[grc] NPR Speak dissed in NY Times

[Tom Worster]

On Oct 27th Larry Miller mentioned "NPR Voice" while introducing Anya
Grundman in the The Future of Radio panel at the Future of Music Policy
Summit in DC. I think he referred to Teddy Wayne's article.

It was a really swell session. The enthusiasm of the audience,
interrupting with many bursts of applause and support, was unlike any
other panel. I sure got the sense of enthusiasm for broadcasting that
connects with the audience as humans (as opposed to algorithms like
pandora and spotify) with programming relevant to their lives.

Frieda, to your question about what has changed in the last 30 years, I
think the way to understand NPR is to follow the money (now heavily
corporate[1]) and remember Pournelle's Iron Law[2]. I agree with you about
what Wayne gets wrong in that catty column in NYT's, and let's be clear,
Fashion & Style section. I like the irony of this exercise in NYT smarm
calling out NPR and others on smarm. But I can't take Wayne seriously if
his idea of "radical" is the difference between Ira Glass and Walter
Cronkite.

I think successful community broadcasters will be those concerned with
matters of greater significance than "NPR Voice".

[1] http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances
[2] http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail408.html#Iron

Tom


On 11/2/15, 8:40 PM, "Frieda Werden" <grc-bounces at maillist.peak.org on
behalf of wings at wings.org> wrote:

>Kate Jessica Raphael called attention to this article, in KPFA's Women's
>Magazine, and went on to share it on Facebook:
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25/fashion/npr-voice-has-taken-over-the-air
>waves.html
>
>When I moved to Canada in 2002, I found a big contrast between the
>relatively conversational and heartfelt way people spoke on CBC and what I
>heard as a very abrupt, choppy, and not very inflected way of speaking on
>NPR.  I much preferred the CBC.
>
>Now, after 10 years of Conservative pressure on CBC radio - serious budget
>cuts, consequent layoffs and reductions in new programming - CBC radio's
>role as daylong friend of the listener has been destroyed. There are
>endless repetitions, and none of the gentle winding-down to more relaxed
>material at the end of the day that used to lead you to bedtime.
>Everything is all mixed up, and people on the air have been sounding
>pretty
>stressed.  Possibly this will be reversed or at least improved under the
>new government.
>
>Meanwhile, I've spent a fair amount of time in the US recently and started
>to listen to NPR again, including online - mostly WAMU and WUNC.
>
>What the author of the NYT article refers to as NPR-speak is, he says, the
>trend to imitate Ira Glass.  I  have never even heard a whole episode of
>This American Life, just a few snippets; but the difference in NPR today
>doesn't sound like this author's description to me.  What I noticed was
>that  NPR news style, especially, seems more natural-sounding, a bit more
>expressive and less grumpy.
>
>The article says the shift is due to "more amateurs in broadcasting," but
>I
>would hazard that it's due to more professionals in broadcasting, but from
>more regions of the country.  I remember when I was at NPR in the early
>'80s, a job came open for a Midwest regional editor and someone told me
>that I wouldn't want that job because it consisted of rejecting and
>discouraging contributors from outside the major cities of the east and
>west.  Now I'm hearing deeply informative and well produced news features
>from various parts of the country - not amateur at all, in my opinion.
>
>The change may well be attributable to a few decades of a different
>funding
>model for NPR.  Until about a year after I worked there, NPR got its money
>directly from CPB.  In 1984, when I started covering public broadcasting
>for Current, CPB was putting a lot of pressure on NPR, and so NPR changed
>its funding model - having the CPB money go to member stations, in the
>form
>of grants for national programming - national programming meaning either
>programming they acquired from NPR or programming they produced themselves
>for distribution.
>
>This broadened the prospects for more producers in various parts of the
>country to be paid for production.  30 years on, that seems to have made a
>difference.
>
>I'm wondering if there is any argument to be made for community stations
>that are losing their CPB grants, if they contribute to national programs.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Frieda Werden, Series Producer
>WINGS: Women's International News Gathering Service www.wings.org
>_______________________________________________
>grc mailing list
>grc at maillist.peak.org
>http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc