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

Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

current.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#31

Post by lvs »

mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

I think your description is an accurate portrayal of one particular host on NPR who runs a discussion/talk show (Ashbrook), but it's unfair to cast that brush across all their shows; certainly NPR News does not do what you describe.

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#32

Post by mc32 »

lvs wrote: post #31
mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

I think your description is an accurate portrayal of one particular host on NPR who runs a discussion/talk show (Ashbrook), but it's unfair to cast that brush across all their shows; certainly NPR News does not do what you describe.

Off the top of my head, a news item about water conservation. One guy, perh some official, stated, paraphrasing here, that it was ridiculous given the drought, that we had not started curtailing the offering of free water at restaurants earlier, making the audience believe that this step was a cornerstone of conserving water. It's not credible, but the host agreed and didn't question the reasoning.

Ok sure, I grant you it's an "awareness" device, but a mechanism for conserving water it's not.

Also, they trot out the trope about almonds using vast amounts of water... Yes, they do, but do does everything else. Did they get into the vast amounts of water or takes to produce a liter of wine? No, of course not.

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#33

Post by drjesusphd »

mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

> the blatant left and blatant right, who at least aren't pretending to be objective

You mean like when they adopt taglines like "Fair and Balanced"?

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#34

Post by 3d8995163 »

jasonmp85 wrote: post #7
pervycreeper wrote: post #4

Hard to take the message seriously when his show, This American Life, is so incredibly bland. In my appraisal, it does nothing but pander to its "middlebrow" audience, never daring to tell them anything they don't already know. Maybe he's just not aware of it.

Like how this week they interviewed a black man who when asked if his young daughter's nascent understanding of the history of racial relations in this country might alienate some of their white acquaintances and he replied "I don't really care about the emotions of the white man in this country; perhaps they should spend some time thinking about things they enjoy that no one else in this nation can." That's not dari…

> "I don't really care about the emotions of the white man in this country; perhaps they should spend some time thinking about things they enjoy that no one else in this nation can."

Thats exactly the sort of thing that I imagine NPR listeners would like to hear, so they can nod their heads and feel progressive

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#35

Post by drjesusphd »

thorfish wrote: post #27
mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

I heard a really outrageous example of that the other day. They were doing a piece on migrants from Africa traveling to Europe. The NPR reporter brought on a British professor of international studies for an interview. The professor says, "There is a perception that immigrants hurt wages. But lots of studies now show that is not true." This statement went completely undisputed, it was reported as fact. No person of a…

> The professor says, "There is a perception that immigrants hurt wages. But lots of studies now show that is not true." This statement went completely undisputed, it was reported as fact.

This seems almost universal. Do you know of a media outlet that doesn't do this?

I would genuinely like to know because this infuriates me. When organization/government/company X is caught up in controversy, if I wanted to hear what they have the say, I would read their press release. What I want to know when I consume news is: who is lying to me?

All too often there are two people who are claiming contradictory facts. Any news outlet that reliably and consistently tells me which one is the liar gets my eyes and ears.

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#36

Post by dragonwriter »

mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

> For example, the strife in some inner cities was cast as police vs population

That is, in fact, who the strife was between.

> when in reality government is at greatest fault.

The police are the government. And, in the case of Baltimore, where the triggering event was murder by police as part of an extended pattern of physical abuse by police, its pretty clear that they were the proximately responsible part of government.

To the extent that there are a myriad of other factors, including other government policies, which could be argued on to have contributed less proximately, they were widely discussed by the media

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#37

Post by zorpner »

thorfish wrote: post #27
mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

I heard a really outrageous example of that the other day. They were doing a piece on migrants from Africa traveling to Europe. The NPR reporter brought on a British professor of international studies for an interview. The professor says, "There is a perception that immigrants hurt wages. But lots of studies now show that is not true." This statement went completely undisputed, it was reported as fact. No person of a…

Do you have any evidence that the result you found was the result this professor was citing?

