Season one of Fiasco , which tackled the Iran-Contra affair, and later seasons on the 2000 Bush v. Gore election and the AIDS crisis, showcased a maturing of his narrative powers. With Fiasco , Neyfakh leaned harder into character development. He has a keen eye for the "supporting cast" of history—the mid-level staffers, the forgotten activists, the lawyers who almost won. By focusing on these figures, he makes massive historical shifts feel personal and fragile.
If there is a critique to be leveled at Neyfakh’s approach, it is that his "historical thriller" style occasionally relies on the suppression of outcomes to generate suspense. For listeners who are deeply versed in history, the episodic "cliffhangers" can sometimes feel manufactured. However, this is a minor grievance against a format that is designed to educate the general public in an entertaining way. neyfakh
Before his podcasting fame, Neyfakh was a prolific staff writer for The Boston Globe and The New York Observer . Season one of Fiasco , which tackled the
Season one of Fiasco , which tackled the Iran-Contra affair, and later seasons on the 2000 Bush v. Gore election and the AIDS crisis, showcased a maturing of his narrative powers. With Fiasco , Neyfakh leaned harder into character development. He has a keen eye for the "supporting cast" of history—the mid-level staffers, the forgotten activists, the lawyers who almost won. By focusing on these figures, he makes massive historical shifts feel personal and fragile.
If there is a critique to be leveled at Neyfakh’s approach, it is that his "historical thriller" style occasionally relies on the suppression of outcomes to generate suspense. For listeners who are deeply versed in history, the episodic "cliffhangers" can sometimes feel manufactured. However, this is a minor grievance against a format that is designed to educate the general public in an entertaining way.
Before his podcasting fame, Neyfakh was a prolific staff writer for The Boston Globe and The New York Observer .