Many TV networks have gone wall-to-wall with coverage of his death, but how many NPR stations (like this pair in Cincinnati) are pre-empting regualr programming for continuing NPR coverage?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bin Laden Coverage On Public Radio
- Thread starter DToTheJ
- Start date
WEOS changed format somewhat. We moved "On Point" to WHWS and ran both hours there (worked out nicely since we already had The Takeaway from 8-10am) and stayed with Morning Edition/Special Coverage until 12n. That killed the first hour of World Cafe, though. Then we ran WXXI's 1370 Connection from 12n to 2pm (blowing out World Cafe hr2) and bumped Fresh Air to 7pm since Terry Gross didn't really talk much about Bin Laden.
I generally try really hard to avoid using WHWS as a "backup" for WEOS but in this case the story was big enough (and no student DJ's were around at the time; finals start this week) that it seemed like a good idea to give at least our Geneva listeners the option of still getting On Point.
The only thing we could've changed would've been going to the BBC World Service at 11pm Sunday night instead of waiting until 12mid. I don't think we lost much in that exchange, though.
I generally try really hard to avoid using WHWS as a "backup" for WEOS but in this case the story was big enough (and no student DJ's were around at the time; finals start this week) that it seemed like a good idea to give at least our Geneva listeners the option of still getting On Point.
The only thing we could've changed would've been going to the BBC World Service at 11pm Sunday night instead of waiting until 12mid. I don't think we lost much in that exchange, though.
NPR itself was VERY slow to respond to this story early-on.
NPR itself was VERY slow to respond to this story early-on.
I think that's a very subjective point of view. NPR intentionally go "breaking news" coverage until Obama's speech and Obama was almost 45 minutes late for that. Prior to the speech, all ANYONE actually knew was that Obama was about to make a speech, and in this speech he was going to say that Osama Bin Laden had been killed. Quite literally, that was ALL the hard news available. Everything else you saw or heard on all the other news outlets was rampant speculation, and that's something NPR tries very hard to avoid.
Some affiliates griped about NPR's "slow" reaction time but some people (myself included) pointed out that the same people griping now where the same people attacking NPR just a few months ago for incorrectly reporting Rep. Giffords had been killed in that shooting, when in fact she was still alive. I'd rather NPR take a little extra time and get the facts, rather than simply blathering on with speculation.
And for cryin' out loud, they were maybe 90 minutes behind the other news outlets on this. At MOST ninety minutes...more like 30 to 45 for most of them. That's not exactly being "scooped". Especially not at 11pm ET / 8pm PT on a Sunday. (Admittedly, it's not like Alaska/Hawaii "don't count" but time zones are always problematic for them anyways; there's not many good solutions for that.)
Slow is slow. They could have broke in with a fairly short newsflash then deferred to the Pres. speach later for more clarification. BBC was all over it right from the time things broke.
What's the big deal? For the NPR stations that have shifted away from classical music toward wall-to-wall news, maybe there is some expectation to have everything instantly.
The NPR stations I know anything about are NOT RUNNING NPR on Sunday night when this story was breaking. They are running all kinds of specialty programs from PRI and APR. Or maybe a pre-recorded segment of classical music by someone on the station staff.
At 10 or 11 o'clock at night on a Sunday, how many NPR affiliates had someone on duty who could make an intelligent decision about killing the standard programming and joining the network.... if the network went nuts on the story?
The NPR stations I know anything about are NOT RUNNING NPR on Sunday night when this story was breaking. They are running all kinds of specialty programs from PRI and APR. Or maybe a pre-recorded segment of classical music by someone on the station staff.
At 10 or 11 o'clock at night on a Sunday, how many NPR affiliates had someone on duty who could make an intelligent decision about killing the standard programming and joining the network.... if the network went nuts on the story?
Slow is slow. They could have broke in with a fairly short newsflash then deferred to the Pres. speach later for more clarification. BBC was all over it right from the time things broke.
A: Being one hour "slower" than the other guys is not "slow". Being a DAY late to the story is slow. Being an hour "late" is calling "getting the facts right". I don't know what crack-fueled coffeehouse you're living in, but an hour's delay is not being "late" to a story.
B: No, they can't break in with a short newsflash. Network programming does not work that way in public radio. Only individual stations can choose to cut away from normal programming...and at that time of night, for most of CONUS, that's pre-recorded programming because there is no national NPR newsmagazine feed at that hour. And individual stations are not going to cut away from pre-recorded programming for such a huge news story if only a quick blurb is being offered; they're going to cut away and STAY away.
The BBC had an edge thanks to timezones here; the "dead of night" 10pm Sunday ET heads-up was 3am Monday at the BBC...about when a lot of their news crews were just coming into work. Nevertheless, the BBC wasn't "all over it" per se; they were merely doing the same damn thing everyone else was: speculating to fill the time. Granted, their speculation was probably a little more "informed" than most others, but it was speculation nonetheless because NOBODY had any real facts until Obama gave the actual speech.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.