Ok, don't get your tunic in a twist. I spent another couple of minutes of my life listening to Ken's podcast on "The Man Trap". Frankly, these are a dish best served cold--and once.
In the podcast, Ken keeps calling the planet M-13, not M-113. He also refers to "Commander Spock".
Nits, of course. But he gets the planet name and the Spock's first-season rank wrong.
1) Spock was, I believe a Lieutenant Commander during season one, yes? Is "Commander" not an acceptable shorthand for referring to someone who carries a Lieutenant Commander rank? How many times have we heard "Commander Data," "Commander La Forge," "Commander Worf," "Commander Dax," and "Commander Tuvok" over they years?
Also, was Spock not a Commander for the last two years of the show? Is it not possible that even if Ken misspoke, it could still be construed as simply being shorthand for Spock's actual rank?
2) More importantly: I sincerely disagree with you that incorrectly referencing "Commander" Spock and "M13" would constitute "get[ting] important facts wrong."
These are, as you said later, minor nitpicks.
Let's get constructive rather than tossing about criticisms, of either the effort or the poster. I think the podcasts would be greatly enhanced if they got more into the behind-the-scenes production trivia, and I mean more than "Gene Roddenberry looped the 'Turkeys' line in Charlie X. That requires bringing out the sacred texts, "Making", "World", and "Inside". Plus the Jeff Bond book on music.
Finally, I really think they should go in production order, not original airdate, because they spend alot of time talking about how in this episode that happened, but in the previous one that hadn't happened. I want to hear production dates, Harvey Hart's ten-day shoot, the utter mess of "What are Little Girls Made Of?" that occurred because Gene R. was trying to write in and rewrite in his mistress.
So... you have no major, important facts to cite that they got wrong. Gotcha. Your criticism boils down to "They're not doing it the way I would do it so it must suck because I would do it better!"
The key point you are also ignoring is that these podcasts are being done based solely on re-watching the show. Yes, external texts and sources are being referenced, but what would be the point of filing through book after book to cite details already available in print?
More importantly - as hosts of the show, John and Ken also bring something else to the podcasts that you can't get anywhere else: their own personal opinions and interpretations of the shows and their impact on the franchise, on television and generally on the original series itself. These are the elements I find more interesting. These are the elements I'm listening for. Anyone can read "Inside Star Trek;" I've read it at least a dozen times since I got it fifteen years ago... I want something fresh, something new. John and Ken are providing that, warts and all.
Dude, you've got a hell
of a way of promoting yourself if this is your objective!