Which is the better network for news.. NPR or the BBC?

[Mark_Giardina]

This is a tough one for me since I worked for a NPR affiliate for many years. Yet I really enjoy listening to the BBC World News.

NPR lacks when it comes to breaking news, IE: September 11, 2001, but does provide great in-depth coverage and live reports.

The BBC ‘s strength is it’s overseas bureaus and ability to report on news in other countries.

Like I said for me this is a tough call.

What’s your opinion?
<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>

 

[XL]

> This is a tough one for me since I worked for a NPR
> affiliate for many years. Yet I really enjoy listening to
> the BBC World News.
>
> NPR lacks when it comes to breaking news, IE: September 11,
> 2001, but does provide great in-depth coverage and live
> reports.
>
> The BBC ‘s strength is it’s overseas bureaus and ability to
> report on news in other countries.
>
> Like I said for me this is a tough call.
>
> What’s your opinion?

They each have their advantages and because of that, it's an unfair question. As far as September 11th, 2001, NPR learned dearly from that and have since done alot better.

 

[Timothy]

> They each have their advantages and because of that, it's an
> unfair question. As far as September 11th, 2001, NPR
> learned dearly from that and have since done alot better.

I would echo that statement. Furthermore, I was disappointed when so many public radio folks complained about NPR's slowness to get the breaking 9/11 info on the air. As if all the stations didn't have their own microphones or didn't know how to use them. Our updates came faster than NPR's so we ****SHOCK**** did our own updates.

NPR covers American issues better than any news organization, and competes strongly with the BBC for international issues.

 

[doc9464]

> NPR covers American issues better than any news
> organization, and competes strongly with the BBC for
> international issues.
>

NPR although falling to letting to many pundits track up the broadcast is still your best chance of getting a solid news cast for USA. BBC without question has the resources and the willingness to cover world issues with detail and great focus.

BBC wins overall to me...NPR better on domestic issues.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

I think that overall, it's no contest: BBC is hands-down the better of the two.

NPR's strength is in-depth analysis, but their weaknesses are spot and "breaking" news.

 

[Timothy]

> I think that overall, it's no contest: BBC is hands-down the
> better of the two.
>
> NPR's strength is in-depth analysis, but their weaknesses
> are spot and "breaking" news.

I've heard a certain NPR bigwig say, "our mission is not to get it first, but to get it right, first."

NPR has made some strident changes to be able to better cover breaking news. As a result, they've lost some of the old, "let's go in the closet and see if our lifesavers make sparks" charm. Which isn't all bad. One thing that I think was clear from 9/11 is that Bob Edwards is not the person to be in the chair during breaking news. I remember hearing Scott Simon later that night and was amazed at how well he handled so many different sources.

I think NPR's depth of coverage is much better than the BBC. The BBC's style of coverage is mostly interviews by the host... I mean presenter.

 

[XL]

> NPR's strength is in-depth analysis, but their weaknesses
> are spot and "breaking" news.

NPR is not known for spot news -- that is not the mission of public radio. Public radio is known for in-depth stories, not soundbites. They are not that concerned with "breaking news" to the point they are back-tracking. NPR will, at least, get a mention on the air that "there are reports", etc. But, NPR will not going into breaking news mode to assume until they get the facts.

 

[markwooldridge]

You're comparing apples with oranges....

NPR: Funded mainly by donations, mission to provide news and analysis to its affiliates across the United States.

BBC: Funded by the UK Government with grant-in-aid, and coupled with its domestic resources by forced subscription (aka TV licence), its non-domestic mission to provide worldwide news and analysis of events happening across the globe.

In terms of resources, the BBC is far better equipped than NPR. For breaking news it is the better of the two. However given everything NPR and BBC do work closely together. How many times have you heard NPR using a BBC reporter in its headline news? However I agree with other posters that NPR is known for its objective analysis. People might think that NPR is better for this than the Beeb, but Auntie does have its programmes where it does analysis (the obvious one is called "Analysis" - a 15 minute slot before the top of the hour heard reguarly during dayparts). Even the Been learns from NPR - they have "learned" from the WMD "sexed up" scandal, and

As a heavily biased British ex-pat, I'd have to say that the BBC is by far the stronger news organization of the two. I also have to give NPR credit because it is getting its news activities into gear and are expanding where other traditional mainstream media organisations such as CBS, ABC, etc are trimming down their overseas bureaus. The Beeb had the resources in place to cover things such as the Tsunami. When it came to 9/11 - the Beeb provided an outsider's view of what was going on - one from a non American standpoint that people appreciated.

My title of this post said it's comparing apples to oranges. NPR and BBC are two very different creatures with two very different cultures. They complement each other and I appreciate both of them. It is a tough call as to what to listen to for each time of the day. If I have my XM then it's often a choice between BBC, Air America and BPM for me personally. If I have no XM then my choice is my local NPR affiliate.

Mark.