NPR is booming
I'm sure it has to do with drive time and people in cars, but this is still pretty impressive.
Free travel mugs and tote bags for all!!!!
(NPR's) "Morning Edition's" average daily audience, 7.6 million, is now about 60 percent larger than the audience for "Good Morning America" on ABC and about one-third larger than the audience for the "Today" show on NBC.
Free travel mugs and tote bags for all!!!!
posted by mikevotes at
6:36 AM
6 Comments:
Other than New Hour, where else can you go for intelligent, in-depth, and REAL journalism? Yes, drive time has a lot to do with it, but I also think people are hungry for truly informative reporting.
Sure, Fox News provides the co-dependent, validating security blanket for those more comfortable with delusions, truthiness and make believe... But I'm happy to see there's at least ONE outlet for good old fashioned news and information.
By
-epm, at 9:15 AM
It digs more deeply into stories than Fox, certainly, but I'm often shocked to hear how superficial its reporting is after reading deeper background in magazines like The Nation, New Yorker and Harper's.
And boy, do I ever appreciate the low-key presence of advertising...!
NPR is mainstream enough, and it's turning into its own brand. Maybe, like Rachel Maddow, it's time to give those faceless NPR voices their own tv slots?
By
Anonymous, at 9:48 AM
NPR -- Morning Edition and All Things Considered -- cover everything from light social fare to international affairs. And they do this with a range of depth (and length) to the pieces. Sometimes, yes, the pieces are more "headline" oriented, and sometimes they're in-depth analysis.
While I agree some of the pieces are more superficial than others, I don't think it's fair to compare radio to print. Obviously I'd expect more from the the Atlantic, or the New Yorker, than a radio program. Just in the same way I'd expect more from a book than a magazine. However, when compared to ANYTHING else on radio -- and nearly anything on video -- I think NPR news coverage is a lone oasis in a toxic wasteland.
By
-epm, at 10:22 AM
Frankly, I like them because they're soft. Nobody shouts at me. Nobody really does any shocking teasers for the next segment. It's a texturally very soft newscast, nothing jarring.
EPM, I wish they'd do more news and less reviving musician stories.
....
Anon, they'll never get TV. The Republicans have been trying to defund NPR forever.
By
mikevotes, at 10:58 AM
EPM, I wish they'd do more news and less reviving musician stories.
I get what you're saying. At times I've felt this way too, but frankly I like the mix.
NPR isn't simply BBC World News. Then again, neither is it as large and diverse as the BBC in it's entirety. As a radio network -- not an exclusive news network -- I think they do a good job mixing human interest with informative news. While I find NPR news educational, intelligent and informative I wouldn't, however, call it "hard hitting."
Can you tell I'm a member of my local public radio stations! Sorry for being such a rah-rah cheerleader for NPR...
By
-epm, at 12:24 PM
Actually, I prefer the BBC (newshour) when they compete here at 8AM.
By
mikevotes, at 3:49 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home