Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

current.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 143 posts

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#91

Post by StevePerkins »

war1025 wrote: post #40
domenicd wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who only vaguely remembers NPR from their childhood, my primary association of NPR is with their podcasts. And those things are full of ads. So I initially found this post very confusing. I guess in the past there might have been something called NPR which did not have ads?

They always say "We don't have ads, we have underwriters". I think the difference being the sponsor has copy that the announcer will read, but they can't do all the annoying audio effects that traditional advertisers use. Personally, I don't much mind it. Gotta pay the bills somehow. Maybe depends where you are, but NPR is big here in central Iowa (iowapublicradio.org). I think it's pretty big in Minnesota as well.

That distinction has been steadily eroding. Over on their television broadcasting counterpart, the PBS NewsHour plays straight-up commercials from financial planning firms prior to each episode now.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#92

Post by paulcole »

donkeyd wrote: post #77
pembrook wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Oh, but you will gladly pay for quality, ad-free content, you say? Unfortunately, based on the numbers I've seen at media companies I've freelanced for, this only works out…

> It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. I don't think this is true at all. Nobody thinks musicians shouldn't be paid, but until Spotify everyone was downloading music. > Oh, but you will gladly pay for quality, ad-free content, you say? I would definitely pay. I just don't want to pay for every single article I read…

> Nobody thinks musicians shouldn't be paid, but until Spotify everyone was downloading music.

This is even worse IMO. People think musicians deserve to be paid but still manage to rationalize taking from them without paying instead.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#93

Post by rwmurrayVT »

yostrovs wrote: post #83
nabla9 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be argued that large majority of Americans have liberal values. Many of them have non-liberal identity that makes them think they are non-liberal. For example: 61 percent of Americans, 42 percent of Republicans, approve of labor unions 66 percent of Americans think money and wealth should be distributed more evenly. 80 percent of Americans think some corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes. 78 percent…

Amazingly, when voting time comes, the country tends to appear center right. Could there polls be wrong?

Uhh, I'd check the popular vote counts over the last 25+ years.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#94

Post by rwmurrayVT »

colordrops wrote: post #65
viburnum wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the main problem with NPR news is they always play dumb. If somebody tells them "2+2=5," they just repeat it, if even it's been proven a lie, even if they've been saying the same lie for 30 years. It's not objectivity, it's just enabling liars.

Yes. Recently they've been corrolating the deaths from bootleg THC cartridges with the banning of flavored nicotine vapes, which is nonsensical but they've parroted it multiple days in a row. There's clearly a propaganda campaign against vaping by big tobacco, with anti-vaping ads everywhere, Trump speaking about it, etc. they are playing along.

Big tobacco owns a hefty minority share of the major nicotine vape companies.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#95

Post by buboard »

SomeOldThrow wrote: post #72
nabla9 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be argued that large majority of Americans have liberal values. Many of them have non-liberal identity that makes them think they are non-liberal. For example: 61 percent of Americans, 42 percent of Republicans, approve of labor unions 66 percent of Americans think money and wealth should be distributed more evenly. 80 percent of Americans think some corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes. 78 percent…

Why do Americans use liberal to mean left?

They use it liberally

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#96

Post by shard972 »

SomeOldThrow wrote: post #72
nabla9 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be argued that large majority of Americans have liberal values. Many of them have non-liberal identity that makes them think they are non-liberal. For example: 61 percent of Americans, 42 percent of Republicans, approve of labor unions 66 percent of Americans think money and wealth should be distributed more evenly. 80 percent of Americans think some corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes. 78 percent…

Why do Americans use liberal to mean left?

[dead]

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#97

Post by scumbert »

pembrook wrote: post #28
e1ven wrote: post #4

I love NPR. I'm glad they're doing well, and hope they will continue to make quality programs. But one of the major advantages which has set them apart for me is that they aren't as advertising dependent as so many of their alternatives. Avoiding ads makes it easier for them to be independent, and able to report without fear of corporations withdrawing their support. It's also just much more pleasant to listen to. I…

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Oh, but you will gladly pay for quality, ad-free content, you say? Unfortunately, based on the numbers I've seen at media companies I've freelanced for, this only works out…

> It turns out, a vast majority of people who complain about ads will not put their money where their mouth is.

