6 ms·

It is curious that NPR contrasts itself with commercial radio, despite the native advertising, regular name drops, and references to listeners as their consumer

It is curious that NPR contrasts itself with commercial radio, despite the native advertising, regular name drops, and references to listeners as their consumers (does active tuning decrease the availability of the signal for others?).

mikeweiss 10y ago
Umm, because commercial radio is 100% driven by advertisements where as NPR is less than 20% and is very selective about what sponsors it takes on?
- salmon30salmon 10y ago
  I have often wondered if NPR or public radio in general is motivated to pander to a demographic. By this I mean, consider the leaders of the organization have demographic data on who is most likely to pledge support during their quarterly pledge drives. Would it not make sense to ensure that the sort of stories that this demographic enjoys and (more worryingly) agrees with? This is not to say that its a bad thing, people are paying into a cooperative because they enjoy it, and they should continue to enjoy it. But public radio, though avoiding corporate advertising, still may have to pander, just on a lesser scale and to in a more democratic manner.
  - jsprogrammer 10y ago
    In the linked article a member of NPR discussed how the flavor of their sound is modified based on NPR's perception of their consumers' behaviors.
    - kasey_junk 10y ago
      That's not pandering though. Even content targeting isn't pandering. Pandering requires doing something distasteful.
      - vertex-four 10y ago
        Distasteful to who, precisely? Even the fact that NPR exists is distasteful to many. On top of that, any choice it makes as to what to broadcast prevents something else, possibly even equally worthwhile, from broadcasting.
        kasey_junk 10y ago
        Distasteful was probably not the right word. Pandering means that you are giving something to someone, that they want but it is something that is immoral or improper to give and the judge of that morality or properness is the society the pandering is happening in. In this case the USA. Choosing to compress your audio, or to play classical music instead of jazz is not immoral, at least not as judged by reasonable Americans, so it isn't pandering. If what you are really getting at, is the idea of the US federal government providing tax revenue to NPR is distasteful to many, that may be true, but it doesn't mean that NPR is pandering to anyone. Similarly, FOX News may or may not be pandering to someone, but their acceptance of federal tax breaks isn't evidence of it.
        jsprogrammer 10y ago
        The person I was responding to supplied their own definition of pander: >By this I mean, consider the leaders of the organization have demographic data on who is most likely to pledge support during their quarterly pledge drives. By this definition, NPR has admitted to pandering (would only need to establish that NPR consumer === pledge supporter) in this article alone.
        dredmorbius 10y ago
        Look up the definition. A perverse appeal or suck-up. Trump or Fox News would both be examples of highly successful (and distasteful) pandering.
        LBXrRkxx 10y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandering_(politics) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandering_(politics) "Perverse" to you and most HN commenters/readers, maybe. Trump and Fox News may "pander" to groups who you find distasteful, but they DON'T "pander" to many groups who you don't find distasteful. Trump was the FIRST PERSON to bring up many issues that had previously been censored by the media. He didn't change his views for the approval of others, he single-handedly SHAPED THE NARRATIVE. Many career politicians started talking differently after he came along. THAT'S pandering.
  - dredmorbius 10y ago
    College-educated boomers, in significant part. Though there are other audience segments. If you listen to the NPR humour programmes and segments, they'll often allude to the whiteness of their audience, and it pretty much always draws a laugh. (Edit: to clarify: CEB are the demographic, though it's not necessarily who NPR are pandering to. See followup.)
    - sukilot 10y ago
      That's kind of gross. Rich white people have enough without getting free radio targeted to their interests.
      - Ericson2314 10y ago
        I think the joke is more that they wish it wasn't so; going by the very name "National Public Radio", demographic skew is quite unfortunate.
      - dredmorbius 10y ago
