I have sometimes talked about the way NPR uses what I consider to be over-gentle, linguistically pre-chewed forms of expression in its writing along with a story-time vocal style that combine to subconsciously infantilize the listener. I do not believe they are trying to infantilize us on purpose, it’s just the unintentional result of a lot of smaller style choices. In any case it’s one of the things that makes NPR so much more pleasant to listen to than the TV-news-standard stentorian delivery of someone like Andrea Mitchell. The closest NPR comes to this is Mara Liasson, who happens to moonlight on FOX TV News. (Or is NPR her moonlight job? Hard to tell.)
But advertisers are another story. Baby-talk modern company names are generated from pure cynicism. And I mean “baby talk” literally. Words like “mama” are common across cultures as the first sounds made by an infant, and in many languages they are used as parental names.
Listen more carefully next time you hear the national underwriting messages pronounced in Jessica Hansen’s lovely voice. You’ll hear “ooma.com“, “myemma.com“, and “moo.com“. They are practically baby-talk anagrams for one another. I’m waiting for “goo-goo-gaa-gaa.com.”
So, is it a coincidence that at least three “baby talk” companies advertise heavily on NPR? Or maybe there are just so many nonsense-word baby-talk companies now that you should expect a normal distribution to be clotted with them.
Google Inc. took its name from the number “googol,” a one followed by one hundred zeroes, which a mathematician allowed his young nephew to name. Google it!
NPR reporter Julia Simon had a story today that exemplifies the best and worst of public media.
She starts with an incredibly good question: all educated Americans know that the US gives mega money to Egypt annually, but what does that money actually buy?
In a very easy to understand narrative Simon takes us on a guided tour of what happens with this money. SPOILER ALERT! It never leaves the USA. It actually purchases a bunch of bloated, American-made cold-war weapons systems of which Egypt already has plenty. Best quote:
There’s no conceivable scenario in which they’d need all those tanks short of an alien invasion.
– Shana Marshall, Insert Relevant Institution Here
Simon then follows with specific examples of companies who lobby Washington to keep these purchases going.
So far so awesome. But then the story just ends. There is the requisite comment that this is just how things are and the inertia of existing programs is difficult to change etc. We’ll just have to leave it there.
Conventional wisdom achieved: the military industrial complex is what it is, sigh.
But there’s a giant Nile crocodile in the room that is utterly absent from this story of a corrupt developing country spending proxy billions of American taxpayer money on unnecessary American made weapons, isn’t there?
Oh wait! Corruption!
The subtext of the story for those actually paying attention is that someone, somewhere, is getting a lot of kickback for these deals. Probably a lot of someones. In fact a lack of corruption in this set-up would be so astonishing as to deserve its own mention.
But I guess that sort of exploration is for the kind of investigative reporting that either doesn’t exist much anymore or is too focussed on Anthony’s Wiener.
I’m so sick of all this Papal coverage, but I found this item of interest:
Supreme Deity “Has Concerns” With Newly Elected Pope
March 14, 2013 Vatican City
(AP) At His day-after-the-election news conference Thursday, The Lord of Hosts said He wants to meet with the newly elected Pope Francis I as part of a search for common ground on policy issues. Jehovah said He was eager to work with Vatican leaders and listen to “good ideas wherever they come from.” But He said He “has concerns” that it will not be easy to reach agreement on contentious issues.
The Lord of Lords has frequently been in conflict with previous occupants of the Vatican’s highest office on a wide variety of matters facing both the Vatican Curia and all of humanity for all of time. The new Vatican leader does not appear to be likely to change that disconnect in spite of conciliatory language from both sides.
The first question from reporters after the King of King’s initial statement concerned the issue of abortion, perhaps the most difficult area to find congruity between the parties. All previous Popes, as well as all priests and cardinals, including the former Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself, frequently and totally condemn all forms of abortion, while the Maker of Heaven and Earth continues to abort or miscarry an estimated 50% of all fertilized eggs globally, an activity He has engaged in for all of human history. God confirmed that He will continue this initiative and allow no interference from Vatican officials, saying He stands by His record of over twelve thousand billion so-called “spontaneous” abortions.
Anticipating a direct request from the newly chosen Pontiff, Jake Tapper of ABC News asked the Ultimate Power of the Universe if He would consider changing His stance on Earthquakes, adding “especially those which cause terrifying tsunamis that kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Your constituents.” Elohim replied that, as with rape, disease, and many volcanoes, Popes and other Vatican officials often pray for the victims of such events and circumstances but rarely proactively ask for their prevention. As a result The Lord “sees no reason to consider changing His policies” on any of these issues in the next fiscal year or, for that matter, all future time until the end of both the Universe and the very concept of time itself.
