NPR essay on losing "America's trust"

[Alma]

In which the former boss who was passionate about the North Star diversity initiative had a HR complaint submitted against him for using the word "civility."

Inside the Crisis at NPR

Note: Reporting process on this story predates Berliner's essay by seven months.

 

[Azrael]

But you ding the mainstream press for treating him as an outlier.

I think he's not only an outlier in conventional political terms, but a singularity in the history of the republic.

I'd further assert the MSM still doesn't know how to cover him.

 

[Azrael]

In which the former boss who was passionate about the North Star diversity initiative had a HR complaint submitted against him for using the word "civility."

Inside the Crisis at NPR

Note: Reporting process on this story predates Berliner's essay by seven months.

'Civility' has a racist past, professor's new book argues | University of Detroit Mercy

"And I asked myself, does civility as a rallying cry work for social justice?" he said.

According to his research, the answer is no.

"From the beginning, you see how civility is a mask to hide racism," he said.

That beginning, Zamalin says, was 1837, when South Carolina Sen. John C. Calhoun, on the floor of the U.S. Senate, blamed the national divisions over the issue of slavery on the incivility of Northern abolitionists.

"It is weaponizing the concept of civility because when you focus on civility, or the perception of incivility, you effectively shut down what they are trying to say," Zamalin said.


www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/03/14/700897826/when-civility-is-used-as-a-cudgel-against-people-of-color

https://www.insidehighered.com/advi...vility-are-attempts-silence-messenger-opinion

 

[justgladtobehere]

Is something different with Morning Edition? On my local station it used to be two hours of programming from 5-7, which was repeated. Now the station is repeating the first hour at 6-7.

 

[DanOregon]

Isn't EVERY hour pretty much the same?

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

Wisconsin Public Radio has offered two programming streams on its 38 statewide stations for years: the "Ideas Network," which consists mostly of locally-produced news, call-in and informational shows, and the "NPR News and Music Network," where "Morning Edition" currently resides. That will change on Monday, when WPR will make "News and Music" pretty much all music except for brief hourly newscasts, and move Morning Edition over to the Ideas schedule.
It will also redeploy its stati0ns so that the former Ideas station that served much of the Milwaukee area will shift to Music, and Ideas/News listeners in the western metro area will have to get the programming from 970 on the AM band from Madison. That, or stream it online, an option the station is actively promoting.
The News/Ideas side is actually reducing locally-produced programming, which has long been a point of pride for the network. The one exception is the popular midday call-in advice program, which expands from 90 minutes to two hours.
I should add that UW-Milwaukee has its own public radio station that has programming along the same lines as the current "Ideas" lineup. I guess WPR figured they could cede its Ideas listeners in the area to WUWM.
Just some local developments on the public radio front.

 

[justgladtobehere]

Isn't EVERY hour pretty much the same?

I remember two completely different hours except for the news headlines. Wikipedia states NPR produces two hours,which are repeated. Lately, the 5 and 6 am hours sound the same.

 

[DanOregon]

The comment was more a reflection of their story choices. Sometimes when the "look ahead" to the coming hour and do the rundown, it really makes me laugh. And they really could improve Morning Edition and ATC if they just cut more things down to two minutes.

 

[Azrael]

But you ding the mainstream press for treating him as an outlier.

I think he's not only an outlier in conventional political terms, but a singularity in the history of the republic.

I'd further assert the MSM still doesn't know how to cover him.

x.com

 

[The Big Ragu]

x.com

It's wholly not surprising that it received less coverage. To me, at least.

First, Trump saying nasty things about people isn't unique in 2024. His outlandish behavior got more coverage in 2015 than it does today. At this point, it would be like reporting that the sun rose and the sun set.

Second, in the case of Hilary Clinton, it wasn't her denigating an opponent (which is why it's a bad comparison), it was her denigrating 60+ million voters at a time she was campaiging to win an election in which they would be voting. Of course that got way more attention than Donald Trump being Donald Trump.

 

[Alma]

x.com

Noted.

What would you like the media do? What is not doing that it should do? What is it doing that it should stop doing?

 

[Azrael]

It's wholly not surprising that it received less coverage. To me, at least.

First, Trump saying nasty things about people isn't unique in 2024. His outlandish behavior got more coverage in 2015 than it does today. At this point, it would be like reporting that the sun rose and the sun set.

Second, in the case of Hilary Clinton, it wasn't her denigating an opponent (which is why it's a bad comparison), it was her denigrating 60+ million voters at a time she was campaiging to win an election in which they would be voting. Of course that got way more attention than Donald Trump being Donald Trump.

Perfectly reasonable reply.

But Trump is denigrating his "opponents" - and his "opponents," plural , are whoever he says they are. Joe Biden? The DoJ? Every Democrat? - with remarkably precise language from the Goebbels glossary for mass violence.

As you point out, part of the problem is an exhausted, diminished press.