        It's not particularly intentional, and NPR mention this in large part as a way of drawing attention to the fact and seeking broader diversity. NPR grew out of the public broadcasting movement that was emerging in the 1960s (though its roots go deeper), as well as the Baby Boom generation and the democratisation of higher education which had occurred after the 2nd World War. Stir in the Kennedys, Vietnam, the Apollo program, Civil Rights, and Nixon, and you had much of the initial foment from which the project emerged. NPR has had its largest followings on the coasts -- Boston, New York, Washington, DC, for obvious reasons, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle. These are all still flagship stations and regions (though there are many others). There are also, and I say this as someone who's driven across and through the US several times, many local stations and "translators", which serve rural and outlying areas, which are a fantastic relief from what's otherwise the monotony of rural radio: Christian broadcasting, bad country-western, and increasingly, Spanish-language radio. (And if you think NPR panders to its audience, you should try listening to these for a change.) The problem of getting a high-concept, intelligence-oriented, limited-budget network to appeal to what have been its underserved communities: African-American, Hispanic/Latino, Native American, and other segments, is difficult, but you're seeing this. There are programs which try to bridge that divide as well as reach out to younger audiences (how successfully is another question). Latino USA, Glynn Washington's Snap Judgement, and The Moth come to mind. Arguably, Car Talk was a crossover show for a long time, bringing in the shade-tree / garage mechanic contingent (though I feel it overstayed its welcome). I'm aware that that program had a huge draw from an otherwise atypical audience though, which probably explains its longevity even into reruns. And finally: NPR is freely available to all. In an age of podcasts and iPhones, all you need is a cheap radio to pick it up, no subscriptions, no fancy hardware, no malware, no surveillance (though yes, those are availble through the various NPR, PRI, PRX, MPR, etc., podcasts, websites, and other online experiences). It's far less, IMO, that NPR targets its core audience as that that's the group to which it appeals and is known. The information provided is certainly democratic and would benefit most. And as I've noted, the network (and its public broadcasting kin) are actively seeking to extend both reach and relevance. Rather than dismiss this with a smear as you have, what would you see done differently, what do you find missing, and why do (or don't) you listen to public bradcasting?
- jsprogrammer 10y ago
  Where are you pulling your numbers from? This[0] NPR page shows that only about 30% of NPR income is non-commercial. Also note the Nestle advertisement on the page (at least it was omnipresent when viewing on a mobile browser). [0] http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances
  - morsch 10y ago
    What number are you referring to? Looking at the page, I can't really see that 70% of income (of either NPR or its members) is commercial.
    - jsprogrammer 10y ago
      I am referring to the Revenue Sources image (second on the page): 39% Station dues and fees 23% Corporate sponsorships 9% Distribution and satellite interconnection ----------------- 71% of revenue from commercial activities >The most significant component of station dues and fees revenue is the charge for carrying our premier newsmagazines - [list of show names]. >Non-newsmagazine program fees (for example, [show]) make up the next largest component of station dues and fees revenue.
      - Aloha 10y ago
        Calling most of items commercial is a willful misconstruction of the structure and methods use by NPR. Corporate sponsorships is functionally no different than individual member contributions at the station level, station dues are how costs are apportioned and passed on to member stations. However, If NPR is using excess satellite airtime to carry non-NPR programming, that could be considered commercial activity, yes.
        jsprogrammer 10y ago
        From the view of NPR, revenue from "station dues and fees", primarily come from charging for access to NPR content, not member donations. It is strictly commercial activity: NPR is producing content and selling it. I think corporate sponsorships are different (if they were functionally the same as another category, they would have been aggregated there). For one, corporations get advertisement time.
peterkshultz 10y ago
NPR is a non-profit organization. Although they need to play the advertising game to keep the lights on, they certainly aren't there to try and make big profits on their listeners. Commercial radio is not like this.
- xufi 10y ago
  Good point, that is one thing I always admired about them. They atleast play bearable ads but I know that they have great content and news analysis stories coming on later.
- justinph 10y ago
  NPR (and their member stations) do not have advertising per se. Rather, they call it underwriting and there are very specific rules about what format the underwriting can take. Here are the guidelines: http://www.npr.org/sections/ombudsman/2015/03/11/392355447/nprs-underwriting-guidelines-part-one http://www.npr.org/sections/ombudsman/2015/03/11/392355447/n... I used to work at one of the largest NPR affiliate stations. Listener support is hugely important, most of the money we made came from listeners. IMHO, NPR is pretty successful in that they have built a model that supports quality journalism, at a decent scale, without a lot of annoyances for the user. Newspapers and other media orgs could stand to learn a lot.
- sukilot 10y ago
  Non-profit simply means that excess revenue is paid in salary instead of to shareholders.

