|
Media Matters
Sept. 13, 2002
9/11/02: Did NPR Get The 'Tone' Right?
By Jeffrey A. Dvorkin
Ombudsman
National Public Radio
Radio is about a lot of things: accuracy, timely information, an ability to delight and surprise the listener through sound and voice. It's also about an elusive and subjective quality called "tone."
Tone is about giving the listeners the right mood and emotion. It means using language that is appropriate to the subject. It is also finding the right sounds that accurately convey the mood of the story and of the event overall.
On Sept. 11, 2001, NPR did an extraordinary job in providing Americans with a sense of the shock of the event and the grandeur of the national response to a unique national calamity. Using music and poetry, NPR connected to its listeners in a remarkable and "radiophonic" way. Millions of people were deeply moved by the power of the human voice to connect. And thousands wrote to tell us precisely that.
A Year Later
On Sept. 11, 2002, NPR also launched a remarkable day of programming, starting early in the morning, taking in events and broadcasting them live around the country. NPR spoke with many people in public life, as well as private citizens, to take note of the events and their impact on their lives and the life of the country.
Among the many heart-wrenching elements to the day was "A September Story," another edition of the Sonic Memorial Project supported by NPR's series called Lost And Found Sound. It was a collection of voice mail messages left by people on hijacked planes or from offices in the World Trade Center buildings.
The day ended with music and spoken word from around the country. It was a day
that -- once again -- left many listeners stirred and comforted.
Changing the Tone
But unlike a year ago, there were some who said NPR had missed the mark when it unexpectedly changed the tone of the program. Particularly when it came to the reading of the names of the dead in New York.
After a few seconds of listening to the names, a discussion between Neal Conan and Daniel Schorr resumed. That provoked an outpouring of e-mails -- more than 600 of them. Enough to tell NPR that we had annoyed a lot of listeners. This letter was typical:
Dear NPR,
I have been listening to the coverage of 9/11 and am extremely disappointed with your voiceover commentary of the on-site reading of the names of the victims. This is what 9/11 is about, and we listeners are not so unfocused as to need commentary or enhancement as in other news events. All radio/TV media are also doing this.
Shame on you for spoiling the tribute to this horrific occasion.
Sincerely,
Jo Reynolds
The reading of the names took more than two hours. No other broadcaster except for
C-SPAN gave its programs over to the recitation of the names. But those who wrote and called felt that NPR should have done just that. In an entire day of programming, two hours seemed like a small and possible gesture.
Good Radio or Good Public Service?
As a former radio producer, I couldn't imagine giving over a program to a recitation of names. It would have seemed an abrogation of my responsibility to report the news or to make a program.
A boss and colleague (his voice still rings in my ears) once reminded us that we were broadcasters, not megaphones. He meant that the radio is just electronics without journalists and commentators -- an attitude that seems somewhat arrogant today.
But would some radio silence on the part of journalists and commentators be considered a disservice? The listeners said they were expecting to hear a memorial service on the radio. Instead they got a radio program in which their expectations of closure were unfulfilled. Radio journalists and radio program makers need to appreciate the value of silence as much as they value intelligent talk.
Dear listeners, I think NPR did the right thing in this case. Radio, unmediated by journalism has its place, but this was not it. Other ceremonies at the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania were going on simultaneously. Choices had to be made about what to air and when to air them.
It was a tough call for the producers that day. But that's of little comfort to many listeners.
Should a similar dilemma present itself in the future (let's hope not), NPR might think of giving longer stretches of time to the audio alone so that people do have that needed opportunity for reflection.
The other possibility is putting it on the Web site where people can listen at their leisure.
'We Interrupt This Symphony...'
Other criticism came for yet another interruption: an evening performance of Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" was marred for some by chat between hosts before the music ended.
Listeners wrote to say that NPR had changed the mood (tone) for them.
And two errors in news reports were pointed out:
• NPR referred to the remembrance ceremony in London as taking place in Westminster Cathedral -- a Roman Catholic institution. In fact, it was held at St. Paul's Cathedral -- an Anglican institution.
• And NPR referred to Ellis Island as the place where immigrants first came to America. An eagle-eared listener asks, "Has NPR forgotten about Plymouth Rock?" (Not to mention Jamestown, which was founded in 1607 -- 13 years before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.)
But overall, NPR still did a remarkable job at conveying the intensity of the day without pushing the audience into awkward emotional places. That's called maintaining the right tone:
I woke up this morning not wanting to participate in the media memorializations but (out of habit) turned to NPR. Listening to the thoughtful and moving coverage allowed me to meaningfully reflect on the defining public event of my life. Like those late nights after 9/11, NPR continues to provide a lifeline to my world community. Thank you for reporting with diligence, care and insight.
Anne Demo
Nashville, Tennessee
Listeners may contact me at 202-513-3246 or at ombudsman@npr.org.
Jeffrey Dvorkin
NPR Ombudsman
|
