Interesting Article in the NYT regarding financial struggles at NPR

Yes because Public Radio used to be such a cash cow and it all fell apart because of those damn KIDS!

Fixed link. And I don't think anyone expects NPR to be a cash cow, but it does need to keep the lights on. Sponsorships were down 25% in 2023 from the year before, according to the article.

R1 understands nothing.

DEI has nothing to do with it, racist.

You sound like Charlie Kirk.

If you want to see failure, look at how Tesla and Twitter have gone done the shitter since Elon Musk became a racist Republican

It's doubtful whether having token wingnuts like the WaPo and NYT op-ed pages will make much difference in their audience. The big problems are declining digital ad dollars which have led to online news orgs' closures and the decline in the broadcast audience. They haven't had any new program that engages audiences' imagination since Serial and that's the sort of thing they need. Fresh Air, All Things Considered, etc. have been around forever.

Non-streaming radio is having financial problem across the board.

NPR’s efforts to diversify itself and its audience didn’t always live up to the expectations of the people who worked there. During a round of layoffs last year, NPR cut “Louder Than a Riot,” a hip-hop podcast that examined Black and queer issues. After that decision, the show’s senior producer, Soraya Shockley, who had previously worked at The Times, grilled Mr. Lansing during an employee question-and-answer session about why the show had no dedicated budget, pointing out the lack of resources supporting content that furthered diversity, equity and inclusion, or D.E.I.

“How are we supposed to support diverse programming — actually commit to D.E.I., and make it not a folly — when this company seems scared to talk about money when it is not a $30 million deficit?” Shockley asked. In a statement, NPR said that the second season of “Louder Than a Riot” had comparable marketing support to other podcasts at the network; Shockley said they were never shown a marketing budget.

Later on the call, after Mr. Lansing urged employees to be more mindful of “civility” in their questions, an NPR employee wrote in an instant-messaging chat accompanying the conversation that the word ‘civility’ is often used as a cudgel against people of color, calling the language choice “racist.” After the meeting, Shockley filed a human resources complaint against Mr. Lansing, saying his remarks about civility amounted to “dog-whistle racism,” according to a person with knowledge of the exchange. The complaint against Mr. Lansing was referred to an outside law firm, which did not recommend any punitive action.

Was never a regular listener.

I get the impression that they drank the whole pitcher of kool-aid.

I haven't read the NY Times article - yet. I have followed along with the orginal critique of NPR, the tone-deaf response from NPR management, the suspension and then resignation of the man who wrote the original critique and a blog post which yammered on about what a shitshow NPR has become. And I have worked in public radio.

NPR's problems stem from the following... people are tuning out the programs because NPR gave up on having objective, dispassionate program hosts YEARS ago. What they broadcast has become unlistenable over time.

While it was one thing to have weepy Scott Simon hosting Weekend Edition Saturday; but Robert Siegel, Linda Wertheimer, and Bob Edwards could at least feign neutrality as program hosts. At one time, stories about small subjects concerning itty-bitty little segments of the population did not require repeated, bang-the-listener-over-the-head coverage (such as the trans). They did not produce repeated segments which fall under the title, "White People Bad, Here's Today's Example".

That has come to an end over many years and journalistic quality has declined as well. In very story presented the listener automatically knows how the host feels about the topic. Steve Inskeep is dismissive/sarcastic of the subject. Michel Martin races through her text (she's disinterested). Layla Fadel has a habit of mewling throughout intereviews, conveying approval or disapproval. Ari Shapiro seems on the verge of tears during some of his interviews/conversations (so was Rob Stein - their health reporter - during COVID. He sounded like he was falling apart). NOT ONE host questions the hyperbole of their guests. Oh and remember how ATCwould host a Republican and Democrat within the same segment? That will NEVER happen at the NPR of 2024.

And by the way, program hosts like A Martinez are not journalists... no reporting background. They're radio personalities - folks who hosted local programs and made it to the big show.

1A, Hear & Now, On Pont, The NYer Radio Hour, etc... mimic NPR. Those programs are unlistenable for extended periods of time.

