“Listening to this podcast I find myself hearing the narrators making numerous assumptions. Assigning meaning behind behaviors without facts attached.
For example, the narrators call into question/suspicion that the guide went to the rental property and entered the living quarters of the women. As a person who has lived in very small communities in Latin America that behavior seems on par with what is typical. I myself have seen behaviors just like that with no malice attached. So to assume and infer suspicion based on interpretation of actions seems misguided.
Another example where suspicion is cast without the clarity of facts is about the couple who found one of the backpacks from the women. There are comments made throughout the episodes questioning why the couple was tending a rice field in the manner they described. While I agree that there are unanswered questions, I don’t think their behavior is strange in anyway because I simply don’t know the facts of their business. I’d like to see the journalists find out the back story to the rice field and the clarify the circumstances around their actions.
I am also interested in the facts about where the guide was the day the women went missing. Can anyone verify his whereabouts? Something as basic as this has not been included this far in the podcast. I can’t figure out why the facts of the case, opposed to assumptions and inferences, are not the highlight here.
Lastly, I think many of these assumptions se to arise out of the possibility of cultural misinterpretation. It makes sense to me why locals are weary of outsiders & reporting like this doesn’t help build that trust. I hope you prove me wrong and the remainder of the episodes have less conjecture and more facts.”
Madre Anita via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
11/09/22