Books: good; ‘battle axe’: bad

The NPR audience loves all things to do with words [View this email online]( [NPR Public Editor by Poynter's Kelly McBride]( A love of books is one of the many attributes that characterize the NPR audience. Book publicists clamor to get their authors into the NPR mix, whether it’s an interview on one of the magazine shows, on a podcast or with Terry Gross on Fresh Air. The annual NPR Book Concierge is the crown jewel of NPR’s books team. Given how influential NPR can be on consumer purchases, we thought it would be a good idea to take a long, hard look at the Concierge through the lens of diversity. After all, if NPR’s primary goal is to diversify its audience, then a signature product like the Book Concierge should live up to that standard. Public Editor Researcher Kayla Randall took a magnifying glass to the Book Concierge. She interviewed many of the hard-working editors, designers and producers who put the impressive project together. And she also reached out to publishing industry critics and advocates to get their takes. What she found was an impressive story of a years-long evolution of a very cool product that will help you find joy and intellectual growth. Read Kayla’s column [here](. [The 2020 NPR Book Concierge homepage]( NPR Book Concierge [NPR’s Book Concierge Is About Discovery And Diversity]( [Read the column]( 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](. ‘Battle axe’? Susan Sternberg [tweeted]( at us: Good combining of ageism & sexism, NPR @MorningEdition: describing a character as “battle axe.” Yeah, that word doesn’t hold up well in 2021, does it? Synonyms include “harpy,” “shrew,” “hag,” “scold” and — here’s one to expand your sexist vocab list — “fishwife.” Describing Jodie Foster’s character in the new movie [The Mauritanian]( as “a stern, battle-axe criminal defense lawyer,” as NPR's Sacha Pfeiffer did in the opening line of her interview with Foster on Feb. 11’s [Morning Edition]( makes me think that whoever wrote that copy was possibly confused about how that term is generally applied. It’s along the lines of something Archie Bunker would say, and it’s not a compliment. That ‘e’ on the end of the word makes it specifically feminine, generally used to describe tough old ladies, like the cruel and humiliating [Nurse Mildred Ratched]( in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Only Foster’s character in this movie is not a fictional one. In real life, [Nancy Hollander]( is a formidable defense attorney who has tackled [deeply unpopular work](. She’s exactly the kind of amazing professional you would want on your side if the American military and intelligence community was against you — more RBG than Cruella de Vil. Maybe we feminists should reclaim “battle axe” as our own. Until that happens, it’s probably best left on the shelf back in 1970. — Kelly McBride How to examine claims of bias Michael Heald writes: Request for reporting series on How to Evaluate Claims of [Reporting Bias]( Hello! Since not a day goes by that someone does not claim a news article is biased, I would appreciate a series from NPR on how to evaluate such claims and to discern when a reporter's/editor's beliefs actually become too prominent in a story. I'm not referring to "fake news" but real stories that might be reported in such a way that a particular slant of a story is emphasized, perhaps significantly. In the halcyon days of Walter Cronkite reporting, I think that most viewers felt that they could trust reporting from a single source. Right or left wing news outlets tended to be at the fringe — available but kept at a distance by many people. Now, it seems that the journalistic debate is not whether to keep reporter's and editor's opinions out of a piece, but that those opinions can reflect the search for "truth" and should be included. A prudent consumer of news should consult a number of different sources about any particular story in order to obtain a full spectrum of reporting. As a result, I would appreciate a series by NPR that examines claims of news bias and how a consumer can accurately evaluate such claims. Best regards. This is a great idea and we are toying with whether it’s doable. We have a lot of thoughts about bias. Your assertion that not a day goes by without a news article being called biased is correct. Our inbox is frequently flooded with messages from news consumers who accuse NPR of bias, many saying NPR is too far to the left, others saying it’s too far to the right, and some saying they felt a host overstepped boundaries with personal beliefs. Still others complain that NPR is too preoccupied with [bothsidesism](. But it’s hard to truly know what a host, reporter or editor believes unless unambiguously stated. Every journalist has biases, whether conscious or unconscious. So does every news consumer. We may not even perceive our own biases, which is another reason why newsroom diversity is so important: You can understand your own beliefs and potential biases better when you work, collaborate and speak with many people from many backgrounds. Journalism is about using the reporting and researching processes to get closer to the truth and be as accurate as possible. No story is perfect, but is it possible to discern when a reporter’s or editor’s beliefs are “too prominent in a story,” as you mention, and when it prevents them from being accurate and fair? That might be impossible just by looking at the finished product. When a story falls short, news consumers are going to doubt the information and perceive it as distorted. We can’t always tell from the outset why a story was incomplete. It usually takes an investigation. It’s also important to note that people tend to detect the bias they disagree with more than the bias they agree with. If someone agrees with a viewpoint or perspective, do they always notice it as a bias? As you suggested, wise consumers consult different sources to get a fuller picture. If we can think of a way to X-ray a piece of journalism and see the bias without further investigation, we are going to patent it and sell it. But seriously, we’ll let you and everyone else know if we think of a method. — Kayla Randall A historical coverup? Eugene Solot writes: This applies to all stories on the Capitol incursion. In every interview or story about the attack on the Capitol, you or the person being interviewed stated it was the first case of a violent attack on the Congress since the War of 1812 and never did anyone mention the 1954 attack by Puerto Rico Nationalists who fired automatic pistols from the gallery while Congress was in session, wounding 4 members of Congress who luckily survived, as some of the injuries [were] life threatening. If you did not know about it, that is inexcusable as it is common knowledge, but if you deliberately left it out because of Political Correctness, that is worse, a gross example of censoring the news. In either case you are misinforming the public. This phrase, “not since 1812” has been uttered several times on NPR air and podcasts. On Jan. 6, The NPR Politics