I wish it would go away. When they interview they show emotion and drive emotion as well as lead the speaker interviewee.
Please stop. I want to infer my own emotions, not yours NPR. I prefer even speech, one which does not add judgement into the story.
Irksome is when they interview a pathetic subject and start with an apology. Like I'm very sorry for the things I think are awful you're going through, but let's have you explain the awful things in a sympathetic way.
Of course NPR isn't the only one. But they have mastered this technique.
I think in the context of all of the media available to us, it's an acceptable style. I appreciate the human touch sometimes. If every news organization adopts that style then it's a problem.
A result is the suggestion of spontaneous speech and unadulterated emotion. The irony is that such presentations are highly rehearsed, with each caesura calculated and every syllable stressed in advance.
This is actually a major problem with the entire TV and radio age. People who seem awkward or fake in front of a camera are actually normal people. It is simply not natural to talk directly to a camera lens as if it is a person, it is not natural to speak in a folksy way to a generic audience that you cannot see. People who seem natural in front of a camera, are actually slick, well-practiced professionals. Thus in the modern era, all politicians and most public figures end up being essentially actors.
It occurs to me that a decent segment of the public figure that politicians and public figures have acting skills.
Can you expand on why acting authentic, and the authentic seeming the opposite, in front of the camera is "a major problem with the entire TV and radio age"?
I was recently impressed when I watched Nightly Business Report, which is now produced by CNBC. A wide range of their staff appear to effortlessly change their delivery for the different audience.
I actually like the more casual, conversational storytelling that NPR is known for. I find the NPR style of delivery to be innovative and calling this "NPR Voice" might just be a negative dig from media traditionalists.
Ira Glass is one of the most recognizable NPR reporters and explains it like this, from the linked article:
“Back when we were kids, authority came from enunciation, precision,” Mr. Glass said. “But a whole generation of people feel like that character is obviously a phony — like the newscaster on ‘The Simpsons’ — with a deep voice and gravitas.”
For his more intimate storytelling, Mr. Glass “went in the other direction,” he said. “Any story hits you harder if the person delivering it doesn’t sound like a news robot but, in fact, sounds like a real person having the reactions a real person would.”
I prefer the NHK style of presentation. Just plain matter of factly. "These are the things that happened today." not the "These are the things that happened today and they are terrible, if you are any kind of responsible human being you will feel empathetic and take action"
I mean, it's as if every human story on NPR has an implicit call to action. I don't want your propaganda (nor Fox's or MSNBC's etc.) I just want you to present news and I can maker up my mind if it's terrible good, indifferent or somewhere in between.
The suggestion of "spontaneous speech" comes from not only a "highly rehearsed" intonation but is perhaps primarily the result of extreme editing, as discussed in this revealing audio post looking at the practice by On the Media:
Really eye-opening to learn that the NPR anchors, reporters, and guest interview subjects are not nearly as quick-thinking and well-spoken as they are made to sound in the final product.
Amateurish and ersatz "thoughtful thinking aloud" is just the latest reason I can't stand listening to radio, and now prefer podcasts.
Pause and ponder all you want, Abumrad, Krulwich, Koenig et. al. I have set my player (Podcast Addict, among others) to skip silence and play at 1.2-2.0x speed, so that gormless pauses and ponderous exposition are now scarcely noticeable.
In this similar vein, I had a religious experience when I realized YouTube had a 2x button. I'm now livid beyond belief that I can't do it on mobile.
Although I will rarely listen to more emotionally charged content (TAL, Radiolab, etc) on the multiplier, since I don't listen to those shows for their facts or to learn something.
Not entirely taken over, only on the left-wing stations. Right wing stations have an entirely different vocal style, and you can tell within seconds what sort of station you've just tuned into.
This is what my mother calls "insufferable, incredulous shouting." She's not left-wing by any stretch of the imagination, but she listens to NPR because she'd "rather get information from people who aren't so angry all the time."
My favorite part of NPR interviews is when they do it out in the field ... ie walking over a bunch of fallen leaves with the soundguy putting his mic near their feet to pick up the crunch, crunch.
That happens every ... single ... time they do an interview. I mainly just listen to find out what the soundguy did to get a weird sound.
Not to mention Silly Names. Looking at you, Sunari Glinton, Neda Ulaby, and Olfebia Quist-Arcton.
Speaking of names, why do the anchors pronounce the Egypt-based correspondent's name "Layla Fadel" while she pronounces her own name "Layla Faldin"? This irritates me no end!
[+] [-] mc32|10 years ago|reply
Please stop. I want to infer my own emotions, not yours NPR. I prefer even speech, one which does not add judgement into the story.
Irksome is when they interview a pathetic subject and start with an apology. Like I'm very sorry for the things I think are awful you're going through, but let's have you explain the awful things in a sympathetic way.
Of course NPR isn't the only one. But they have mastered this technique.
[+] [-] TrevorJ|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] flatline|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] louisphilippe|10 years ago|reply
This is actually a major problem with the entire TV and radio age. People who seem awkward or fake in front of a camera are actually normal people. It is simply not natural to talk directly to a camera lens as if it is a person, it is not natural to speak in a folksy way to a generic audience that you cannot see. People who seem natural in front of a camera, are actually slick, well-practiced professionals. Thus in the modern era, all politicians and most public figures end up being essentially actors.
[+] [-] drdeadringer|10 years ago|reply
Can you expand on why acting authentic, and the authentic seeming the opposite, in front of the camera is "a major problem with the entire TV and radio age"?
[+] [-] maxerickson|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danboarder|10 years ago|reply
Ira Glass is one of the most recognizable NPR reporters and explains it like this, from the linked article:
“Back when we were kids, authority came from enunciation, precision,” Mr. Glass said. “But a whole generation of people feel like that character is obviously a phony — like the newscaster on ‘The Simpsons’ — with a deep voice and gravitas.”
For his more intimate storytelling, Mr. Glass “went in the other direction,” he said. “Any story hits you harder if the person delivering it doesn’t sound like a news robot but, in fact, sounds like a real person having the reactions a real person would.”
[+] [-] mc32|10 years ago|reply
I mean, it's as if every human story on NPR has an implicit call to action. I don't want your propaganda (nor Fox's or MSNBC's etc.) I just want you to present news and I can maker up my mind if it's terrible good, indifferent or somewhere in between.
[+] [-] unknown|10 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] keane|10 years ago|reply
http://lk.tumblr.com/post/5435349794/public-radio-production
Really eye-opening to learn that the NPR anchors, reporters, and guest interview subjects are not nearly as quick-thinking and well-spoken as they are made to sound in the final product.
[+] [-] fluxon|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mdaniel|10 years ago|reply
Although I will rarely listen to more emotionally charged content (TAL, Radiolab, etc) on the multiplier, since I don't listen to those shows for their facts or to learn something.
[+] [-] hugh4|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] intopieces|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] analog31|10 years ago|reply
"_____bbbbbBillion"
It's not a big number any more. ;-)
[+] [-] gdubs|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwilkes|10 years ago|reply
That happens every ... single ... time they do an interview. I mainly just listen to find out what the soundguy did to get a weird sound.
[+] [-] mjklin|10 years ago|reply
Speaking of names, why do the anchors pronounce the Egypt-based correspondent's name "Layla Fadel" while she pronounces her own name "Layla Faldin"? This irritates me no end!
[+] [-] fiatmoney|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chris_wot|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mc32|10 years ago|reply