|
Media Matters
March 28, 2003
When Will NPR "Resume Normal Programming"?
By Jeffrey A. Dvorkin
Ombudsman
National Public Radio
We seem to be an impatient people. Some listeners are apparently anxious to know when the war in Iraq will be behind us.
Jazmyn McDonald asks NPR to go back to its previous programming and reporting:
Please: Live up to your reputation for insightful, in depth and broad
coverage. If I want round the clock headlines, I can go to the competition. What I count on from NPR is thoughtful intelligence, that allows your listeners to live our lives from a reasonably aware perspective.
And from Brian Metcalf:
For over 20 years I have relied on NPR to do what no other news service does: provide a balanced and well thought-out analysis of events in our world. That approach requires a careful and complete analysis of the many aspects of an event. Therefore, it requires sufficient time for small events to mature and take some kind of real shape. You are not allowing that process to occur by giving nonstop coverage of the war against Iraq. Please go back to your regular programming until there is something of substance to report.
And from Dan Raas:
Enough constant war coverage. You're neither Fox nor CNN, and shouldn't pretend or aspire to be. What's the Congress doing about the budget, judicial nominees, Medicare, or almost anything? What's going on in the states and cities that is not war related? What happened to your environmental coverage? Where did your human interest stories go? The war can be covered without sacrificing everything else. Incessant war reportage desensitizes and de-emphasizes the other important things, and preempts wider coverage of the rest of the world.
These are only a few of many, many e-mails like these -- serious e-mails from longtime listeners. But the short answer for those who ask when will NPR resume "normal," (aka pre-Iraq) programming is, possibly not for a while -- if ever. In fact, it is likely that programming really ended on Sept. 11, 2001.
Preparing Listeners and Journalists for What's To Come
Part of this may be our own fault as journalists. Even though NPR has devoted a considerable amount of time over the past six months -- and longer -- to a careful explanation of the lead-up and the causes of this war, many listeners still want NPR to go back to its pre-war programming fare. Perhaps NPR was remiss in not helping the listeners understand that it may be difficult -- even impossible -- to go back... that we may be in a new era of international politics, and journalism will have to follow.
Journalists, too, may need to pace themselves for what may be a long haul. It's worth remembering that the Gulf War in 1991 lasted for 41 days. The military aspect of the reporting was followed by at least six months of aftermath and follow-up. We should expect no less this time.
These listeners who want the coverage to stop aren't simply in denial, in my opinion. In fact they are telling NPR that while the war remains the most important story, it won't be the only one, especially in the days after hostilities cease.
While there are some listeners who may indeed be in denial, it would be too easy to dismiss their concerns. There is no question that the war -- and the coverage -- has made many listeners anxious -- but this story will not go away, even if and when NPR "resumes normal programming."
NPR's Role in Wartime
These listeners raise important questions about how journalism in general and NPR in particular should do its programming and its journalism in wartime. If the duty of journalism is to remain skeptical, how does this continue in wartime?
Journalism likes a good story. It looks for tension and conflict and looks for ways to report that. Journalism likes to consider the presentation of sides as "evenhanded" or "balanced" reporting. For the most part it is -- in normal times. But these times may no longer be normal.
Some questions arise about how NPR will do its journalistic duty over the coming months:
• How can NPR present both sides -- the American and the Iraqi positions fairly?
• How should NPR report the pro- and anti-war factions at home?
• Will tough reporting on domestic politics be seen to be "unpatriotic"?
• How should NPR continue to report from the war front, without appearing to trivialize what else is going on at home and abroad?
Looking back at Sept. 11, 2001, it seemed easier then: It was a moment of national and journalistic consensus about the event. If my e-mail is any indication, the war in Iraq has brought many of the long-held contradictions and tensions among the press, the political elites and the people into sharp relief.
This war will be a challenge for all media -- including NPR. There will be efforts to make the journalism tamer under the guise of a patriotic appeal. Others will push NPR to be more openly hostile to the conduct of the war.
Journalism 'As Usual'?
Journalists have a duty to resist official spin and partisan pressures. But a free press must "serve the governed, not the governors," wrote Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black. Wartime will undoubtedly put extra demands on the ability of a free press to function as before. Journalists must be ready to make some very difficult choices.
To quote our colleagues at the Freedom Forum:
If the war goes well, the White House need not fear for a well-informed citizenry.
If not, Americans will demand to know why. Either way, journalists will best serve the national interest by maintaining a patriotic skepticism.
A return to "normal programming" seems unlikely and even inappropriate for a while.
At some point we need to hear again the sound-rich features and cultural stories that are NPR's hallmarks. But finding a place for solid domestic and investigative reporting is more important than ever. That may be the best -- and the closest -- NPR can or should come to "resuming normal programming."
Listeners may contact me at 202-513-3246 or at ombudsman@npr.org.
Jeffrey Dvorkin
NPR Ombudsman
|
