• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

National Public Radio Journalist Believes That NPR Listening Demographics Have Changed And...

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are pieces of NPR that I really like. There have been times when tuning across the band that I have had to stop and listen because of interesting content. But when it comes down to it, they always present from a liberal point of view. There really isn't a diversity of ideas or opinions coming from NPR. It is not the overt in-your-face slant that some traditional talk radio has, but the subtle holier-than-thou higher-ed snark that really turns me off.
People just want their news given to them straight, without the agenda. Just like Dragnet, "All we want are the facts, ma'am." And do you really trust someone like this to guide an organization that is supposed to do that? NPR CEO aims to erase "bad information" & replace it with "good information", RESURFACED video shows
How about give me all the information in a truthful manner, and let the people decide for themselves? The world is crazy enough as it is without havinh media orgs hype it up or spin it.
For anyone tempted to click that link, this is information about the site the video’s on:
 
We now have the first legislative reaction to the Uri Berliner piece. Rep. Claudia Tenney has introduced an Act to defund NPR:


The problem with her law is it's based on a false premise.



In point of fact, there is no line item in the federal budget for NPR. There's a long funding process that involves the states and member stations. She apparently doesn't know this. There is the Corporation For Public Broadcasting that was designed to act as a buffer between congress and the media. NPR does a lot more than produce news programming. Defunding the entire company over the perceived bias of one department seems inherently unfair. She is basing her legislation on the opinion of one person. The company has the right to defend itself. She brought up the social media comments made by the CEO as the basis for her legislation. The CEO has the right to defend herself as well.

So there are a lot of constitutional rights involved here.

True too and also NPR is technically a private non-profit foundation. The ones affected by this are NPR affiliates owned by State Universities that are part of statewide networks.
 
Agreed, but the real purpose of this might be to provide the basis for congressional hearings, and all the informative, deliberative, and thoughtful dialogue grandstanding that results.

The only relevant person who should testify is the CEO of the Corporation For Public Broadcasting, who happens to be a Trump appointee. She is the person who is responsible for how the federal funding is disbursed. Everything else is a side show, which unfortunately is likely where they'll concentrate.
 
Are we not talking a blue city in a hyper-gerrymandered red state?
I know it is long lost in a very lengthy thread, but I just saw this question...and some of the resultant confusion about it. It was in response to a post where I discussed the ratings of KUOW in Seattle/Tacoma, then touched on KQED in San Francisco and KERA in Dallas/Fort Worth. So I assume you are referring to Dallas/Fort Worth with this comment.

And, yes, Dallas is a blue city. You're also correct on Texas being a heavily gerrymandered red state. However, understand that the Dallas/Fort Worth radio market probably averages out to being more purple than either blue or red. Dallas itself is quite blue. Fort Worth is purple. Some of the inner suburbs are blue, others are purple, and some are red. The exurbs are generally red. And that is the market that KERA is rated in...not just the city of Dallas.
 
I know it is long lost in a very lengthy thread, but I just saw this question...and some of the resultant confusion about it. It was in response to a post where I discussed the ratings of KUOW in Seattle/Tacoma, then touched on KQED in San Francisco and KERA in Dallas/Fort Worth. So I assume you are referring to Dallas/Fort Worth with this comment.

And, yes, Dallas is a blue city. You're also correct on Texas being a heavily gerrymandered red state. However, understand that the Dallas/Fort Worth radio market probably averages out to being more purple than either blue or red. Dallas itself is quite blue. Fort Worth is purple. Some of the inner suburbs are blue, others are purple, and some are red. The exurbs are generally red. And that is the market that KERA is rated in...not just the city of Dallas.
I responded to you and @gr8oldies up-board, and I took his comment ("hyper-gerrymandered red state") to refer to Washington State. It didn't make a ton of sense, so my own comment tried to clarify as regards Washington State. Apologies for misinterpreting. It's very tough to disagree with what you wrote.
 
If anyone has anything new to add to this topic, you've got a day or so - otherwise, I think this thread has drifted pretty far from radio and it's time to close it.
 
There are now multiple bills, all from Freedom Caucus, to defund NPR:


The problem is that the local stations depend on the content to fill airtime and fundraise around:


Hard to avoid the fact that they're trying to use funding to control speech, which is what the first amendment is supposed to prevent.
 
Last edited:


And now the members of congress who are proposing to "Defund NPR" are after Katherine Maher's donation records for some reason. But still that does not make NPR "Left Wing Propaganda". All this does here is that it make certain local NPR and PBS affiliates get political interference when it comes to funding.

National Public Radio's CEO Katherine Maher, who is facing criticism for progressive tweets and a video in which she says that seeking the truth may get in the way of working together, also turns out to have a history as a campaign donor according to Federal Election Commission records reviewed by The Center Square.
While she has been an infrequent and minor donor, all of her donations have gone to Democrats, perhaps providing more fodder for her critics.
All of her donations were recorded before she took the helm of NPR.
Her only large donation was $1500 to Virginia Congressman Tom Perriello in 2017.
 
For anyone tempted to click that link, this is information about the site the video’s on:
Wow, nice call out. Cool, so I am the extremist for not wanting to support Google by watching the exact same video on Youtube. Google being the company who just suppressed the free speech of people protesting Israel's war on the Palastinian people. You guys just want to blame everything on right wing extremists, when in reality, there is a whole group in the middle who have independent thoughts and just want the truth. This is exactly why NPR is having trouble. These news organizations are just echoboxes that indoctrinate their consumers to think that anyone else with a different idea or opinion is in a homogenious group on the other side. Stop that!
All that Uri Berliner said was that NPR was suffering from a lack of diversity of viewpoints in it's political coverage. HOW IN THE HELL IS THAT CONTRIVERSIAL?!?!?! The man loves NPR and worked there for decades. And now he is shunned because he put forth a small criticism. News media should always be questioning and refining itself to seek THE truth, not THEIR truth.
 
All that Uri Berliner said was that NPR was suffering from a lack of diversity of viewpoints in it's political coverage. HOW IN THE HELL IS THAT CONTRIVERSIAL?!?!?! The man loves NPR and worked there for decades. And now he is shunned because he put forth a small criticism. News media should always be questioning and refining itself to seek THE truth, not THEIR truth.
Some of the controversy stems from how he did it. Anyone who's worked in a corporate environment knows that taking on a whistleblower role has its own perils. If you're going to do that, you'd better have thought through what you're doing and to have an objective in mind. You had also better be pretty sure of your facts. Berliner does not appear to have done any of that.

Much of the reaction coming out of NPR relates to a breach of trust among colleagues. To put it more bluntly, Berliner's co-workers appear to have felt betrayed by him. It becomes rather difficult to maintain working relationships when that's the case. Relationships matter.
 
Some of the controversy stems from how he did it. Anyone who's worked in a corporate environment knows that taking on a whistleblower role has its own perils. If you're going to do that, you'd better have thought through what you're doing and to have an objective in mind. You had also better be pretty sure of your facts. Berliner does not appear to have done any of that.

Much of the reaction coming out of NPR relates to a breach of trust among colleagues. To put it more bluntly, Berliner's co-workers appear to have felt betrayed by him. It becomes rather difficult to maintain working relationships when that's the case. Relationships matter.
I can understand that. And when I read his article, he seemed genuine and hopeful that NPR could correct course and continue. It did not read like an attack at all, but a call out to say, "Hey, this is my passion, and we can do better." I really wish in an alternate reality they could recieve that with open minds and make good radio, but at this point, it isn't in the cards. Thanks Mark.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom