Ugh, can't listen to Morning Edition anymore

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is peddling one sided ideas, not news. Bad bad bad!!!!

No, it's not. I listen all the time and they make more effort than most anyone to present multiple opinions.

Like how?

They consistently have multiple points of view on their shows. I know that the listenership skews liberal but I consistently find that they do the best job of explaining multiple points of view. Also there is research that shows that NPR listeners tend to be some of the best-informed people, while Fox News viewers have the most factually incorrect beliefs. I so wish my Fox News loving parents would give NPR a try, because it really does do a good job covering the facts.

Agreed. I think people get stuck on the fact that many of the non-news shows skew liberal. I also like listening to the BBC Newshour that comes on at 9 am on WAMU. It's really interesting to hear the news from a completely different point of view.

+1 NPR regularly has conservative guests and they are treated the same as liberal ones -- I recall Asa Hutchison being a frequent guest on morning edition (or the evening version, can't remember) several times during the 2016 election, and I came to appreciate his viewpoints. They also had David Duke, Kevin McCarthy... and they've had lots of reporting about Trump voters that doesn't treat them like bizarre fools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love NPR!

Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Noticing a lot of vocal fry which is also incredibly annoying and still can't get used to ML Kelly's voice. She's truly driving listeners away.

The funny thing about vocal fry is that the men do it too - nearly all of them. Ira Glass on This American Life is one of the worst. Yet, this entire thread seems to come down on women and how "annoying" their voices are.

This episode of This American Life nails it (apologize in advance if link doesn't post - I don't normally post links). It's a sexist double standard.

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/545/if-you-dont-have-anything-nice-to-say-say-it-in-all-caps?act=2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH and I were discussing her this morning. He's a former newsman and thinks she's a solid reporter however, we both can't stand her voice at all. It is apparent that she has received some training in the past few months and she is a bit better but with all the other great radio voices out there, certainly NPR could do better.

Our other complaint recently is that ALL the new reporters have extreme and atrocious vocal fry - both women and men. They need to have their own training seminars for EVERY new hire at this point.

I wonder if it's impacting their revenue yet? It will.

Thank you for acknowledging that men also suffer from vocal fry.

[Anonymous]

Mary Louise is not great; but the one I can't stand is cai risdall. So smug and fake folksy.

[Anonymous]

I can't listen to Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson, only because of how she says her name. Soraya SarhaddiNel-sssssoooooonnnnn. So pretentious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't listen to Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson, only because of how she says her name. Soraya SarhaddiNel-sssssoooooonnnnn. So pretentious.

I agree, the sing-songy of it is so annoying.

I do love, love Oefebia Quist-Arcton (or however that's spelled, I think I'm close!). I just adore her accent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't listen to Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson, only because of how she says her name. Soraya SarhaddiNel-sssssoooooonnnnn. So pretentious.

I agree, the sing-songy of it is so annoying.

I do love, love Oefebia Quist-Arcton (or however that's spelled, I think I'm close!). I just adore her accent.

I'm PP. Oh my goodness, I do love her voice and accent so much. I admit I had to Google her because I didn't recognize the name, but I do recognize the voice. I'm also a fan of Eleanor Beardsley, the French correspondent. (I might also be just a little bit jealous of her job.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is peddling one sided ideas, not news. Bad bad bad!!!!

No, it's not. I listen all the time and they make more effort than most anyone to present multiple opinions.

Like how?

They consistently have multiple points of view on their shows. I know that the listenership skews liberal but I consistently find that they do the best job of explaining multiple points of view. Also there is research that shows that NPR listeners tend to be some of the best-informed people, while Fox News viewers have the most factually incorrect beliefs. I so wish my Fox News loving parents would give NPR a try, because it really does do a good job covering the facts.

Agreed. I think people get stuck on the fact that many of the non-news shows skew liberal. I also like listening to the BBC Newshour that comes on at 9 am on WAMU. It's really interesting to hear the news from a completely different point of view.

+1 NPR regularly has conservative guests and they are treated the same as liberal ones -- I recall Asa Hutchison being a frequent guest on morning edition (or the evening version, can't remember) several times during the 2016 election, and I came to appreciate his viewpoints. They also had David Duke, Kevin McCarthy... and they've had lots of reporting about Trump voters that doesn't treat them like bizarre fools.

I also like that they cover a wider variety of topics than most TV news. I have a conservative media-hating relative who is always posting things on Facebook about some news story THE MEDIA IS NOT COVERING! Because, of course, the media hates regular America. 9 times out of 10 I can post a link to a piece from NPR. Which she of course ignores because the media (other than Fox?) is the devil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is peddling one sided ideas, not news. Bad bad bad!!!!

