Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth • Hacker News Board

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

#141

Post by scarface74 » Wed, Sep 25, 2019, 3:23 AM UTC

mateus1 wrote: post #140

scarface74 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I listen to mostly the economics podcasts “Planet Money” and “The Indicator”. I consider myself a bleeding heart libertarianism capitalist. (ie Don’t increase minimum wage but pay more in taxes to help people help themselves.) I don’t see any real bias in their reporting. Also, a “This American Life” episode about illegal immigrants working at a chicken plant (?) in Alabama single handedly made me see a few of the po…

Listen to the one where The Indicator ponders if the Chilean dictatorship was worth it because they now have some good capitalism going. It's awful.

Freakanomics does the same thing - argue a contrarian point. This includes the famous study about whether increase abortions reduce crime.

And before anyone replies about how horrible this study was, the author explicitly said that public policy should not be based on his study and advocated more spending on education and other safety net ideas.

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

#142

Post by Maakuth » Wed, Sep 25, 2019, 9:24 AM UTC

vorpalhex wrote: post #106

pembrook wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point on Tim's post was that a majority of his most passionate followers (people who also follow him on twitter and would take the time to answer a survey) would not pay for his content. I have no doubt the 72% contains some overlap with "people who complain about ads." On the lying about willingness to pay reference, I was referring to actual data I've seen, which I posted below. This was from a media company I w…

We have to be careful when we look at isolated data points. One, uh, "trick", I've seen newspapers in particular pull which will immediately cause me to not support them are confusing subscription terms. "Special! $1 a month for 12 months". Well, that's $1 per month, that's perfectly affordable... except it's going to auto-renew at a mystery rate that you won't tell me. My other recently seen favorites include, "Only…

Also there's no neat way to unsubscribe, you need to convince somebody via chat that you really don't want the subscription anymore. This seems quite toxic pattern and will keep me from subscribing to services doing this, such as NYT or WaPo, even at their discount rates.

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

#143

Post by alrs » Wed, Sep 25, 2019, 10:08 PM UTC

gbrown wrote: post #115

alrs wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you're disagreeing that it's state media, so at worst I'm at 50%. BBC, RT, France24, Deutsche Welle, PressTV, and Telesur all exist to promote a state interest. How are NPR and APM different? https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/10/25/npr-the-cia-and-corp...

Comparing the BBC to RT demonstrates the complete emptiness of your claims. Certainly, publicly funded media sources can be expected to have inbuilt biases, but to pretend that institutions with editorial independence should be compared to actual propaganda outlets which have actively participated in centrally orchestrated and well documented disinformation campaigns is ridiculous.

BBC World Service and RT are absolutely comparable. Both are very obvious in pushing the agenda of their state sponsors.

If you want subtlety, watch France24 English. If you want the propaganda arm of a dying empire, BBCWS is for you.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/bbc-fake-news-1811...

http://oro.open.ac.uk/36441/