Podcast host Susan Davis mentioned a [Capitol historian who told CNN]( that the last time the Capitol was breached was during the War of 1812. On [All Things Considered]( that same day, NPR Senior Political Editor/Correspondent Domenico Montanaro spoke of Cory Booker’s impassioned plea, during which the Democratic U.S. Senator from New Jersey said the last time there was an insurrection where people came into the Capitol the way they did on Jan. 6 was in the War of 1812. “[Not since the War of 1812]( have we seen rioters rush to the Capitol like this,” former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson told NPR’s Noel King on Morning Edition two days later. As the War of 1812 raged on, [invading British troops set fire to the U.S. Capitol](. We searched our database, and the few mentions we found in NPR stories of this event have been either of staff citing someone else or of an outside source, and are not entirely untrue. For example, when Jeh Johnson said “not since the War of 1812 have we seen rioters rush to the Capitol like this,” that is based on truth, because the Puerto Rican nationalists from 1954 you reference did not rush the building. The Capitol had [few security protocols]( at the time, and the group of four reportedly entered quietly, according to a House of Representatives oral history. For the record, NPR’s Throughline did highlight the 1954 attack by Puerto Rican nationalists on Congress, so it seems unlikely that NPR is engaged in a deliberate coverup of the event. You’re right in that what happened in 1954 was also violent. Five congressmen were shot. There have been other [violent attacks on the Capitol](. I reached out to Puerto Rico historian Israel Melendez Ayala, who is based in San Juan, for some insight into the 1954 attack. He told me violence was the common thread in both events. The motivation behind each was very different, he noted. “The reality, taking out ideals and opinions, is that a fight is a fight. Lolita Lebrón, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Irvin Rodríguez, Andres Figueroa [Cordero], they were nationalists. They were in favor of [the] independence of Puerto Rico for many reasons between the relations of the United States and Puerto Rico, which still today is questionable,” he said. “They did this action to show to the world that Puerto Rico was still a colony.” Another notable difference between both events is that three of the assailants in the 1954 attack were quickly detained, and the fourth was apprehended later that afternoon. Since the Jan. 6 riot, [the list of those charged]( has grown to more than 250 suspects, and five people died as a result. — 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. Songs of Remembrance More than 500,000 people have died from COVID-19 in the U.S., and [NPR is remembering]( some of them with the stories of their families and the music they loved. One recent [Songs of Remembrance]( tribute comes from Marissa Yingling, who lost her grandmother, Drema Ellen Slack. John Denver’s “Sunshine On My Shoulders” “was one of a handful of cheerful, heartfelt songs Gran constantly sang to loved ones.” The entire series is worth your time. Getting to know a few of those who’ve died through the deep bonds of music feels like an intimate gift. Songs of Remembrance is the best of NPR. — Kayla Randall A happy centennial [After the deaths of his father and brother in 1917 and 1918, Duncan Phillips found solace in art. His wife, Marjorie Phillips, was a painter. They opened The Phillips Collection in Washington, D.C., in 1921. They are pictured in the Main Gallery, circa 1920.]( The Phillips Collection MORNING EDITION [Happy Birthday To The Phillips Collection, America's First Museum Of Modern Art]( Personal stories foster connection in the deepest ways. NPR Special Correspondent Susan Stamberg provides her own with [this Morning Edition piece]( wishing The Phillips Collection a happy 100th birthday. She recalls being a newlywed and new to Washington in 1962, when on Sunday afternoons she’d walk with her husband, coffee and the paper, and sit on one of the Phillips’ brocade loveseats and look at a piece by Matisse or Manet. “It was like visiting a really rich uncle with fabulous taste, and a collector’s eye,” she said. Stamberg said she went to the museum after 9/11, believing in what founder Duncan Phillips also believed in: the healing power of art. In just five minutes of audio, the story touches on the idea of art as catharsis, and traverses time with a little past, a little present and a little future. — Kayla Randall One question We ask NPR journalists one question about how their work came together. How did you stay in touch with the survivors of The Capital Gazette mass shooting? By Amaris Castillo The first episode of a [new four-part Embedded series]( grabs listeners from the introduction: “There's this thing that happens in our country, this uniquely awful American thing,” host Kelly McEvers says. “It's become so common, I don't even have to say what it is for you to know what I'm talking about. I can just say where it happened.” Then comes a litany of news reports, in 20 seconds, alternating between the left speaker and the right: mass shootings throughout the United States. The tragedies become part of the news cycle, and survivors and the families of those killed are the ones left to heal. Nearly three years ago, a gunman [murdered]( five employees of [The Capital Gazette]( newspaper in Annapolis, Md. Embedded producer Chris Benderev spent more than two years following the surviving staff to bring NPR listeners a personal look into how they have had to adapt to their new lives, and what happens when those of us who are far from a tragedy continue to pay attention. Benderev told me he maintained steady contact with the staff of the Capital Gazette. “Certainly more than they bargained for, but they were gracious anyway,” he told me in an email. “We would talk by phone often, and sometimes text and email. Before the pandemic I was spending at least one day a week in their office in Annapolis, and often more.” Benderev said he has two goals through the series: The first is helping people understand more about how an attack like this changes people over the years that follow. The second goal, Benderev said, is that, by meeting the staff, and connecting with them, people who don’t follow media news will end up learning about the pressures local journalists everywhere are facing. “It struck me that many of the Capital Gazette staff constantly faced this tension between not wanting the world to only ask them about the shooting and also not wanting the world to completely forget and move on,” Benderev said. NPR takes us on an incredibly moving and heartbreaking path in the [first episode]( which brings the newspaper to life and what the staff was doing on June 28, 2018, before their lives changed forever. It’s an intimate portrait that could only be earned through trust between Benderev and his subjects. The second episode drops today. 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]