Am I missing something, or has Daniel Schorr's recent passing really been ignored on these boards? In some tribute or other to Schorr - I think it was on NPR - someone said that despite Schorr and his peers of an earlier time, there was never a "golden age of journalism". Perhaps not; maybe, during Schorr's early and prime years, it was only silver or bronze. By comparison, we are now in the plastic age of journalism - and cheap plastic at that. I don't think such a thoroughly professional journalist as Schorr would ever get hired today.
-
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
Daniel Schorr, 1916-2010
- Thread starter listener-in
- Start date
listener-in said:
Yes, you are missing something. There was a very nice post on the Public Radio/Non-Commercial board with a link to Schorr's obituary. It was made yesterday, at 3:57 PM. That's over 24 hours before you started this thread.
As for Schorr's "professionalism", with all that entails about objectivity in reporting, A quote from Schorr's mentor Edward R. Murrow comes to mind. After the death of Senator Joe McCarthy, Murrow is reputed to have responded to an inquiry about McCarthy with, "Speak no ill of the dead."
Many people including me don't listen to NPR. It's like listening to people talk in golf announcer voices 24/7/364.
Unlike commercial radio that has to appeal to the lowest common denominator, because the advertisers only want the listeners who'd actually believe the claims being made in their spots, NPR doesn't. No hype on NPR. No dumbing it down. Many people do listen. In fact, those listeners willingly pony up money, from their wallets, to support NPR programming. So, yes, you'll never hear an NPR announcer saying in a loud voice hyping " coming up we'll be hearing about one of the many blond actresses in Hollywood who did something stupid today that totally doesn't deserve any media attention, right after we have this brief word about hemorrhoid cream." Frankly, I prefer NPR. To each his/her own.
The fluffy TMZ crap is what a lot of the people want, although I don't understand it. As for whether or not an advertiser is lying in making a claim, they aren't all doing that. The local pizza parlor that supports the high school football broadcasts is doing it to show community support & to move pizzas. Also, if the TMZ crap got in donations, NPR would figure out some way of airing it. Look at how the individual stations have cut music programming in the past decade. From what I recall, NPR was set up to air commercially nonviable programming.MikefromDelaware said:
NPR put pressure on the F.C.C. along with the N.A.B. in the 1970s to do away with the 10-watt class D stations. This prevented high schools, colleges & civic groups from getting on the air unless they could run at least 100 watts. I know because in the 1990s I tried to start a station at my high school only to find no frequencies were available which may have been had the F.C.C. not done away with the 10-watt licenses years ago. This was done to "alleviate interference." So the Class D stations had to move, upgrade or go off the air (yet the translator stations were somehow fine). Hey, who cares about the kids who want to "play radio?" We in the U.S. need our own B.B.C., right?!
Also, I do not like the C.P.B. (Corporation for Public Broadcasting). NPR & PBS are partially supported vis a vis by the government through the C.P.B. whereas other stations (commercial, high school, college, some community stations) have to sink or swim. Personally I have supported my local PBS station in the past because they do good work & do not seem to be on a pedestal like the latecomer NPR windbag station (which bought out a local ethnic station which no longer has a voice in the area despite the huge population).
I would say for non-hype radio, try community radio. It does what NPR was supposed to do, is predominately local, and can be the lifeblood of a community (WOMR in Provincetown, Ma. for example).
I agree with a lot of what Lorenzo Milam said in his book "Sex and Broadcasting, a handbook to starting your own community station". He derides the "boorish educational" stations (most university stations in the '70s & before) which the NPR affiliates are descended from.
Granted, TMZ appeals to the least common denominator, which unfortunately, there is a large market. This is why commercial radio airs what it does (same for commercial TV). They've got to keep their customer (the advertiser) happy. Understand that the listener is not the customer, the advertiser is. The listener is the product or the target the advertiser is trying to draw to hear their spots. So if playing mindless drivel will bring the audience that advertiser is seeking for his/her product, they'd air mindless drivel. If a Polka 24/7 format brought in the desired demo for that station's advertisers you'd be hearing WPLK all polkas all the time !!!
