The sonic aesthetics of technical communication have been underconsidered compared to their visual and textual counterparts. We highlight the aesthetic overlaps and contrasts between human-produced audio technical communication and Generative AI audio that mimics the aesthetic patterns of successful science communication podcasts, specifically Radiolab, while exploring the sonic dimensions of ethos, relatability, trust, and narrative. Applying close listening analysis, we explore two particular sonic aesthetic features: prosodic variation and shared conversational syntax. We argue prosodic range and shared syntax contribute to the aesthetics of either overarching agreeableness/certainty or confrontation/uncertainty, which in turn constitutes an orientation to scientific knowledge.
AguilarG. L. (2025). AI Writing is always embodied: Building a critical awareness of the invisible labor of humans-in-the-loop in AI products. College Composition & Communication, 77(1), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc202577139
2.
AndersonE. (2014). Toward a resonant material vocality for digital composition. enculturation: a journal of rhetoric, writing, and culture, 18. http://enculturation.net/materialvocality.
3.
AngeliE. L. (2024). Responding through listening: Promoting listening skills through lightning talks and 2 × 2 × 2 storytelling. Journal of Response to Writing, 10(2), Article 3. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/journalrw/vol10/iss2/3.
BanihashemiA.ShahriaryA.YaghoobzadehY. (2025). Human vs NotebookLM for educational podcasts: A controlled experiment on two general topics. Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Knowledge Engineering (ICCKE), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCKE68588.2025.11273844
6.
BartonB. F.BartonM. S. (1988). Narration in technical communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/105065198800200103
7.
BathaeeY. (2018). The artificial intelligence black box and the failure of intent and causation. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology (Harvard JOLT), 31(2), 889–938.
8.
BecksteadL.CookI. M.McGregorH. (2024). Podcast or perish: Peer review and knowledge creation for the 21st century. Bloomsbury.
BjorkC. (2025). True crime podcasting and technical communication: Exposing the oppression of objectivity. Technical Communication Quarterly, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2025.2455058. Advance online publication.
11.
BlevinsB. (2019). Sound strategies for sonic literacy. In SabatinoL. A.FallonB. (Eds.), Multimodal composing: Strategies for twenty-first-century writing consultations (pp. 140–152). Utah State University Press.
CarusiA. (2008). Scientific visualisations and aesthetic grounds for trust. Ethics and Information Technology, 10, 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-008-9159-5
14.
CerasoS. (2014). (Re)educating the senses: Multimodal listening, bodily learning, and the composition of sonic experiences. College English, 77(2), 102–123. https://doi.org/10.58680/ce201426145
DoT. D.ShafqatU. B.LingE.SardaN. (2025). PAIGE: Examining learning outcomes and experiences with personalized AI-generated educational podcasts. Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713460
19.
DroumevaM.MurphyD. (2018). A pedagogy of listening: Composing with/in media texts. In DanforthC. S.StedmanK. D.FarisM. J. (Eds.), Soundwriting pedagogies. Computers and Composition Digital Press/Utah State University Press. http://ccdigitalpress.org/soundwriting.
EdwardsD. (2025). Weathering the rhetorical climates of AI. College Composition & Communication, 77(1), 13–38. https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc202577113
24.
FjellroR. (2025). Vocal stories: The sound of narrative in podcasts. In Benestad HågvarY.HornmoenH.AlnæsJ. (Eds.), Narrative theory in journalistic practice: Understanding emerging digital genres (pp. 81–95). Routledge.
25.
HardestyK. S.HollingerA. (2020). Uncommonly common: Reconsidering creativity and beauty in technical communication. Technical Communication, 67(4), 28–48. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27340193
26.
HoffmanA. (2021). Close listening: Approaches to research on colonial sound archives. In BullM.CobussenM. (Eds.), The bloomsbury handbook of sonic methodologies (pp. 529–542). Bloomsbury Publishing.
27.
HuseinS.SaiveR.JordanM.BertoniM. I. (2019). Podcasts: An under-utilized form of science communication. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 46th Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), 2464–2466. https://doi.org/10.1109/PVSC40753.2019.8980967
28.
IshizakiS. (2011). A model of aesthetic experience. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.2011.6087208
29.
JonesN. N.WaltonR. (2018). Using narratives to foster critical thinking about diversity and social justice. In HaasA. M.EbleM. F. (Eds.), Key theoretical frameworks: Teaching technical communication in the twenty-first century (pp. 241–267). Utah State University Press.
30.
JordanL. S.SaubererP. G.WolgemuthJ. R. (2025). The sound of science: Exploring generative AI podcasts for qualitative health research translation. Qualitative Health Research, 36, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323251375410. Advance online publication.
31.
JuslinP. N.SchererK. R. (2008). Vocal expression of affect. In HarriganJ. A.RosenthalR.SchererK. R. (Eds.), The new handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research (pp. 65–135). Oxford University Press.
KjeldsenJ. E. (2018). The rhetoric of sound, the sound of arguments. Three propositions, three questions, and an afterthought for the study of sonic and multimodal argumentation. Argumentation and Advocacy, 54(4), 364–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2018.1525013
KostelnickC. (1995). Cultural adaptation and information design: Two contrasting views. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 38(4), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1109/47.475590
McKeeH. (2006). Sound matters: Notes toward the analysis and design of sound in multimodal webtexts. Computers and Composition, 23(3), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2006.06.003
Sano-FranchiniJ. (2025). Timely, (un)Disciplinary, and solutions-oriented: On the affective politics of writing technologies and where we might go from here. [2025 CCCC chair’s address]. College Composition & Communication, 77(2), 348–368. https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc2025772348
49.
SchulzeH. (2021). Sonic writing. In BullM.CobussenM. (Eds.), The bloomsbury handbook of sonic methodologies (pp. 659–670). Bloomsbury.
SelfeC. L. (2009). The movement of air, the breath of meaning: Aurality and multimodal composing. College Composition and Communication, 60(4), 616–663. https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc20097190
52.
SharmaM.TongM.KorbakT.DuvenaudD.AskellA.BowmanS. R.PerezE. (2023). Towards understanding sycophancy in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13548. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.13548.
SlaterJ.Rosselot-MerrittJ. (2024). The technical communicator as artist: Rhetoric, aesthetics, and form in the workplace. Technical Communication, 71(2), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.55177/tc547418
55.
SpinelliM.DannL. (2019). Podcasting: The audio media revolution. Bloomsbury Publishing.
SunY.WangT. (2026, April). Be friendly, not friends: How LLM sycophancy shapes user trust. Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.10844
58.
SwiatekL. (2018). The podcast as an intimate bridging medium. In LlinaresD.FoxN.BerryR. (Eds.), Podcasting: New aural cultures and digital media (pp. 173–187). Springer International Publishing.
VealeyK.GerdingJ. (2021). Introduction to the special issue: “the work of storytelling in technical communication”. Technical Communication, 68(4), 1–6. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27340322
62.
WeidmanA. (2015). Voice. In NovakD.SakakeenyM. (Eds.), Keywords in sound (pp. 323–345). Duke University Press.
63.
WelhausenC. A. (2018). Toward a topos of visual rhetoric: Teaching aesthetics through color and typography. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 48(2), 132–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281616646752
64.
WrightD. (2019). Sounding off: Toward a rhetoric of sound in technical communication. Technical Communication, 66(4), 363–374. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27303388
