| | Here are a few quotes from the Public Editor's inbox that resonated with us. You can share your questions and concerns with us through the NPR Contact page. |
|
Who are those 19 Republicans? |
Joshua Nannestad writes: May I suggest that every story like this one, detailing the passage or failure of a piece of legislation in one chamber or the other, include a simple list of the yeas and nays? This story makes a point of 19 Republican senators voting yea but doesn't list or link the votes. … |
|
There was a hyperlink over the words “19 Republicans” that led to another NPR web story whose sole purpose was evident by the headline, “Here Are The Republicans Who Voted For The Infrastructure Bill In The Senate.” Toward the end of that story was a link to the Senate roll call. The original story by Congressional Correspondent Kelsey Snell has several links to other NPR stories, all intended to help readers who want to get more information find what they are looking for. I reached out to Saeed Ahmed, director of digital news, about the importance of understanding what the reader needs. “Our job is to provide service to our readers. And part of that is anticipating their obvious next question and answering it,” he told me in an email. “So, if we’re telling readers that the House has voted to impeach Trump again, their next obvious question is ‘Who are the lawmakers who voted?’ Then, if we’re doing a story about how there were some GOP lawmakers who voted to convict Trump, the next obvious question in the reader’s mind is ‘Well, are any of them up for reelection?’ ” Ahmed told me the example we are referring to in this instance falls into this camp. “If there are Republicans who cross the party line to vote for a mammoth Dem-led infrastructure bill, the audience will want to know who they are,” he said. However, NPR doesn’t load all of that information into a single story, like you have requested, because generally, according to Ahmed, what really resonates with most readers is a story with a very specific framing. — Amaris Castillo |
|
Did that information really come from the White House? |
Brian McCafferty writes: I just heard an hourly NPR News update. It reported on hospital capacity in Texas and the counterproductive decrees of the governors of Texas and Florida, then attributed to “the White House” reports of rising infections in those states. I don’t understand how “the White House” factors into this. If your intention is to frame this as a political dispute or “both sides” the issue this seems to be what you would do. As far as I can tell “the White House” is not where most news organizations are getting their information about the pandemic. … |
|
It looks like you’re referring to an afternoon newscast from Aug. 9 reported by Lakshmi Singh. Here’s the exact wording: “Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott has blocked mask mandates, arguing that is a personal choice, not one for the government. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is also barring mask mandates. Both states are among a handful, most of them in the South, that the White House said last week accounted for nearly half of all new COVID infections in the country recently.” We reached out to Robert Garcia, executive producer of NPR newscasts, with your comment. In an email, he said the White House holds nearly daily COVID-19 briefings, so when President Biden’s top medical advisers release pandemic-related information, “it seems completely appropriate to describe that information as coming from the ‘White House.’ ” He said the phrase attributing case numbers in the South to the White House came from these briefings. “In general — we try to be quite specific about the source of pandemic-related information and numbers, regularly citing Johns Hopkins University, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration as well as state health officials and local government officials,” Garcia said. “In retrospect, it would have been more accurate and specific to say ‘that the White House said last week in its daily COVID briefings…’ ” It’s common for journalists to attribute a piece of information to the White House when it comes from a president’s advisers or representatives. While the scientists who are advising the president are clearly gathering data from a number of places, they are also interpreting that information as they pass it along. Because of that interpretation, it’s more accurate to attribute the statements to the White House. There’s no hidden agenda. “One could argue it’s odd to attribute anything to a building, but I am fairly certain most listeners understand what is meant by phraseology that attributes news to ‘the White House’ — that it comes from individuals representing and speaking for the administration — in this case, medical professionals hired by the president to advise him on pandemic-related issues,” Garcia added. — Amaris Castillo and Kayla Randall |
|
The Public Editor spends a lot of time examining moments where NPR fell short. Yet we also learn a lot about NPR by looking at work that we find to be compelling and excellent journalism. Here we share a line or two about the pieces where NPR shines. |
|
A friendly question and answer |
We love to see a wholesome exchange on Twitter — especially when it intersects with our work. Tucker Cholvin tweeted at reporter Andrew Limbong (and tagged our office as well) to ask a friendly question: “What are NPR’s guidelines on referring to subjects of a story by their first name? I feel as though tonight’s All Things Considered story on Britney Spears’ conservatorship referred to her a lot as ‘Britney’ while others are given with full names.” As a word nerd, and journalist who lauds copy editing, I appreciate this question. And I appreciate the transparent response from Limbong, too: “Fair! Kinda tricky since it’d usually just be last names on second reference, but since Britney and James have the same last name I just played it by ear to be clear who I was talking about.” To conclude, Cholvin replied, “Thanks! Appreciate the clarification. Keep up the good reporting!” Cheers to more interactions like this, with friendly journalism questions and friendly journalist answers. — Kayla Randall |
|
| | The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo and Kayla Randall make this newsletter possible. Illustrations are by Carlos Carmonamedina. We are still reading all of your messages on Facebook, Twitter and from our inbox. As always, keep them coming. Kelly McBride NPR Public Editor Chair, Craig Newmark Center for Ethics & Leadership at the Poynter Institute |
Kelly McBride, Public Editor |
| | Amaris Castillo, Poynter Institute |
|
|
|
The Public Editor stands as a source of independent accountability. Created by NPR's board of directors, the Public Editor serves as a bridge between the newsroom and the audience, striving to both listen to the audience's concerns and explain the newsroom's work and ambitions. The office ensures NPR remains steadfast in its mission to present fair, accurate and comprehensive information in service of democracy. Read more from the NPR Public Editor, contact us, or follow us on Twitter. |
|
| | | | You received this message because you're subscribed to Public Editor emails. This email was sent by National Public Radio, Inc., 1111 North Capitol Street NE, Washington, DC 20002
Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy | | | |
|
|
| | |
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire
Thank you to leave a comment on my site