We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, May 27. 2014
Their appeal is their substantive content, not their political messaging. When it comes to news or politics, just mute the radio or skip the article to protect the heart from sudden, dangerous blood pressure rises. They each still have lots of other interesting stuff for the enjoyment of the effete and the elite like us Yankee rednecks.
Do I feel that NPR or PBS should exist? No, not unless entirely listener- or other-sponsored.
Way I think about it, Maggie's Farm has interesting stuff too, besides politics.
Posted by Bird Dog in The Culture, "Culture," Pop Culture and Recreation at 15:58 | Comments (18) | Trackbacks (0)
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I have seldom found NPR to be interesting, regardless of political message. To me it is patronizing and often trite.
Maggie's is never that way, except about the rhubarb. I like strawberry rhubarb pie.
Of course you're right - about Maggie's. The more I think about it, Maggie's is sort of like an NPR for conservative/libertarians on the web because of its eclectic mix of topics that has a little for everyone.
One of the things that I like about Maggie's is that there are BD travelogues, recipes, lectionary, art, and any manner of stuff along with the politics. It's unlike any site I know about. It's very refreshing in its makeup. You are to be commended, BD!! I've loved it since explored it several years ago after reading about the SR-71 mission over Libya.
We read the New Yorker at this point mostly for the cartoons, and maybe we read half of the articles and stories. I have been a subscriber for 45 years. The rag can be offensive and profane these days, but where else is can one see the brilliance of Roz Chast or William Hamilton?
I seldom read anything but the excellent cartoons in the New Yorker. In waiting rooms.
My wife listens to NPR as she does the dishes every evening. She also likes the weekend midday game/humor shows. (And they do have PJ O'Rourke at times, so there's that.) I close the door so that I can be on the computer without distraction, but I hear bits of it. One can tell that they try very hard to be objective and look for alternative POV's, but they just don't know how. They tell the news by anecdote, which is great for getting your bias across but bad for truth. They simply just don't get that. They think that "human interest" is superior to "running the numbers." They cannot step outside and look at themselves. Nice people, but it isn't in them. They are so fully immersed in their Arts & Humanities Tribe culture that they cannot see outside it.
Notice that the games measure intelligence in terms of whether one is up on current events. It is a dead giveaway that they still fall prey to the liberal bias toward being socially "with it." Theirs is the better version than the cool kids in high school, but it's the same phenomenon fast-forward twenty years.
I will give "Marketplace" credit for embracing the idea that prosperity is a good thing for any nation and group. They still have listeners who think we should not only be above such things, but actively disdain them.
It's a start.
When I was doing the daily commute, NPR was much easier on the ears than the usual yuck, yuck, drive time. Also never hurts to hear what the other side finds interesting.
Now I listen because I can get my jazz fix and they seem to be the only radio station that does local reporting. They don't do the local high school scores but got the Saturday news paper for that.
I listen to NPR too, mainly on the weekends when AM talk is slow. They have some interesting shows, and some things I'm interested in that I otherwise may not hear about. They use to have some shows that I don't hear anymore, like cooking and a jazz show with a live piano. Rick Steves is good, and so is the puzzle show on Sundays. Car Talk is a classic, but I'd bet the farm that they're classic libs.
What I can't stand is the subdued vocal fry that is apparently a job requirement. Or the hipster, quasi-hip hop bumper music. There biggest problem is that everything they talk about, from food to news to puzzles, has the subtle implication that they know what is best for us, and if we just realize that then we will be better for it. I think it's called uppity.
Yes. Yes. I was just commenting on the expansiveness of your blog to several people over the weekend. I like this community. Thank you.
Their appeal is their substantive content, not their political messaging.
No, no, no.
Let's try it this way:
How can you trust ANY of their content after seeing how inaccurate-to-venally-dishonest their political reporting is?
A parallel anecdote:
When I first moved overseas, I listened to the BBC for exactly the reasons you describe - knowing full well that they had gotten MY little corner of the world (mideast) hopelessly wrong.