No matter how many times this pans out, people try and convince themselves all netizens are altruistic, with the means to bankroll content creators. That just doesn't measure up to reality.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#98

Post by Chathamization »

pembrook wrote: post #28
e1ven wrote: post #4

I love NPR. I'm glad they're doing well, and hope they will continue to make quality programs. But one of the major advantages which has set them apart for me is that they aren't as advertising dependent as so many of their alternatives. Avoiding ads makes it easier for them to be independent, and able to report without fear of corporations withdrawing their support. It's also just much more pleasant to listen to. I…

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Oh, but you will gladly pay for quality, ad-free content, you say? Unfortunately, based on the numbers I've seen at media companies I've freelanced for, this only works out…

> It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid.

Most of the media we consume is probably detrimental to us, even before advertising is factored in. It's not a bad thing when people have to make a choice in whether or not something is worth the money, and end up deciding it's not. It seems like people are better able to understand monetary costs than time or brain space costs.

As an aside, some of the highest quality content I've found is free and without advertisements (for example, the Ottoman History Podcast or the Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean Podcast).

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#99

Post by scarface74 »

domenicd wrote: post #11
e1ven wrote: post #4

I love NPR. I'm glad they're doing well, and hope they will continue to make quality programs. But one of the major advantages which has set them apart for me is that they aren't as advertising dependent as so many of their alternatives. Avoiding ads makes it easier for them to be independent, and able to report without fear of corporations withdrawing their support. It's also just much more pleasant to listen to. I…

As someone who only vaguely remembers NPR from their childhood, my primary association of NPR is with their podcasts. And those things are full of ads. So I initially found this post very confusing. I guess in the past there might have been something called NPR which did not have ads?

NPR was initially funded by the government. I would much rather any media be ad supported than government supported. Given a choice between dealing with business motives and government motives, I trust government a lot less.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#100

Post by StevePerkins »

makotech222 wrote: post #29
e1ven wrote: post #4

I love NPR. I'm glad they're doing well, and hope they will continue to make quality programs. But one of the major advantages which has set them apart for me is that they aren't as advertising dependent as so many of their alternatives. Avoiding ads makes it easier for them to be independent, and able to report without fear of corporations withdrawing their support. It's also just much more pleasant to listen to. I…

NPR is corporate propaganda for people who think their above the type of propaganda you see on FOX news. I use to listen religiously for about 3 years, until the 2016 election. The way they talked about the democratic primary, it was very very obvious they were biased towards favoring Hillary. They were telling outright lies about Bernie and his policies. Haven't listened to them since, but I've seen stories about ho…

I think the myth of any "balanced" news source is exactly that, a myth. All human organizations have an internal culture, and that produces bias.

My view on public broadcasting is that its culture is CLEARLY left-leaning. That is, I don't think you could get hired and build a career in that world if you were known to be politically conservative or libertarian. Subconcious bias is worn on their sleeves, and they do tend to ensure that it always gets the last word (e.g. see virtually any interview segment involving gun control or illegal immigration).

However, I also think they TRY to be objective in their content. Even if there may be bias in story selection or story structure, I think they try to provide the building blocks so that you can think for yourself. One POV might consistently get the last word, but the other perspective(s) are represented in a segment.

Anyway, this topic and thread were on my mind, because I happen to be in the middle of reading the book "Listener Supported", a book on NPR history from longtime insider Jack Mitchell. The last section in the book deals with criticisms of bias that NPR has received over the years.

Mitchell is pretty candid in acknowledging public broadcasting's progressive roots and culture. However, I was surprised that most of the discussion involved attacks on NPR from the LEFT! A lot of people feel the same way as parent comment. Not that NPR is culturally right-wing, in the same manner as Fox News. But rather that its bias is not sufficiently left-wing. Or that it's a "trojan horse", appearing leftist yet subject to manipulation and too much a servant of the status-quo.

This perspective is interesting to me, if a bit frightening. Particularly reading the claim "they're mostly funded by the Koch's", and not seeing a SINGLE person on Hacker News counter that 8 hours later. In reality, David Koch has only made donations to the PBS show "Nova", has never donated a dime to NPR, and this is such a prevalent fake news trope that Snopes has had to cover it:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/koch-brothers-buy-npr/

You think about this sort of thing being right-wing material, spread by old people on Facebook. It's sobering to see its inverse here.

Post reply on HN