I care, I care!
Poor Ben, that was alot to cover, but he gave good background information on the region and people. He did a wonderful job of tying it in with what the U.S. is also doing in the area and how it will affect us.These types of issues are so hard to understand when there are so many differnt groups with different issues, not to mention beliefs. Great job! But, it was a little like a game show with the clock ticking and all that!
I care...now do I win a prize?

Sent by Duckie | 7:34 PM ET | 05-21-2007

Duckie -- Glad you care! About the clock ticking -- we were of two minds on that, did you like it?

Sent by Matt Martinez | 7:43 PM ET | 05-21-2007

MM,
The clock was a little distracting...but, I liked it when Ben kinda stumbled through his explination(does that make me a bad person?).It seemed less scripted.

Sent by The Duck | 7:51 PM ET | 05-21-2007

Hmmm, some of us were afraid it might be distracting. Others thought it was fun and beat-the-clock-y. And, no. You are not a bad person to hear him stumble. He was just talking like a real person. Ben is a great guy, btw. Good reporter. Good friend.

Sent by Matt Martinez | 7:56 PM ET | 05-21-2007

I liked how the "why" was a major focus of the segment. Yes, it made me care. However, get rid of the clock.

Sent by Steve Petersen | 11:57 PM ET | 05-21-2007

I'm a fan of the concept and the title of the segment. I liked Alison's tone ringing a little of Samantha Bee without the pungent political incorrectness.

It's been blogged before; your audience is in the mood for the Daily Show. We like a host who doesn't pretend to know everything and certainly doesn't assume that we do. The Daily Show recognizes plain as day that without the comedy, we might not otherwise care. And in respectable journalism, a friendly jab like "Make Me Care" is a glad substitute for fake news.

While the piece succeeded overall, it was not the slightly stressful 67-second gimmick, but rather learning some basic background, left out by other NPR and BBC coverage, that made me care.

Sent by Helen Ivor-Smith | 12:22 AM ET | 05-22-2007

I care because I was once married to a Lebanese and lived in Tripoli and Bassafrin for 6 months. I know people who live in Tripoli. I learned some new information about the refugee camps. Good report.

Sent by Dottie Atkins | 1:47 PM ET | 05-22-2007

Unfortunately, Ben Gilbert, while unarguably a good reporter, did not make me care. He outlined the major issues and conflicts coherently and succintly, yes. He mentioned the buzz words, democracy, financing, yes. But he did not get to the humanistic side. He did not touch on why what seems to be serious in-fighting and civil breakdown to us, thousands of miles away, should make us stop,listen, and want to be involved. The clock thing made it seem too cavalier, too game-show-gimmicky for so serious a matter.

Sent by Jann McClary | 3:06 PM ET | 05-22-2007

Interesting idea. Next time you try it, once you establish the ticking at the top, consider taking it to a lower (almost subliminal) level under the guest, and then bringing it back up again at the end. Best, -jk

Sent by Jay Kernis | 3:32 PM ET | 05-22-2007

I like the basic concept of this segment, namely, that too much news coverage about complicated issues leaves out straight-forward, engaging background and context that makes the listener CARE. But both the tone and content of this piece disappointed me.

Because I'm obsessive, please let me separate the two:
1. Tone & Format: Yes, the ticking was totally distracting, but that was just one example of an even more distressing element: the whole tone of the piece was condescending and flip. You're talking about people surrounded by fear, violence, loss, and death. You think my attitude is "Make Me Care"? Like I need a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down? My attention span is so short I can't possibly care unless you explain it in 60 seconds or less? It seems like all you really want me to care about is whether the interviewee beats the clock.

I'm also troubled that this approach gets selectively applied to the deaths of brown people in a far-off foreign country. I mean, would you say "make me care" about Americans who are at the moment being attacked and killed where they live? Would that story require more gravity?

2. Content: My objections to your tone aside, I think it's a totally admirable goal to tackle the big, confusing, inaccessible news stories that are too glossed-over by most news consumers, and to make them accessible and engaging way. But I don't think you succeeded here.

Ben Gilbert's summary of why I should care about the fighting in Lebanon is because it's "a focal point for all the problems in the Middle East." Well, OK, but don't we already kind of know that? Isn't that why it's so easy to let this story fade into the background -- because it sounds vaguely like every Middle-Eastern-conflict story we've heard since we were watching current-events filmstrips in 4th grade? The whole thing about displaced Palestinians living in refugee camps was kind of a trippy concept for us American kids then -- by now, sadly, we've gotten used to the idea.

The way to get us engaged in these new developments is to expand the details (the right details, and in an interesting, surprising way), not to strip all the details away.

I'm not one of those rabid fans of This American Life who thinks Ira Glass can do no wrong. But something I really respect that team for: when they tackle hard news, they take important, poorly understood stories, and do riveting, explanatory reporting so you can't help caring. And they do it a conversational, but not condescending, way. The show devoted to Habeus Corpus is the prime example.

Show me, don't tell me.

Thanks. I don't want to be a haranguer here, but I do feel strongly about these things, and about what is offered to my generation as news sources. I, for one, am not "in the mood" for the Daily Show when I actually want to understand what's going on in the world. (When I'm unwinding with a gin and tonic is another matter.)

Sent by EB | 4:41 PM ET | 05-22-2007

I just want to second all the good points listed by EB in the above posting.

Sent by Upstate Joan | 1:00 AM ET | 05-23-2007

Good basic idea (the who, what, when, where, and quick history) but sounds amature and style is too distracting. Hated the 60 seconds ticking away in the background at the end. Your commentator used the word "essentially" WAYYYYY too many times. I'll give the segment one, maybe two more chances. If I don't see improvements, I'll forget I ever saw it.

Sent by Up late in OC | 2:24 AM ET | 05-23-2007

I have to agree with EB on the tone. You never want to make light of what is a very serious situation for some scared people.

You want to make me care? "Put" me in that refugee camp. Show me how the refugees are caught in a crossfire between Lebanese who don't want them and militants from the outside who use the camp as a shield.

Love the blog. Been watching this site for a while and glad to start hearing some audio.

Keep up the good work.

Sent by Kyle Majors | 2:54 AM ET | 05-23-2007

I cared already, but I didn't quite understand the "what" and "whys" of the situation in Lebanon. I enjoyed the podcast and the opportunity to learn more about important issues, but was distracted by the tick-tocking and had to listen to the episode several times to fully absorb the information. I hope to see more of these types of podcasts as they are an excellent chance for me to broaden my knowledge of world issues and because I care. Thank you.

Sent by Sarah Hernandez | 8:39 AM ET | 05-23-2007

He made me care. The clock left an impression on me. I thought Jesus, we have to be MADE TO CARE and his story is ONLY WORTH A MINUTE??? The clock ticking gave me the impression that he was being rushed and our society is only giving him a minute (not NPR but society) to cover this story, because evidently no one cares so we will give them a shot--1 minute!

However, i was not told how to care or get involved. I don't remember exactly what the atrocity was. But it left a dreary impression. I know the people and the region but i don't understand the conflict.

Sent by Jacob | 10:48 AM ET | 05-23-2007