Then I was sent by employers to other corners of the world - and found that they were getting THOSE places and stories wrong, as well.
... it's a cliche that for lefties, everything is ultimately political. But it's a cliche that's true - being "progressive" is an all-encompassing, self-referential weltanshauung that only traumatic events (such as 9-11) can crack/dislodge.
It's a set of perspectives that, like spectacles, color everything the journalist reports, and everything an editor edits.
... and the more you expose yourself to it, the more it seeps into your own moral values, social norms, and cultural tastes.
NPR is okay, until they release the Kraken nutjobs.
Their vocal tone is far easier than the normal DJ, can be topical, and informative, if you filter out the progressive snipes.
Its one of the reasons why we went Siruis\XM - limited commercials, better content, and they have an Old Time Radio station that plays good stuff. Even listening to the very old commercials is entertaining.
Plus, their sports can't be beat - even the baseball feeds are good. Like sitting on Grandpa's back porch, munching popcorn, listening to the Pirates on the small transistor radio, with the citronella candle burning.
Yep, I am THAT old....
I stopped listening to NPR news back in the 80s. I voted third party during the Reagan years. I noted while listening to a news report during election time that the tone of the female NPR radio person was dripping with scorn towards Reagan. I decided that when my choice was "none of the above," I didn't need to listen to a partisan news source, especially when a partisan news choice of the opposing view wasn't readily available. [I didn't know about Rush.]
AVI has a good point about anecdotes versus numbers in news. A news source will invariably choose anecdotal news that supports its POV. But numbers- such as reporting on the "shovel-ready projects" of the Stimulus Package- have the potential to disrupt the lib/prog narrative. So no numbers.
Yes, stop government funding of NPR.
I used to listen - and occasionally contribute- to a local station that carried NPR news. I just stopped listening to the news. It had outstanding local DJs that played an enchanting mix of classical, jazz, and American roots [call it what you will] music. Over the years it dropped the local DJs in favor of carrying national shows. I stopped listening.[As I had accumulated hundreds of CDs @ $1-2/CD, I no longer needed the radio for music.]
For current events knowledge, I download web articles of some length to read on my e-reader, which is easier on the eyes than a computer screen. It turns out that a significant proportion of the articles I download are from The New Yorker.
We stopped supporting NPR after 9/11. My husband will still tune in for the "free classical music," as he calls it, but I won't have it on for any reason whatever. I dislike their bias, their tone which seemingly contrives to be erudite yet stoned, their unfunny and I cute programming. I never thought Garrison Keillor was the least bit amusing, even before he turned into a hater.
What I dislike even more, however, are NPR's acolytes among my friends, who quote it so very reverentially and who so obviously believe themselves the most informed and enlightened people on earth.
I used to love NPR. One day a few years ago I heard them do a story which criticized the Republicans for negative political ads in a presidential election. I realized at that moment that they would NEVER and I mean NEVER run a story criticizing the Democrats using negative ads in an election. Sometimes their bias is subtle, but it's there if you pay attention. No more donations from me.
Same here: used to listen then realized there was no way for another POV to permeate their programming. Now, I can't stand the whiney thing. Thanks to Jack Walter for pointing out the "subdued vocal fry" gosh that's so irritating! Thanks also to Fred Z for directing me to the Sirius radio possibility--great idea I am going to try free one month trial. Out here the NPR station is the only opportunity for any civilized music. HOWEVER, in their desire to please all market niches, the one hour beginning at 4:00PM (commute hour in town) is set aside for the program for children under 8 years of age--the "little green boat". Ironically I can't help but think that most commuters during the 4-5 hour probably aren't much more intelligent than the "Little Green Boat" crowd. We have two university towns here so the FM radios are pretty much--well you know. . .
Someone whose name I can't recall used the term "narcoleptic condescension" for the unmistakable NPR vocal tone.
Hmm. Seems several here have fallen into Michael Crichton's "Gell Mann Amnesia Effect"