It's not generally possible to gain an understanding of a field by "[looking] at some of those studies". This is why graduate students spend hours every week doing literature review. It's why news stations get an expert in the field to comment on a topic. Such experts can never be completely free of bias, but the idea that every expert should be coupled with someone with an opposing viewpoint (and if there's consensus in the field on the topic, who?) is ludicrous at best.

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#38

Post by thorfish »

zorpner wrote: post #37
thorfish wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard a really outrageous example of that the other day. They were doing a piece on migrants from Africa traveling to Europe. The NPR reporter brought on a British professor of international studies for an interview. The professor says, "There is a perception that immigrants hurt wages. But lots of studies now show that is not true." This statement went completely undisputed, it was reported as fact. No person of a…

Do you have any evidence that the result you found was the result this professor was citing? It's not generally possible to gain an understanding of a field by "[looking] at some of those studies". This is why graduate students spend hours every week doing literature review. It's why news stations get an expert in the field to comment on a topic. Such experts can never be completely free of bias, but the idea that ev…

Such experts can never be completely free of bias, but the idea that every expert should be coupled with someone with an opposing viewpoint (and if there's consensus in the field on the topic, who?) is ludicrous at best.

I actually think reaching some goal of being "bias free" is neither possible nor desirable. I would have had a less of an issue with that NPR segment if they had only presented one side - but it was the side that I thought had the most accurate view.

My problem with citing "studies" was not just that I had read that one lousy study. My problem is that virtually all these studies are inconclusive at best, since you cannot do controlled experiments, you cannot generalize a study of one immigrant group in one situation to other groups, etc. So citing "studies say" as some kind of world of God is ridiculous.

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#39

Post by dmschulman »

thorfish wrote: post #27
mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

I heard a really outrageous example of that the other day. They were doing a piece on migrants from Africa traveling to Europe. The NPR reporter brought on a British professor of international studies for an interview. The professor says, "There is a perception that immigrants hurt wages. But lots of studies now show that is not true." This statement went completely undisputed, it was reported as fact. No person of a…

On the other hand, what other broadcast news outlets are dedicating any time (much less 7 or 8 minutes as many interviews on NPR can run) to a discussion about the implications of African migrants traveling to Europe?

In my experience, many of the discussions on NPR involve more than one voice in the conversation and the host allows those guests to say their piece, intervening when necessary (in the case of dodging a question, for example) but not getting in the way of what the individual has to say. Still picking apart the details of an argument but not harping on a single quote or factoid. It's part expediency but also part of what makes NPR enjoyable to listen, more time given to make a case, less time spent arguing or trying to suss out some marginal point of a larger conversation.

Re: Ira Glass: Public radio can capitalize on its popularity without selling out

#40

Post by mc32 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #36
mc32 wrote: post #8

Public radio is a mixed bag. It's better than most but I dislike the pretense of being better, because in my view they are only marginally better when presenting news. One of the things I'm most disenchanted with is how on uncontroversial things they'll offer an opinion. "lack of oversight is bad". But on controversial issues they tend to appear neutral (offering no opinion) while at the same time couching the questi…

> For example, the strife in some inner cities was cast as police vs population That is, in fact, who the strife was between. > when in reality government is at greatest fault. The police are the government. And, in the case of Baltimore, where the triggering event was murder by police as part of an extended pattern of physical abuse by police, its pretty clear that they were the proximately responsible part of gover…

I think that's obtuse. By that measure the police are part of the community and the community is part of government. Obviously you understand that the government uses the (blunt force of and in the shape of the) police to keep the peace because the community asks for help combating rampant crime.

The government takes an easy shortcut and instead of trying to solve the source of social, economic and cultural problems sends in the police as the only expression of government and thus the police are in the unenviable position take the full brunt of the backlash against an inattentive and perhaps negligent government.

That's a lazy cheap and untenable form of governance. It's like understaffing an IT department and the when the breaches happen blaming the IT security staff, a la Sony.

It's not bad policing so much as bad governance. the police are the main symbol of this "government" in the community, so they take the fall.

Post reply on HN