Take Them Away, Please (Or, How to Numb Your Mind in the Morning)

It may be only be day five, but it's already crystal clear: the new morning show on National Public Radio affiliate WYNC, 'the takeaway', is drivel wallowing in a pseudo hipness, quasi news, and stilted banter.

NPR's 'Morning Edition' has been a venerable and reliable source of radio news - presented concisely, with only a slight bias - for over 25 years. According to a recent article in the NYT, NPR is dissatisfied with their record 28 million listeners, and has been doing research to determine how to give their programming more 'verve'. Meanwhile, affiliates are coming up with their own programming to cater to a younger, less traditional audience. WNYC taunted listeners for weeks about their new show, which airs from 6 - 7a.m. and is hosted by Adaora Udoji and John Hockenberry, of CNN and NBC respectively.

Broadcast live, and carried by 15 other affiliates so far, Adora and John banter about four or five topics - sometimes with their collaborators at the NYTimes, BBC, or WGBH - trying to inform, while sounding 'tough enough to get the real story' and just contrarian enough for a veneer of objectivity. Every 15 min or so, a twelve-year-old sounding Brit cheerily reads the headlines: 'another 50 die in a suicide bombing in Baghdad' she chirps as if describing a new flavor of cupcakes. And then, because research must have shown it is key, they have an interactive aspect. Listeners can call (and they make it a point that the call will be transcribed - uh, who cares?), or email comments, a selection of which they read, leading to further banter. It's all so forced and scripted - even the indignation is clearly of the mock variety . . . hipness is simply not attained with such obvious falseness and clumsiness - rather it seems they are trying too hard.

One is left feeling uninformed and gypped: All that talking and time, with so little information imparted. And it's insulting too - why should one of the last vestiges of intelligent reporting be dumbed down to be more like Don Imus? If NPR listeners really wanted that sort of show, they have many other - and better options. Now, if we want to hear 'Morning Edition' at that time in New York, we have to tune in on the AM dial - who even hooked up the AM antenna to their clock radio? I certainly did not.

A few years ago, in an attempt to be more lively, NPR fired Bob Edwards, with his coma-inducing voice, weeks within his 25th anniversary on air - to great uproar and indignation . . . but who can better explain what's going on in the Supreme Court than Nina Totenberg, in Washington in general than Brian Naylor, or give us thoughtful news analysis than Juan Williams? With a little tweaking (and perhaps slightly more balance), they could continue to expand their listening audience, and still be the gold standard of radio news.

Comments

[grailknight]

NPR listeners who contribute money should tell their local affiliates that they have fallen prey to dumbing down the audience. My local affiliate likes to boast that its listeners are more intellegent, but if they start delivering pablum, they will be put on notice that my ducats can be distributed elsewhere.

[plooger]

wtf is up with all this nonsense regarding "balance"? There is no place for "balance" in objective news reporting. The story is either being reported factually and objectively, or it is not. Use of the term "balance" implies that the news should be delivered in paired newslets, with each story being dually reported by "journalists" from competing political perspectives.

[brixtony]

I gave it a week. I gave up. It's dull, less informative than Morning Edition and frankly, annoying. I listen during shaving, shower and breakfast in NYC where it's taken over the 6-7 slot. ME is on AM which I can't receive well in the bathroom where the radio is. I don't need the so-called interactive, listen to the listeners, pretension either. There are other excellent shows on WNYC like Brian Lehrer's, which do this very well without the fake bonhomie of Eyewitless News. If he was doing this show...that's another story. Sorry, but I hope it crashes and burns soon.

[SamThornton]

There is a very basic problem that lies at the root of most of broadcast and cable media "news" shows. The problem is that, in an attempt to attract more viewers and listeners, and in keeping with the advice received from media consultants, media managers have created what amounts to a series of cults of personality, selling not the hard news, but the personalities and antics of their on-air personnel.

Look or listen to nearly any "news" show and what one sees is not a sober presentation of facts about current events, but a raucous side-show full of half-wit pronouncements and, if the opportunity presents, half-assed sexual innuendo. Contrast this with broadcast news from other countries and one wonders how Americans get even a fraction of useful information.

[Marlyn]

There is NOTHING on the radio worth listening to. I used to enjoy NPR until the right wing took over. I used to enjoy certain Air America Radio shows until my local station was taken over by Clear Channel who changed it to sports, even though there are already 5 sports stations in the area. I used to enjoy listening online to Randi Rhodes and Sam Seder on Air America Radio, until they were taken over by the Green brothers.

Now there is nothing ...

[JScott]

I've turned the radio off by that time thankfully.
At least it hasn't crowded out Morning Edition......yet...

Sad day when it will.... the Foxization of NPR.....of course this is what neoconevangelfundie rethuglicans want.

[DaveDonelson]

Let's give it a little time. While we're doing that, though, let's get up a petition to ban themes like the one I heard Thursday, which was "phrases that have outlived their usefulness." It may have been the anniversary of "Mission Accomplished" but the take on it was strained like mashed bananas through a sieve.