, but also for real change in airline security. And a lot of what we see in airline security today is because of the victims of Pan Am Flight 103 and the changes that were made. The other thing I want to say is that the work that Syracuse University has done to remember Pan Am 103 and the 35 students that were lost is astounding. To this day, the end of October every year, there's a remembrance week. To this day, 35 students, current students get scholarships and the names of the students that were lost. That's amazing. There are ceremonies and projects and work being done every year for Syracuse. Yeah. And that the fight continues. This trial coming up is a important part of the Pan Am 103 story. The fact that we have the alleged bomb maker in custody, the fact that there will be a trial in the United States is astounding. There has never been a jury trial for Pan Am 103, and there has never been an American-based trial. Will it be in DC? Yes. So it will take place in federal court in DC. And it will likely take about two months. And so this year we will have a verdict in this case. So we just keep fighting and we keep remembering and we keep trying to honor our loved ones. They just keep on.

SPEAKER_00 58:28

Are there any recommendations that you would have for people who are looking for things to read or watch about the story?

SPEAKER_01 58:36

There is one documentary series that was done in 2015 called My Brother's Bomber, which is a three-part series that was done for PBS's Frontline by Ken Dornstein. And Ken Dornstein is a documentary filmmaker and a journalist, but he is also the brother of David Dornstein, who was killed in Pan Am 103. His work and his investigation is what has led to Massood being in custody. And so it's really an extraordinary journey by anybody, but the fact that it is done by a brother of a victim makes it that much more potent and poignant. The other thing I want people to be aware of is that there is a book that's being published by Simon and Schuster called Targeted Pan M 103, Lockerbie Libya, and the attack that brought terror home. That's being written by Jack Carr and James M. Scott. These two authors have been working hard on this for quite a bit. They've been in constant contact with us. We've met them in person. They have just been doing an incredible amount of research. And we are very, very confident that this book will be a very reliable piece of media about the bombing. You can pre-order it now, you can wait for it to be out, but I did want to put it on everyone's radar.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:06

Those are great tips. How about you? My recommendations would be first, I did not know that the FBI has a YouTube channel. They had put out a 20-minute sort of a remembrance video called Remembering Pan Am Flight 103 30 Years Later, where they show real footage from that time and they have interviews with Dick Marquise, Catherine Terman, and real family. So if you want to see the real faces to these characters that you're watching in the series, I would really recommend that. And we'll put the link in the show notes.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:40

Yeah, and I'm really glad that you mentioned that. I knew this existed. I hadn't seen it for a while, and I re-watched it before this recording. And it really does a good job.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:49

The other thing that I would recommend is just generally checking out the band Mogwai. They're a Scottish band. They've been around for a while, and they did the soundtrack for the series and were recognized by the Scottish Royal Television Society, which gave three awards to the bombing of Pan Am 103, including Best Soundtrack and Best Music for Mogwai, as well as Best Director for Michael Keeler. All very well deserved. So definitely want to check them out.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:16

There's one other thing that I want everyone to know about. Connor Swindells is in what I think one of the best shows that ever was on Netflix, which is a show called Sex Education. Wow. I think it is the most brilliant look at adolescence and sexuality that I have ever seen. He is absolutely brilliant in it. And if you have not seen it, you need to watch it. It is so good. Oh, I will check it out. Well, thank you, Gina. I know this was a lot. Well I think we both need to take naps.

SPEAKER_00 1:01:51

Thank you, Michelle. And I love you, and thank you so much for sharing your story with all of us.

SPEAKER_01 1:01:56

Oh, I love you too.

SPEAKER_00 1:01:59

Michelle Chula Lipkin has been a media literacy educator and advocate for the last 25 years. She teaches at the City University of New York and writes, presents, and consults on topics related to media and tech. You can find her at Michelle Chulalipkin.com.

SPEAKER_01 1:02:14

Gina Wu spent 15 years in tech, building Uber as the first person on the ground in European and U.S. markets, and founding Meta's Global Information Ecosystem Program. Today she is the author of Feed for Thought, a newsletter that explores how digital platforms are reshaping standards for authority, expertise, and trust. Did you see with Gina and Michelle?

SPEAKER_00 1:02:36

It's produced by Stevie Starr. Our theme song is by Laundry Day.