Submitting to RadioDoc Review
AUDIO DOCUMENTARY/NARRATIVE PODCAST/AUDIO FEATURE REVIEWS (up to 3000 words or 10 minutes)
Each issue we publish in-depth reviews (of up to 3000 words) of radio or podcast documentaries, features or other examples of the crafted (sometimes called ‘built speech’) factual form. Reviews can be written or audio format (up to 10 minutes). Audio format can include clips of the documentary, providing they comply with appropriate copyright (discuss with the editorial team).
By documentary we mean audio stories, investigations, features and other examples of the crafted (sometimes called ‘built speech’) factual form. We are not thinking of conversational studio podcasts, celebrity interviews, live commentary, radio phone-ins or news magazines. We’re not looking for sound art, soundscape or field recordings or oral history recordings, unless they have a narrative frame. We’re not thinking of anything that’s all fiction or dramatized, though documentaries often include elements of dramatisation. However, we’re curious about all things audio, and have in the past run a special issue on audio drama. So if you’re not sure whether a work is suitable and want to push our boundaries, please get in touch and make your case!
Request to review an audio work in RadioDocReview
We invite academics and programme-makers/producers to review a radio or podcast documentary or other audio feature (provided it is not their own work), but we also accept unsolicited proposals for a review. There are two ways to submit your proposal to review: respond to our call to review a selection of the best output each year or you can propose another piece of audio you would like to review.
Reviews are not peer reviewed, but are subject to approval by our editorial team.
Submitting a documentary to be reviewed
You can nominate a piece of audio work for review in the journal, by our reviewers. We are looking for documentaries and audio stories/features that have been broadcast or podcast on an accessible and well-known platform for a mainstream audience, or been played at an audio documentary festival, rather than private works of art or site-specific installations. If the documentary/work is not in English, we will need a transcript or voiceover in English.
SCHOLARLY ARTICLES (up to 6500 words or 20 minutes)
We publish original essays and research articles about audio documentary and other crafted factual output. These should tackle in-depth one or more aspects of the craft, format, genre, production, reception or content of audio programmes or podcasts, or comment on debates and developments within the field of study. We are interested in work that focuses on production, reception or the texts themselves, or on the study or teaching of audio documentary. We are especially keen to publish new work that helps the field of radio and podcast studies develop a common language or conceptual framework to discuss audio documentary, and/or advances theory. Please also see //ro.uow.edu.au/rdr/aimsandscope.html”> our aims and scope Articles can be written or audio format and will be up to 6500 words or 20 minutes.
Essays and articles will be double blind peer reviewed.
If you’re not sure whether your idea for an article or essay will meet our criteria, you’re welcome to email a 200 word abstract or outline to the editors at email@example.com
OPEN SPACE (1500 words or 5 minutes maximum)
In Open Space we publish short written (1500 words maximum) or audio (max duration 5 minutes) pieces that propose new avenues of discussion, research, review and production in the field of audio documentary and other crafted factual audio. You can be polemical in this section of RadioDoc Review. You can also use Open Space to respond to reviews, interviews, essays and articles in previous editions of RadioDoc Review. Think of this section as a letters page plus.
Open Space contributions are not peer reviewed, to allow for a faster and more informal exchange of ideas. They can be written or audio format.
If you would like to submit a piece for Open Space, email a brief outline of your idea for a piece to the editors firstname.lastname@example.org
BOOK REVIEWS (up to 3000 words or 10 minutes)
We will publish reviews of books relating to the audio documentary/narrative podcast form, even if only in part: for example, a book on podcasting or a history of a broadcast organisation.
INTERVIEWS (up to 3000 words or 30 minutes)
Documentary makers might not have the time or inclination to compose a lengthy essay and pursue it through peer review, so to make sure we draw on their critical insights at the cutting edge of our field, we invite scholars and programme-makers to submit edited, in-depth interviews with someone who has made or is making an important contribution to the field.
We are not looking for promotional, human interest or career guidance interviews, which can be found elsewhere. We are looking for interviews that examine in depth key aspects of audio documentary-making and other crafted factual/storytelling audio. This might be about editorial or ethical issues, audio craft, format and genre, audience, funding and commissioning, education and training, new and changing technology.
Your interviewee needs to be someone noteworthy and you need to make the case to us for why they are interesting and how this will contribute to our journal’s aims. Your interview needs to have a clear focus, such as their innovative editing style, their work on a particular subject matter, technical innovation within the industry, or a discussion about narrative form or funding for documentary.
You should begin your interview with a brief introduction that makes the case for talking to this particular programme maker, setting the interview in context, and drawing out the ways this develops theory or knowledge in the field. You may also include other critical commentary on the interview content at other points in the article. You may edit interviews for brevity and relevance.
You may submit interviews as text or audio. You can submit up to 30 minutes or a written version of 3000 words. If in audio format, you will need to ensure good quality audio recording and editing so it’s a pleasurable listen for our audience.
Interviews are not peer reviewed, but will be subject to feedback by our journal editorial team.
Before recording, please consult our editors by emailing email@example.com
Reviewers are invited to address the following criteria:
1. STORYTELLING STRENGTH
(how compelling is the story, storyline)
2. ORIGINALITY AND INNOVATION
(what is new and how/why is it appealing)
3. AUDIENCE ENGAGEMENT and HOSTING
(how does it pull audience in and connect with audience, relatability of host, if present)
4. RESEARCH AND REPORTING
(depth, breadth, and accuracy of knowledge accessed)
5. COMPLEXITY OF INFORMATION AND PORTRAYALS
(interplay between content/research and form/audio medium and portrayal of place/people)
6. EMOTIVENESS AND EMPATHY
(identification with talent/characters, affect, evokes visceral response)
7. CRAFT AND ARTISTRY
(use of sound and music, mix of sound, scripting, pacing)
8. EPISODIC/NARRATIVE STRUCTURE
(micro and macro story arcs, well deployed serialisation, use of scenes, taut episode endings, resolution)
9. ETHICAL PRACTICE
(fair, honest and considerate treatment of topics and talent)
10. PUBLIC BENEFIT and IMPACT
(contribution to store of knowledge and evidence of merit, e.g. awards or other forms of formal recognition;
evidence of changes in public attitudes, policy; audience feedback; professional feedback)