In what could be yet another sign of problems to come, Pope Francis broke with more socially active clergy during his time in Argentina. He failed to support the “Liberation Theology” movement as they attempted to improve conditions among the poor via direct aid and via calls for government action. Very God of Very God refers to Himself as a “Biblical Originalist” on the issue. “While poverty has proven to be a greater challenge than I anticipated when I called for its eradication over 2000 years ago, I still firmly believe we can, and indeed must, do everything in our power to bring an end to it.” Norm Ornstein, resident scholar at the pro-business American Enterprise Institute, speculated “if the omniscient and all-powerful Maker of All Things Seen and Unseen truly wanted to end poverty there’s a sense that He could do so very quickly.”
Even differences on something as seemingly uncontroversial as “the dignity of life” may cause strong divisions between the new Pope, who has frequently spoken in support of it, and God Almighty, whose record includes infinite varieties of hideous fetal mutations, flesh-eating bacteria, organ-liquefying hemorrhagic fevers, and continence-robbing brain injuries and diseases.
There are several areas of apparent agreement between the parties. On the questions of why bad things happen to good people and why Apple insists on changing the configuration of the iPhone recharger even though the old one was completely fine and now everyone has to buy a stupid adapter both parties replied in a joint statement that there would be “no comment at this time.”
My local public radio station played a piece from a PRX podcast called “99% Invisible” this weekend about the history of pneumatic tube delivery systems. It was quite interesting. Unfortunately it contained the following howler, uttered by producer Sam Greenspan:
If you think about the kind of technology that we were promised by something like Star Trek, we have just about all of it except the transporter.
Has this guy ever actually seen Star Trek?
If so, then I am really excited because I guess I missed the latest issue of Sky Mall, which I assume now features:
A real-time language translator that works from thought, and not just human thought, so it can translate alien languages it has never encountered.
Faster than light travel
Time travel via manipulation of faster than light travel
iPhone-sized communicators that can talk to orbiting spaceships…without requiring any cell towers or satellites.
Beds that can monitor all of your medical vitals with no probes or straps.
Hand held laser-style weapons that can stun or kill
Spaceship mounted laser-type weapons
Near infinite, powerful clean energy from crystals
Robots so much like humans you can’t tell the difference
And that’s really just the beginning of a complete list.
So, Sam, either you need to send me some “Buy Now” links for this stuff or you need to calm down your tech triumphalist hyperbole about our current, really quite lame state of technology compared to Star Trek’s actual implicit promises to the contrary.
The much more accurate and interesting point is the very opposite of Greenspan’s sentiment: very, very few of the things promised us by 20th Century sci-fi have come true. Why is that?
(Oh, and let’s not forget the greatest expectation the producers instilled that we in glorious 2015 have failed to invent: world peace.)
Speaking of “on a Friday”, what is it with local and national NPR hosts telling us, every few minutes, what day of the week it is? Is it because a lot of the listening audience resides in “memory care” apartments?
This happens enough that, sort of like the “give us a sense” style of interviewing, I am convinced it is some kind of “best practice” enforced by policy and not just a fad.
I’m no Pope Gregory XIII, but I am usually pretty on top of what day I’m having a case of or humping over or thanking God that it is. I’d like to humbly suggest that you guys go all the way and tell us the date. Try “it’s Fridy the 18th” instead of the truly useless “on a Friday, it’s Morning Edition” or “good Friday morning to you.”
Either that or add even more tautological information so we can all meditate on what it means to be told things we already think by the journalists we choose to listen to. “Here on Earth, just like yesterday, it’s Morning Edition.” “Reality is comprehensible by applying reason to the information detected with the human sensorium, and it’s All Things Considered.”
Speaking of days, does anyone inside NPR or out actually know what the hell “Weekends at All Things Considered ” means? I can’t parse it. What was wrong with Weekend Edition Saturday/Sunday? I smell a committee.
Just a brief item to note that the guys and ghouls at “Story Corpse” have again incremented their body count and the world’s collective misery. Today’s heart-soup immersion blender’s victim was canine, which at least shakes it up a little.
I think the producers over there dream of a day when every death of every beloved person, animal, or object with great sentimental value can make the whole world cry. These stories are, as we are constantly reminded, archived in the library of congress, so they can make the space aliens who’ll be sifting through the wreckage of our civilization in a few years cry too.
I can find one positive note: at least the pun-loving Keeper landed a job after the regrettable cancellation of Tales From the Crypt.
There was a pretty good piece by David Folkenflik today dissecting the press coverage of Notre Dame’s girlfriend-gate. At one point he spoke of the problem of how much the reporters wanted the story to be true (like the one about Saddam’s WMDs I suppose).
Let’s think about that statement. The reporters wanted a young, football-star-beloved woman to have died of cancer long before her time? That really helps me understand Story Gore’s morbid editorial bias.
