When the news is obscene

Journalists anticipate how to help the audience hear the profane [View this email online]( [NPR Public Editor by Poynter's Kelly McBride]( There was a lot of cussing on NPR’s airwaves last week during the live coverage of the Senate impeachment trial. That’s because the prosecution used a fair amount of video documentation of the insurrection, which included violence and screaming profanity. If you tuned into the coverage expecting to hear the usual NPR programming, you might have thought, “What the hell is this?” And if you were listening all along and you heard a host break in to explain what it was, you might have thought, “Don’t patronize me.” We heard more from the latter camp. “I can handle hearing [obscenities], it’s news,” Micheline Maynard [tweeted]( at us. Listener John Voldal wrote in to say the host break-ins felt like censorship, and prompted him to turn off the coverage. This divide between what a news consumer wants from the news coverage and what she gets is at the heart of the relationship between audience and newsroom. That relationship stays strong when journalists can anticipate what the vast majority of the audience wants, and then deliver. Sometimes you have to choose one part of the audience over the other. Whenever NPR broke into coverage, you were hearing it prioritize those who would be shocked or confused over those who would be annoyed. We explore another case of audience expectations vs. journalist intentions below. It’s a perpetual dance. [The Senate voted 57-43 Saturday to acquit former President Donald Trump during his second impeachment trial.]( The Senate voted 57-43 Saturday to acquit former President Donald Trump during his second impeachment trial. Handout/Getty Images From the Inbox 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](. One-sided documentary on Middle East process Peter Crownfield writes: Is telling only one side of the story becoming the 'new normal' for Fresh Air? This show was known for questioning that brought out the truth. It's very troubling and disappointing to see NPR present one-sided views like [this show [Jan. 26]](. You can't pretend Dennis Ross is objective about Israel / Palestine — he's a self-described advocate for Israel. Any objective look at Israel sees it as an apartheid state, and its brutal genocide of Palestinians is one of the worst human rights abuses in the world today. No longer on my list of deep, truth-telling shows. Your disappointment is a perfect illustration of the gap between a news consumer’s expectations and a journalist’s intentions. You were looking for an accurate and complete description of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Fresh Air is a long-form, interview-format show that provides extensive conversations with one or two individuals. This particular episode was a deep dive into a documentary, The Human Factor, about the role of American diplomats mediating the negotiations during a specific time period. So there is a mismatch between what you wanted and what Fresh Air does. That said, even a show like Fresh Air has an obligation to anticipate the needs of a consumer like you. So I reached out to Dave Davies of WHYY in Philadelphia, home to Fresh Air. He hosted the episode you heard. I asked him about his process of preparing for the interview and what he hoped to accomplish. One of the first things he said in his email was that if he was looking to do a comprehensive report on the Middle East peace process, he would not have selected filmmaker Dror Moreh, who describes himself as a member of the Israeli left who wants to see the creation of a Palestinian state. “We felt Moreh’s record as a documentarian and Dennis Ross’s history as a diplomat through four presidential administrations made them credible voices on the subject explored in the film, though of course there are other valid points of view,” he said. “Not every show can cover every perspective.” In preparing for an interview, Davies said he strives to develop questions that allow the interview subjects to tell a compelling story while keeping in mind the many points of view that are not represented. In this particular case, he asked Ross, the diplomat you identify as pro-Israel, how the negotiations might have progressed had the team not been predominantly Jewish themselves. And he also asked the director whether the film would have benefited from a Palestinian perspective. However, Davies said the answer to that second question was cut from the broadcast for time. While the show has a policy of not releasing material it doesn’t air, it’s safe to assume that the answer didn’t offer much for the audience. In addition to being aware of the host’s responsibility to represent alternative perspectives through his questions, Davies said that Fresh Air is committed to providing a full range of perspectives over time, even for an issue as complicated as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I hope you find that to be true. — Kelly McBride Which president gets ‘former’ added to his title? Paul Fisher writes: I have noticed that of all the former Presidents you mention, only President Trump is referenced as ‘former President Trump’. Obama isn’t, Bush isn’t and Clinton isn’t. It is customary to call the POTUS President. Even the [Huffington Post]( agrees. Two forces are at play here: formal style and the needs of the news consumer. The formal style that NPR follows instructs journalists to refer to a past president as “former.” But if you’re talking about President Abraham Lincoln or President John F. Kennedy (see what we did there?), there’s no chance the audience will be confused about who is the current president. So the word “former” gets applied to living ex-presidents. That said, there are plenty of examples in which NPR refers to previous presidents [Obama]( [Bush]( and [Clinton]( as “former,” [just as it has]( for former President Trump. There are also examples in which stories eschew the “former” title, and that use both “former president” and “president.” [During this November interview with Obama]( heard on All Things Considered, NPR’s Michel Martin addresses him as “Mr. President,” which makes sense. You wouldn’t necessarily say “Mr. former President.” But Host Ari Shapiro also sets up the conversation by referring to him as “President Obama,” then ends it