Of the selection of clips, the piece on Adderall stuck out when I listened for the quality and variation of sounds. Unfortunately, it struck a cord with me because I wasn't very impressed with the execution of this story. It is quite heavily reliant on the narration of the broadcaster, which causes his voice to seemingly drone on, only rarely broken up by nat sound. This is a fine example of our discussion in class about whether the focus lies more on the reporter or the subject. Understandably, much needs to be explained with this topic; however, the coverage seemed too broad and consequently remedial when the broadcaster droned rather simple facts about Adderall.
With the exception of quotations from medical professionals, the rest weren't very poignant. There was no nat sound (albeit, something hard to obtain with this story), and the students recorded had all (not surprisingly) requested anonymity. Another area where I thought this broadcast could have been stronger is in emphasizing the prevalence of Adderall use. Although we are supposed to be wary of number usage in radio broadcasting, I feel reinforcing one or two relevant statistics could have made this story more hard-hitting.