mikeweiss 10y ago

Umm, because commercial radio is 100% driven by advertisements where as NPR is less than 20% and is very selective about what sponsors it takes on?

salmon30salmon 10y ago
I have often wondered if NPR or public radio in general is motivated to pander to a demographic. By this I mean, consider the leaders of the organization have demographic data on who is most likely to pledge support during their quarterly pledge drives. Would it not make sense to ensure that the sort of stories that this demographic enjoys and (more worryingly) agrees with? This is not to say that its a bad thing, people are paying into a cooperative because they enjoy it, and they should continue to enjoy it. But public radio, though avoiding corporate advertising, still may have to pander, just on a lesser scale and to in a more democratic manner.
- jsprogrammer 10y ago
  In the linked article a member of NPR discussed how the flavor of their sound is modified based on NPR's perception of their consumers' behaviors.
  - kasey_junk 10y ago
    That's not pandering though. Even content targeting isn't pandering. Pandering requires doing something distasteful.
    - vertex-four 10y ago
      Distasteful to who, precisely? Even the fact that NPR exists is distasteful to many. On top of that, any choice it makes as to what to broadcast prevents something else, possibly even equally worthwhile, from broadcasting.
      - kasey_junk 10y ago
        Distasteful was probably not the right word. Pandering means that you are giving something to someone, that they want but it is something that is immoral or improper to give and the judge of that morality or properness is the society the pandering is happening in. In this case the USA. Choosing to compress your audio, or to play classical music instead of jazz is not immoral, at least not as judged by reasonable Americans, so it isn't pandering. If what you are really getting at, is the idea of the US federal government providing tax revenue to NPR is distasteful to many, that may be true, but it doesn't mean that NPR is pandering to anyone. Similarly, FOX News may or may not be pandering to someone, but their acceptance of federal tax breaks isn't evidence of it.
        jsprogrammer 10y ago
        The person I was responding to supplied their own definition of pander: >By this I mean, consider the leaders of the organization have demographic data on who is most likely to pledge support during their quarterly pledge drives. By this definition, NPR has admitted to pandering (would only need to establish that NPR consumer === pledge supporter) in this article alone.
      - dredmorbius 10y ago
        Look up the definition. A perverse appeal or suck-up. Trump or Fox News would both be examples of highly successful (and distasteful) pandering.
        LBXrRkxx 10y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandering_(politics) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandering_(politics) "Perverse" to you and most HN commenters/readers, maybe. Trump and Fox News may "pander" to groups who you find distasteful, but they DON'T "pander" to many groups who you don't find distasteful. Trump was the FIRST PERSON to bring up many issues that had previously been censored by the media. He didn't change his views for the approval of others, he single-handedly SHAPED THE NARRATIVE. Many career politicians started talking differently after he came along. THAT'S pandering.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  College-educated boomers, in significant part. Though there are other audience segments. If you listen to the NPR humour programmes and segments, they'll often allude to the whiteness of their audience, and it pretty much always draws a laugh. (Edit: to clarify: CEB are the demographic, though it's not necessarily who NPR are pandering to. See followup.)
  - sukilot 10y ago
    That's kind of gross. Rich white people have enough without getting free radio targeted to their interests.
    - Ericson2314 10y ago
      I think the joke is more that they wish it wasn't so; going by the very name "National Public Radio", demographic skew is quite unfortunate.
    - dredmorbius 10y ago
      It's not particularly intentional, and NPR mention this in large part as a way of drawing attention to the fact and seeking broader diversity. NPR grew out of the public broadcasting movement that was emerging in the 1960s (though its roots go deeper), as well as the Baby Boom generation and the democratisation of higher education which had occurred after the 2nd World War. Stir in the Kennedys, Vietnam, the Apollo program, Civil Rights, and Nixon, and you had much of the initial foment from which the project emerged. NPR has had its largest followings on the coasts -- Boston, New York, Washington, DC, for obvious reasons, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle. These are all still flagship stations and regions (though there are many others). There are also, and I say this as someone who's driven across and through the US several times, many local stations