And, trying to seem hip, the 5:20 (repeated at 7:20) segment is about hip hop artists over and over.

ALL OF THOSE CHANGES stem from audience research years ago whose conclusion was that NPR and its hosts spoke above the younger segment of its audience. NPR was losing audience because it sounded too intellignet, which was deciphered as "elitist". Conclusion, NPR needed to lighten up, get conversational, find younger hosts.

The result is that NPR has NEVER changed the composition of its audience... it's still very white and college eduacated. BUT IT IS SMALLER because it has turned its back on those who made it a valuable journalistic powerhouse.

Unfortunate - there's really no alternative on the radio to NPR.

Something something self congratulatory NPR listeners

I listen to public radio when I go out for bi-weekly errands. I have a bet with myself that when I turn on the radio, the show will either be about black issues, women's issues, or trans issues, and it's always the case, sometime all three at once.

Laverne Cox variety hour?

NPR like the JC Penney delivered a product that was no longer needed. The amount of resources allocated to change it were wasted because NPR simply cannot add new and younger viewers, who are used to acquiring their information on demand. This is the lesson learned by JC Penney, who hired the Apple Store guru to redesign their stores, who destroyed their relationship with longtime customers chasing an imaginary youth market who wouldn’t shop there anyway.

NPR needed to find new ways to deliver its message, not change its message.

The most telling line in the article is this:

[quote]One 2020 survey, from the Pew Research Center, found that of the people who named NPR as their main source for political and election news, 75 percent were white, more than any other outlet except Fox News.

NPR has a white listenership. Alienate them and your numbers drop. It's not that hard to figure out.

The same thing has happened with regional and nonprofit theaters theatre across the US. Attendance is way down. Older white people are the bulk of the ticket buyers. There is only so much they'll put up with.

I often watch Democracy Now on the Internet and the show is called "War and Peace" or some such - well, I kept thinking that it was Palestine 99% of the time. I paid attention yesterday and there was not one word about Ukraine. But, even though Amy Goodman said "the War and Peace" edition, she did stories on the environment, and some other non-war stuff, but still... not a word about Ukraine.

Do lefties love Russia?

The fact of the matter is the demographics they are trying to attract do not want to pay for anything. Especially a podcast or special online access. Additionally those demographics are not the key segment that advertisers want to go after in terms of revenue. Marketing is about selling a product. You cannot sell the product to people that do not want to pay for it or can't afford to pay for it. The only hope for NPR is if Trump wins the election ironically. This may galvanize some of these individuals to put in the work instead of the constant pontificating of how unfair everything is. DEI is useless, unless your staff includes industry experts and veterans who know the business. Affirmative Action did not work DEI will not either.

Imagine being almost as white as Fox News. “Coming up next: The Guilt Hour with Sunshine Smith”

“A” Martinez has the dumbest nickname of all time. People said “hey Martinez” to him a lot, so he called himself that? OK

Understanding the heading might be off putting, many responders are not taking into account what a lot of NPR liberal loyalists wrote on a related thread.

The character of NPR programming markedly changed. It is no longer recognizable as mostly neutral, educational and unique, but now a preachy ideological instrument whose slant, their mandated “north star,” is glaring, clunky and preachy.

The outspoken, longtime NPR journalist Uri Berliner revealed that NPR’s reporting morphed from having an “open-minded, curious culture” with a “liberal bent” to one that is “knee-jerk, activist, scolding,” that was “rigidly progressive.”

For anyone wanting straight forward news coverage or thoughtful, educational escapism, NPR is now a completely different brand. The result was they lost listeners and didn’t attract new or different ones.

This is insanity:

[quote]Later on the call, after Mr. Lansing urged employees to be more mindful of “civility” in their questions, an NPR employee wrote in an instant-messaging chat accompanying the conversation that the word ‘civility’ is often used as a cudgel against people of color, calling the language choice “racist.” After the meeting, Shockley filed a human resources complaint against Mr. Lansing, saying his remarks about civility amounted to “dog-whistle racism,” according to a person with knowledge of the exchange. The complaint against Mr. Lansing was referred to an outside law firm, which did not recommend any punitive action.