No, it's not. I listen all the time and they make more effort than most anyone to present multiple opinions.

Like how?

They consistently have multiple points of view on their shows. I know that the listenership skews liberal but I consistently find that they do the best job of explaining multiple points of view. Also there is research that shows that NPR listeners tend to be some of the best-informed people, while Fox News viewers have the most factually incorrect beliefs. I so wish my Fox News loving parents would give NPR a try, because it really does do a good job covering the facts.

Agreed. I think people get stuck on the fact that many of the non-news shows skew liberal. I also like listening to the BBC Newshour that comes on at 9 am on WAMU. It's really interesting to hear the news from a completely different point of view.

+1 NPR regularly has conservative guests and they are treated the same as liberal ones -- I recall Asa Hutchison being a frequent guest on morning edition (or the evening version, can't remember) several times during the 2016 election, and I came to appreciate his viewpoints. They also had David Duke, Kevin McCarthy... and they've had lots of reporting about Trump voters that doesn't treat them like bizarre fools.

I also like that they cover a wider variety of topics than most TV news. I have a conservative media-hating relative who is always posting things on Facebook about some news story THE MEDIA IS NOT COVERING! Because, of course, the media hates regular America. 9 times out of 10 I can post a link to a piece from NPR. Which she of course ignores because the media (other than Fox?) is the devil.

1A is spectacular in their coverage of both sides of any issue. I was sad that Diane Rehm retired (though it was time) but Joshua Johnson kicks ass. It's my favorite program!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is peddling one sided ideas, not news. Bad bad bad!!!!

No, it's not. I listen all the time and they make more effort than most anyone to present multiple opinions.

Like how?

They consistently have multiple points of view on their shows. I know that the listenership skews liberal but I consistently find that they do the best job of explaining multiple points of view. Also there is research that shows that NPR listeners tend to be some of the best-informed people, while Fox News viewers have the most factually incorrect beliefs. I so wish my Fox News loving parents would give NPR a try, because it really does do a good job covering the facts.

Agreed. I think people get stuck on the fact that many of the non-news shows skew liberal. I also like listening to the BBC Newshour that comes on at 9 am on WAMU. It's really interesting to hear the news from a completely different point of view.

+1 NPR regularly has conservative guests and they are treated the same as liberal ones -- I recall Asa Hutchison being a frequent guest on morning edition (or the evening version, can't remember) several times during the 2016 election, and I came to appreciate his viewpoints. They also had David Duke, Kevin McCarthy... and they've had lots of reporting about Trump voters that doesn't treat them like bizarre fools.

I also like that they cover a wider variety of topics than most TV news. I have a conservative media-hating relative who is always posting things on Facebook about some news story THE MEDIA IS NOT COVERING! Because, of course, the media hates regular America. 9 times out of 10 I can post a link to a piece from NPR. Which she of course ignores because the media (other than Fox?) is the devil.

Yup, right there with you. I've given up on NPR links with Trump-supporting relatives and have resorted to sharing The Hill or something like BBC. It's frustrating, because NPR is so much better... but people don't believe it.

[Anonymous]

I'm a bit taken aback by how unkind some of these comments are. I wonder how directly we would comment in this manner if Mary Louise or Diane Rhem we're right here. I have no doubt they see some of this.

I have my own sense of what is beautiful or pleasant, but the bottom line to me is that they are all deeply committed, professional journalists. And, I too love NPR and wake up grateful and feeling safer every morning because these people get up at 3 o'clock every day to be there for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a bit taken aback by how unkind some of these comments are. I wonder how directly we would comment in this manner if Mary Louise or Diane Rhem we're right here. I have no doubt they see some of this.

I have my own sense of what is beautiful or pleasant, but the bottom line to me is that they are all deeply committed, professional journalists. And, I too love NPR and wake up grateful and feeling safer every morning because these people get up at 3 o'clock every day to be there for me.

To be fair, they are public figures working in the news/entertainment industry, which frequently involves being the subjects of critical reviews. It's just part of the job to have people state their opinions about what they do in a very frank manner.

[Anonymous]

I would tell Diane Rehm to her face that she's a fine journalist but she should've retired 15 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Wow, some posters are really very critical about the things that don't matter, like voice timbre.

About the things that DO matter, like intelligent coverage, NPR is the best thing out there by long shot, but it doesn't mean it's excellent, unfortunately. They're a bit wishy-washy and could be more rigorous.

The rest of the news world is just SO INCREDIBLY BAD.