‘The Intercept’ Reporters: Our ‘Serial’ Article Is “Being Held Hostage”

The Intercept reporters Natasha Vargas-Cooper and Ken Silverstein have responded to backlash from Serial fans following their article featuring an interview with Kevin Urick, the lead prosecutor in the case against Adnan Syed. The article criticized host Sarah Koenig‘s reporting, calling her efforts to contact Urick “underwhelming” and the “most troubling part” of the podcast.

The article also implied that Koenig favored the defense for storytelling purposes, while Urick himself critiqued Koenig and denied he had been contacted multiple times by Serial. On Thursday, Serial defended its reporting and fact-checking on Twitter. Vargas-Cooper and Silverstein, in turn, stood by their reporting and explained why they had not published a response to Serial, nor the second part of their interview with Urick.

Vargas-Cooper originally said part two would be published late Thursday or early Friday and then later said of the delay, “My outlet decided to consult with a number of other editors to see how they felt. Ate up time.” One of her tweets claimed their response was “being held hostage,” posting this just as the France hostage crisis unfolded on Friday. 

Here is a look at what the reporters had to say about their Serial reporting.

If you’re wondering we did not just take a prosecutors word, we have done our own investigation THANKUVERYMUCH

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 7, 2015

We got @serial ‘s list of complaints, currently in transit, gonna get on a good wifi and respond. No significant errors or changes.

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 8, 2015

Twitter I am currently employed by First Look. If you want me to spend all day answering your tweeties match my salary. I accept bitcoins.

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 9, 2015

.@KenSilverstein1 and I wrote a brief response with corrections but our editors are deciding whether it should run at the bottom or alone

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 9, 2015

But for some reason running a 200 word post on it’s own is controversial

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 9, 2015

So anyways again our response and part 2 is being held hostage by a fearless, adversarial, outlet.

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 9, 2015

How many subreddit hate threads does a girl have to have before I get verified here, Twitter?

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 9, 2015

I am just killing time now waiting for our response to be approved by fearless adversarial editors. AMA

— Natasha VC (@natashavc) January 9, 2015

Also, this is my generic response to all the people who hate the Serial story. I honestly don’t care. Bye. https://t.co/uYfBOqw3ec

— ken silverstein (@KenSilverstein1) January 7, 2015

I respect juries. Thank God Twitter is not a jury. Manson would have walked.

— ken silverstein (@KenSilverstein1) January 7, 2015

So Julie @serial, fast question. Adnan: Guilty or not? Pretty easy.

— ken silverstein (@KenSilverstein1) January 9, 2015

Also, it’s hard getting #theintercept to post a simple reply, but @serial‘s “factual inaccuracies” are more smoke and mirrors.

— ken silverstein (@KenSilverstein1) January 9, 2015

I’m new to Twitter so can someone tell me where the moron-proof button is?

— ken silverstein (@KenSilverstein1) January 9, 2015

Rabbinical scholars have spent less time studying the Torah then our editors have spent on 150 word item delivered yesterday

— ken silverstein (@KenSilverstein1) January 9, 2015