I can barely listen to NPR any more -- everyone sounds like they're standing on a soapbox at Columbia denouncing the powers that be.

One interesting stat from the article -- they say that Blacks make up only 11% of the listeners. Well, Blacks make up only about 12% of the country's population, so maybe this is exactly where it should be: Maybe NPR could represent the country .

It’s not just the content that is bad, but also the voices. The women sound like that SNL parody and the “men” sound like Pajama Boy. Why not get voices that sound like real people and masculine men? They could hire people from talk radio to be the news readers. That would help.

The only good program on NPR is " Wait, Wait, don't Tell Me"

Would be a lot better without the forced hilarity

So far, DL's recommendations include - ban all black people from the airwaves or turn it into Fox News Radio.

These complaints are literally the same ones that Republicans have been making about literally every media organization not controlled by them since the 1960s.

But then again, the people on this thread have been making the same complaints since the 1960s.

Nobody said that, R25, but nice try. Also - it's about as white as Fox News NOW, so whatever they're doing isn't working.

Bravo R19, R21, and R22. You type the truth.

But, but the "driveway moments" and those tote bags!

I liked that NPR had a liberal bent, and I also liked that they made some effort not to let that get too very heavyhanded.

At some point they moved for in depth and sound reporting with some broad liberal slant into handfeeding its audience, giving them cues and instructions about how they should react to a story - not trusting their listeners to understand let alone interpret the increasingly dumbed down stories.

I lost interest when most of NPR's news sounded like a scold --and a lesson!-- in the Rachel Maddow mold. Give me the lovely, long, labyrinthine sentences of Nina Totenberg, not every story wrapped in cotton wool and explained to death because I might be too sensitive or too stupid.

[quote] And its story selection has on occasion left it open to criticism that its focus on race and identity has affected its news judgment. There have been stories, for instance, on how to “decolonize your bookshelf” and “thin privilege.”

The NYT reader comments reveal loyal listeners are upset about the progressive agenda takeover.

Many said they stopped tuning in and others said, while they will keep listening, they will no longer donate. Others cancelled their memberships.

At least two women in a few dozen responses, implored the network to stop referring to every pregnant woman as a “pregnant person”.

Many conveyed that a wide range of topics have been replaced by narrow identity politics navel-gazing. Others feel in the last decade stories have been dumbed down. They are hoping NPR readership is reading their comments, but fear their smugness will not allow.

^NPR leadership, not readership.

This whole "diversity" fetish ruins everything.

The idea that a podcast about Black queer hip hop on NPR would generate a substantial audience is just so out of touch.

“Our focus on the North Star has led to increased diversity in our content: the voices on the air, the sources our journalists go to, the broader range of topics and issues discussed in our shows,” Ms. Lara said. “We want to reach people where they are.”

It seems like NPR resents its audience - which for them is too old, too white, and perhaps too moderate (nobody is even pretending conservatives listen to NPR anymore). And for Ms. Lara and other NPR honchos if the drive for diversity pushes away some of it's traditional audience than so be it - it will be worth it as a kind of moral victory. NPR is thus kind of like Fast Food which also resents customer base - in its case mostly working class - and really wishes it was the wealthy and the hip who were eating at Taco Bell and McDonalds.

Progressives are learning some really hard lessons these days. They should have spent more time learning business and less time in feminist studies.

I'm not sure when I completely gave up on NPR. 2016? I think it was around the time I learned Sanders had been completely fucked over by the DNC.

In the Bush years it was a lifeline, and I was one of those who had it on constantly in the background. I can't remember the last time I listened to it

It’s because of vocal fry.

The hosts all lack gravitas with many sounding, even the men, like they were women's studies majors at Oberlin College.

Back on the 90s I listened to it all the time. It was the only halfway interesting content you could access 24 hours a day anywhere.

There are so many other things to choose now. The vocal qualities are the reporters and hosts are atrocious and most of the programming isn’t reporting. It mostly human interest or analysis. Those factors outweigh any political bias for me.