and "translators", which serve rural and outlying areas, which are a fantastic relief from what's otherwise the monotony of rural radio: Christian broadcasting, bad country-western, and increasingly, Spanish-language radio. (And if you think NPR panders to its audience, you should try listening to these for a change.) The problem of getting a high-concept, intelligence-oriented, limited-budget network to appeal to what have been its underserved communities: African-American, Hispanic/Latino, Native American, and other segments, is difficult, but you're seeing this. There are programs which try to bridge that divide as well as reach out to younger audiences (how successfully is another question). Latino USA, Glynn Washington's Snap Judgement, and The Moth come to mind. Arguably, Car Talk was a crossover show for a long time, bringing in the shade-tree / garage mechanic contingent (though I feel it overstayed its welcome). I'm aware that that program had a huge draw from an otherwise atypical audience though, which probably explains its longevity even into reruns. And finally: NPR is freely available to all. In an age of podcasts and iPhones, all you need is a cheap radio to pick it up, no subscriptions, no fancy hardware, no malware, no surveillance (though yes, those are availble through the various NPR, PRI, PRX, MPR, etc., podcasts, websites, and other online experiences). It's far less, IMO, that NPR targets its core audience as that that's the group to which it appeals and is known. The information provided is certainly democratic and would benefit most. And as I've noted, the network (and its public broadcasting kin) are actively seeking to extend both reach and relevance. Rather than dismiss this with a smear as you have, what would you see done differently, what do you find missing, and why do (or don't) you listen to public bradcasting?
jsprogrammer 10y ago
Where are you pulling your numbers from? This[0] NPR page shows that only about 30% of NPR income is non-commercial. Also note the Nestle advertisement on the page (at least it was omnipresent when viewing on a mobile browser). [0] http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances http://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances
- morsch 10y ago
  What number are you referring to? Looking at the page, I can't really see that 70% of income (of either NPR or its members) is commercial.
  - jsprogrammer 10y ago
    I am referring to the Revenue Sources image (second on the page): 39% Station dues and fees 23% Corporate sponsorships 9% Distribution and satellite interconnection ----------------- 71% of revenue from commercial activities >The most significant component of station dues and fees revenue is the charge for carrying our premier newsmagazines - [list of show names]. >Non-newsmagazine program fees (for example, [show]) make up the next largest component of station dues and fees revenue.
    - Aloha 10y ago
      Calling most of items commercial is a willful misconstruction of the structure and methods use by NPR. Corporate sponsorships is functionally no different than individual member contributions at the station level, station dues are how costs are apportioned and passed on to member stations. However, If NPR is using excess satellite airtime to carry non-NPR programming, that could be considered commercial activity, yes.
      - jsprogrammer 10y ago
        From the view of NPR, revenue from "station dues and fees", primarily come from charging for access to NPR content, not member donations. It is strictly commercial activity: NPR is producing content and selling it. I think corporate sponsorships are different (if they were functionally the same as another category, they would have been aggregated there). For one, corporations get advertisement time.

peterkshultz 10y ago

NPR is a non-profit organization. Although they need to play the advertising game to keep the lights on, they certainly aren't there to try and make big profits on their listeners. Commercial radio is not like this.

xufi 10y ago
Good point, that is one thing I always admired about them. They atleast play bearable ads but I know that they have great content and news analysis stories coming on later.
justinph 10y ago
NPR (and their member stations) do not have advertising per se. Rather, they call it underwriting and there are very specific rules about what format the underwriting can take. Here are the guidelines: http://www.npr.org/sections/ombudsman/2015/03/11/392355447/nprs-underwriting-guidelines-part-one http://www.npr.org/sections/ombudsman/2015/03/11/392355447/n... I used to work at one of the largest NPR affiliate stations. Listener support is hugely important, most of the money we made came from listeners. IMHO, NPR is pretty successful in that they have built a model that supports quality journalism, at a decent scale, without a lot of annoyances for the user. Newspapers and other media orgs could stand to learn a lot.
sukilot 10y ago
Non-profit simply means that excess revenue is paid in salary instead of to shareholders.