I don't agree with you that if NPR thought they could get donations with TMZ they'd air that. NPR however, does have to follow the donor money. Many of you have major problems with NPR or PBS getting the small amount of money they still get from Uncle Sam (they used to get much more in the early years, I believe). So no NPR is not the BBC, because the BBC is totally financed by the government. NPR does offer programming that commercial radio has forgotten. They offer the long form newscasts and news magazines, plus other shows including music that has left the commercial radio airwaves. NPR is local as well as network. That of course does depend on your local NPR station. Local programming is costly. My guess is, the reason fewer NPR stations offer Classical Music is they are finding far less financial support, in some markets, and had to either cut back or drop it completely (by the way, I am a regular listener to my local NPR stations, WRTI which plays both Classical and Jazz, and NPR news/info WHYY-FM which does air locally produced programming as well). However, my two NPR stations are in the nation's #8 radio market(Philly) along with my hometown market #76 (Wilmington DE) so they have a fairly large audience to draw upon for support. A smaller market, might have problems making ends meet and have to adjust what they are doing.
Remember NPR and their affiliates get less than 10% of their money from the Feds, so they don't have a guaranteed source of money any more than any other station, be they non-comm college, non-comm religious, or commercial stations. They too have to pay their bills or go out of business.
As far as high school radio, sorry, we didn't have that when I was a kid and generally only the well to do high schools can afford such a luxury, sort of like having a swimming pool or a planetarium at your school (my high school didn't have any of that stuff, but schools in the better "healed" parts of town sure did). I worked many years as a part timer on weekends (stopped about 4 years ago after over 30 years of doing this as I've also had a great career in industry as a lab tech), I used to practice in my bedroom as a kid and taped my self with a battery operated toy reel to reel tape recorder, being the jock, and doing the news, etc. I'd re-write the news stories I found in my local hometown paper and do my own newscasts. So if a high school kid really wants to do radio as a kid, they can get plenty of practice doing it themselves minus the audience. Of course they could scape together some money (kids today have far more money than we all had) to start their own internet station. However, given the state of the radio industry, I'd not be encouraging high school kids to consider a career in radio, so why waste the tax payers money on a high school station. You're upset that NPR gets a pittance from tax dollars, but think every high school should have its own station cluttering up the air waves ? We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
NPR does fill an important need in radio today. If it weren't for NPR, I'd rarely listen to the radio, other than to hear some talk shows as the commercial radio stations stopped playing music I liked many years ago and am thankful for NPR's great jazz and Classical music, plus the great informational (All Things Considered , Morning Edition, Marketplace, etc, and entertainment shows like Car Talk, Prairie Home Companion, etc. Frankly, the tax dollars that the Fed gives to NPR and PBS, in my opinion, is some of the better spent tax dollars, and Lord knows the Fed knows how to waste Trillions of dollars. So, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I don't agree with you that if NPR thought they could get donations with TMZ they'd air that. NPR however, does have to follow the donor money. Many of you have major problems with NPR or PBS getting the small amount of money they still get from Uncle Sam (they used to get much more in the early years, I believe). So no NPR is not the BBC, because the BBC is totally financed by the government. NPR does offer programming that commercial radio has forgotten. They offer the long form newscasts and news magazines, plus other shows including music that has left the commercial radio airwaves. NPR is local as well as network. That of course does depend on your local NPR station. Local programming is costly. My guess is, the reason fewer NPR stations offer Classical Music is they are finding far less financial support, in some markets, and had to either cut back or drop it completely (by the way, I am a regular listener to my local NPR stations, WRTI which plays both Classical and Jazz, and NPR news/info WHYY-FM which does air locally produced programming as well). However, my two NPR stations are in the nation's #8 radio market(Philly) along with my hometown market #76 (Wilmington DE) so they have a fairly large audience to draw upon for support. A smaller market, might have problems making ends meet and have to adjust what they are doing.
Remember NPR and their affiliates get less than 10% of their money from the Feds, so they don't have a guaranteed source of money any more than any other station, be they non-comm college, non-comm religious, or commercial stations. They too have to pay their bills or go out of business.
