|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
How "Public" is National Public Radio? |
Current rating: 0 |
by Jonathan Lawson via Seattle IMC
(No verified email address) |
05 Jun 2001
|
|
Last weekend (May 19-20), public radio managers and journalists from NPR affiliates across the country met in Seattle for a cheery discussion of the network's expansion into new markets via digital broadcast technology. Many of NPR's core listeners in Seattle and elsewhere depend on the network for daily in-depth news coverage which is - they have faith - more free from corporate bias and more diverse than commercial radio and TV news. |
|
|
See also:
http://seattle.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=3526
|
|
Nice Article -- Some more on NPR & LPFM |
by Paul Riismandel
paul (nospam) mediageek.org (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
05 Jun 2001
|
This is a nice article summarizing the decline of NPR's newsgathering and overall corporate approach to broadcasting.
With specific regard to NPR and low-power FM (LPFM),I had the opportunity to question Kevin Klose, president of NPR, on the LPFM issue back in March during a live studio-audience talk program on the Urbana, IL NPR affiliate, WILL-AM. Klose got very animated and somewhat agitated when I asked him about the issue (he seemed mostly asleep for a lot of the program), and vigorously defended his and NPR's opposition, saying it was based purely on technical grounds. He expressed his opinion that the FCC had rushed the LPFM effort, and in doing so had let interference concerns take a back seat.
After the program was over there was a small reception, during which Klose pursued me, saying "Hey, low-power FM guy." We talked for at least 15 minutes, wherein he continued to make his case that he was not against low-power FM per se. He seemed to be annoyed with the FCC, and specifically annoyed with then-Chairman Kennard, who he believed blew him off on the issue of interference.
When I pointed out his bedfellows on the issue--namely the National Association of Broadcasters--he distanced himself, saying that their agenda was not his. In fact, he made pains to prove that he was sympathetic to the LPFM movement and its aim to give voice to unserved communities and audiences, even expressing sympathy for some pirate broadcasters--specifically mentioning latino ones in Chicago and elsewhere.
He continued to crticize the FCC, saying that the LPFM effort was in effect Kennard's way to try and make up for the corporate consolidation of the radio dial, and a case of "too little too late."
His intensity in defending himself and NPR on this issue took me by surprise. He also surprised me in his willingness to listen and dialogue with me some, although, truthfully, he did most of the talking.
Afterwards I wasn't quite sure what to make of it--whether to take him at face value or not. My own belief is that the interference argument against LPFM is largely a red herring. This is especially true in light of the fact that the very same standards the FCC originally proposed for LPFM are almost identical to those already in place for translator stations--low-power stations whose only purpose can be to relay the signal of another full-power station, currently mostly used by Christian stations to blast their signals across the country cheaply, and also used by many NPR affiliates. In fact, Klose noted that it was the worry of Western NPR affiliates who use a lot of translators to reach remote mountainous areas that sparked NPR's objections.
It did really seem as though Klose believes the interference argument--or at least he wants to. In a way LPFM stations could be good for NPR, providing some relief from giving the appearance of attempting to serve listeners who aren't middle-income whites. This is the same logic commercial broadcasters used when they embraced the creation of US public broadcasting in the late 60s--they figured it would take some of the pressure off them for providing educational and public service programming.
Yet, regardless of how sincere Kevin Klose is about his affinity for the goals of LPFM, the fact is that the service has been eviscerated by Congress and effectively kept out of many of the dense urban areas where it is most needed.
--------
A version of this comment along with links to audio of the program where I talked to Kevin Klose are available on my website at this address:
http://www.mediageek.org/commentaries/3-1-01_kevin_klose.html |
See also:
http://www.mediageek.org
|