referring to him as “former President Barack Obama.” [This headline]( for a review of his book from a few days before the interview refers to him as “Former President Obama.” Style preferences shift and evolve over time; journalist personnel changes and so do guidelines. The modifier of “former” is most useful to news consumers during the time period when the country is transitioning from one president to another, like now. It’s even more important when a group of politicians and citizens are disputing who is the legitimately elected president. Right now, it’s customary for major media outlets to call former presidents “former.” But again, you may find examples throughout the years that say otherwise — you won’t find perfect consistency anywhere humans are involved. — Kayla Randall Should NPR ignore Fox News? David Elsea writes: What news value does [repeating a Fox News interview]( have? A good news organization tries to anticipate audience questions and answer them. “How is Trump reacting to the Senate trial?” was a reasonable question that many were asking. By summarizing the interview that Fox News’ America Reports conducted with Trump adviser Jason Miller, NPR was able to impart some insight on that question. This is not to say that everything, or even most things, on Fox News are of value to the NPR audience. The network has played a role in amplifying misinformation, from the debate over former President Obama’s [birth certificate]( to [doubting the severity of the pandemic](. Most recently, as NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik [reported earlier this month]( the cable news giant canceled Lou Dobbs’s show a day after a voting-tech company’s $2.7 billion lawsuit alleging Fox participated in a conspiracy to spread lies about its involvement in election fraud. Does that mean that everything that happens on Fox should be avoided? I reached out to Folkenflik about this. He regularly covers shifts affecting the news industry, the relationship between the press, politicians and the general public, and more. “It’s a tiny tile in a much larger mosaic being constructed by NPR to cover the Senate impeachment trial for the former president,” Folkenflik said of the digital story, which he described as modest. “And in the absence of the (former) president himself speaking to this process about his conduct and the very serious accusations he faces, they are trying to reflect this surrogate, what he’s saying.” I asked Folkenflik why it’s important for a news organization like NPR to monitor what Fox News does and bring that information into NPR’s reports. “Fox News has been one of the most influential outlets during the Trump years, imaginable. It has often served as a cheerleader for Trump, a conduit of his thinking, and a place where people on the air in real time advise the former president,” he said. “The very nature of its coverage, which has been among the most sympathetic possible in its most popular programs, affects the public’s understanding of what’s happening, at times often to the great detriment of our ability to process the events that occurred.” Monitoring what happens at Fox News is important to understand what the cable news TV channel is going through as it moves forward into this post-Trump era, Folkenflik added. “People talk to all kinds of outlets all the time, from Democracy Now! to Breitbart, and Fox News is a key player in our media ecosystem and eco chamber — whatever you think of it,” he said. “I’m sure not going to ignore it even if it makes someone uncomfortable.” The Fox interview with Miller was one of the few on-the-record sources about the state of affairs in the Trump camp. At that moment, it was newsworthy. — Amaris Castillo Spotlight On 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. Collaboration: Insight from a kids’ author and illustrator [Milo Imagines the World cover]( G.P. Putnam's Sons WEEKEND EDITION SUNDAY [A Boy Named 'Milo' Reminds Us To Choose Imagination Over Impressions]( Last Stop on Market Street is one of my favorite children’s books to read to my toddler son. This weekend I was delighted to hear Newbery Medal-winning author Matt de la Peña and Caldecott Honoree illustrator Christian Robinson on [Weekend Edition Sunday](. For this latest installment of NPR’s special series Picture This — in which authors of children’s books converse with the artists who illustrate them — de la Peña and Robinson shared the story behind their third book together, titled [Milo Imagines the World](. The book follows a young boy who, while on a long subway ride with his older sister to visit their incarcerated mother, studies the faces around him and creates pictures of their lives through his imagination. Milo’s story was partly inspired by Robinson’s own experience. Upon finishing the collaboration, de la Peña said he realized that the book’s purpose is to dismantle the concept of stereotypes. At the tail end of such a heavy news week, this rich conversation was a bright light, and it’s the kind of weekend content I have come to expect and appreciate from NPR. Listeners were given a glimpse into the synergy between a writer and artist — a window into their process that one isn’t afforded in the actual book. — Amaris Castillo Mardi Gras, pandemic edition [The "Birds of Bulbancha" house float made by the Krewe of Red Beans in New Orleans.]( Phoebe Jones/WWNO MORNING EDITION [In A Year Without Parades, Mardi Gras In New Orleans Is All About House Floats]( The pandemic canceled this year’s grand tradition of Mardi Gras parades in New Orleans. But residents of the city have come up with a COVID-safe alternative by decorating their homes as if they were glorious floats. [This Morning Edition story]( from WWNO reporter Aubri Juhasz and photographer Phoebe Jones, features accounts from those who decked out their houses, and stunning photos that capture the joy of Mardi Gras — only this year, the joy is on the front porch. The piece is a rich slice of local life, a tale of resilience and solidarity showing that no matter what, people will find ways to celebrate what is sacred. — Kayla Randall The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo and Kayla Randall make this newsletter possible. 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 Kayla Randall, NPR 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]( [NPR logo]