I’ve noticed that journalists tellingly universally loathe the preachy, shallow character-filled Sorkin series “The Newsroom”. I love it. It’s almost like “Airbag Moments” the tv show. It takes the media to the woodshed weekly by doing what Folkenflik does, only in narrative form. It Monday-morning (“On a Monday…”) quarterbacks the news. It’s one big thought experiment about, knowing what we know now, how should the press have handled big events in recent history. Who else is even having this conversation in this way? The Daily Show last week even expressed a devout wish that the show depicted a journalistic drive that actually existed. In reality there isn’t enough money in profit-driven journalism for the logistics of investigative reporting about things less interesting but more important than gridiron paramour three-hankies.
The more vital question for reporters, I suppose, is whether or not the platonic ideal of reportage Sorkin tries to model would have made any real difference. What if the answer to that is no?
As punishment, anyone who reported about the Notre Dame story has to watch a “Love Story” / “Brian’s Song” double feature tonight. I’m assuming the Story Corps folks were already planning to because, you know, it’s Friday!
Speaking of unpleasant stories the media wants badly to be true, NPR loves the “Military Veterans Aren’t Getting The Support They Deserve and it’s the VA’s Fault” headline. I can’t recall a single positive NPR story about the Veterans Administration. I happen to know that the VA, especially the health care delivery side known as the VHA, not only delivers a lot of great care, but also delivers it in ways that are years and sometimes decades ahead of the private sector. Computerized patient record keeping is a powerful example of this. Given how many stories NPR does about the tragicomic struggles of the private sector with this technology you’d think they’d cover how the public sector already nailed it.
Something else the press usually misses is that a large number of VA employees are themselves, by mandate, for better and for worse, Veterans. This is especially true in the VBA, the branch that determines what benefits Veterans receive, and the recipient of the most frequent and bitter excoriations. By policy the VA hires some of these Veterans preferentially over non-Veterans who might be more qualified. (Not every Veteran is an angel straight from heaven, and that should not be a controversial sentiment.) So please be aware that when you criticize the VA you are criticizing a whole bunch of Veterans many of whom are working hard and some of whom are hardly working.
We can all agree that many Veterans do need and deserve more services than they are getting, but journalists need to stop acting like the reason is some faceless implacable bureaucracy. Like most things, it comes down to money and logistics (sound familiar?), not a lack of desire on the part of the VA to serve the Veterans.
On a local note: please keep in mind, NHPR, there are good economic reasons why there’s no full VA hospital in your state. Politicians and scoundrels love to talk about how much they care about Veterans, but forcing the VA to waste money on a facility that won’t have enough patients to stay in business or provide a full range of services does not serve the only constituencies that matter, Veterans and taxpayers. Between the Boston area, Maine, and Vermont, northern New England is as well served as makes economic sense. If you’re concerned about drive times, talk to Veterans who live in far flung towns in hypertrophied western states. This whole “New Hampshire needs a VA” thing is just political grandstanding and cap-feather acquisition. So in spite of your knee-jerk sentimentality and desire for the big bad VA narrative, please add some more balance to your coverage of this.
The following exchange took place yesterday in one of the infinite “two-way” reports spending one last night in bed with the still-warm body of Rick Santorum’s stillborn campaign:
SIEGEL: Speaking of his future, of course much depends on whether the Republicans win or lose the White House, but what is his future?
LIASSON: Well, he could be in a Romney Cabinet. He certainly will be a conservative social issue leader in the Republican Party. 2016, he could run again. He’ll have a heck of a lot of competition if [he] does that, though.
It’s really not hard to know what Santorum’s future is. It’s going to look a lot like his immediate pre-primary past. As Joshua Green put it in Bloomberg:
He did some lobbying, hooked up with a think tank, and sat on a few boards
Sound familiar? Basically being handed a bunch of money for his extraordinary ability to be Rick Santorum.
So what’s up, Mara? Do you not know this? Either you are extremely naive about what out of work politicians do or you think it isn’t interesting enough to just say it. Too true to be good.
But I find it extremely interesting that out of work politicians make a bunch of money simply for being out of work politicians. It’s a sickness at the heart of our politics, and I find it very, very worth discussing.
In fact I find it much more worth discussing than the questionable poll results you and your kind perseverate over daily.
But you, Mara, seem to be wed to the old school reportage. Make it exciting! Gin up a real fight! Make it about the contest. 2016!! You actually said it! I think you might be the first! Yay!
And today on Morning Edition you even fired the starter pistol on the race between Romney and Obama, characterizing it as completely evenly matched. How conveniently exciting for you and all your horse-race monger compatriots.
War is Peace! Ignorance is Strength! Everything is Equivalent!