As far as high school radio, sorry, we didn't have that when I was a kid and generally only the well to do high schools can afford such a luxury, sort of like having a swimming pool or a planetarium at your school (my high school didn't have any of that stuff, but schools in the better "healed" parts of town sure did). I worked many years as a part timer on weekends (stopped about 4 years ago after over 30 years of doing this as I've also had a great career in industry as a lab tech), I used to practice in my bedroom as a kid and taped my self with a battery operated toy reel to reel tape recorder, being the jock, and doing the news, etc. I'd re-write the news stories I found in my local hometown paper and do my own newscasts. So if a high school kid really wants to do radio as a kid, they can get plenty of practice doing it themselves minus the audience. Of course they could scape together some money (kids today have far more money than we all had) to start their own internet station. However, given the state of the radio industry, I'd not be encouraging high school kids to consider a career in radio, so why waste the tax payers money on a high school station. You're upset that NPR gets a pittance from tax dollars, but think every high school should have its own station cluttering up the air waves ? We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
NPR does fill an important need in radio today. If it weren't for NPR, I'd rarely listen to the radio, other than to hear some talk shows as the commercial radio stations stopped playing music I liked many years ago and am thankful for NPR's great jazz and Classical music, plus the great informational (All Things Considered , Morning Edition, Marketplace, etc, and entertainment shows like Car Talk, Prairie Home Companion, etc. Frankly, the tax dollars that the Fed gives to NPR and PBS, in my opinion, is some of the better spent tax dollars, and Lord knows the Fed knows how to waste Trillions of dollars. So, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
It's obvious that not everyone appreciated Daniel Schorr; my dad who passed away in April enjoyed listening to Mr. Schorr on Sunday mornings (as I also did).
Another elder journalist I miss was the late Paul Harvey and his "now the rest of the story commentaries".
I'm afraid most news organizations now have the motto......."if it bleeds, it leads!" which is why if I want real news as opposed to entertainment and news lite; I listen to the BBC or VOA.
I agree with Mike from Delaware that NPR does a decent job, but as with any news organization, improvements can be made.
drt
st. petersburg,fl
Another elder journalist I miss was the late Paul Harvey and his "now the rest of the story commentaries".
I'm afraid most news organizations now have the motto......."if it bleeds, it leads!" which is why if I want real news as opposed to entertainment and news lite; I listen to the BBC or VOA.
I agree with Mike from Delaware that NPR does a decent job, but as with any news organization, improvements can be made.
drt
st. petersburg,fl
drt said:
I appreciated Daniel Schorr for what he was, which was an excellent commentator who articulated his personal opinions well, and backed them with selected facts that supported his positions. His skill at advocating the positions he felt strongly about was undiminished with age. He was a pleasure to listen to, even if one disagreed with his personal opinions. As a commentator and editorialist, he was on the highest level, with few peers and none superior.
However, he wasn't a journalist. Journalists are, by definition, objective. There are many virtues that Daniel Schorr displayed. He was intelligent, knowledgeable, and a master of using the English language. But "objective" is one of the few words that are no more appropriate to describe Daniel Schorr than they are to describe Paul Harvey. Both men were outstanding broadcasters, and both men leave a large void in the world of broadcasting.
But neither one of them was a journalist.
Dan Schorr may have been a "great journalist" but during my NPR listening days, he was nothing but an old man with a very annoying nasal voice.
He always sounded like his nose was congested. :
I don't listen to NPR anymore - the monotone voices coming from announcers with speech impediments and holier-than-thou attitudes; and overall bad production values kind of killed the experience for me.
The only thing the local NPR transmitter is good for is the overnight rebroadcast of the BBC World Service news.
He always sounded like his nose was congested. :
I don't listen to NPR anymore - the monotone voices coming from announcers with speech impediments and holier-than-thou attitudes; and overall bad production values kind of killed the experience for me.
The only thing the local NPR transmitter is good for is the overnight rebroadcast of the BBC World Service news.
- Status