Most Active Stories
Listeners share their views
Fri February 17, 2012
Friday Feedback for February 17, 2012
This is an expanded version of Friday Feedback that aired February 17th. Listener Sonja wrote:
My husband and I will become members as soon as your management starts downplaying the panhandling and pomposity.
Constantly interrupting great shows with your pleas for a handout, or pretending that you had a hand in producing NPR shows by telling listeners what they will be hearing next on "All Things Considered", for example (which is just another excuse for you to beg again for money), just makes the station seem overly self-congratulatory and amateurish at best, and annoyingly desperate at worse (you really might get more members if you weren't so obnoxious about asking for money). You should stop calling yourself "Radio with Vision" until you actually get a vision that goes beyond your bottom line.
PS: Omitting the "point" in "91.3" just accentuates the elitist posture--including "point" is standard form and good enough for the rest of the world.
A brief clarification: while we do pre-empt some network segments during our twice-yearly member drives, for the rest of the year the announcements Sonja refers to occur only at times NPR deliberately sets aside for station announcements. No NPR programming is being pre-empted.
Listener Raleigh Duttweiler wrote:
My husband and I recently moved to the area from New York City, and I am overjoyed to find that you air the Diane Rehm show. It's a public radio gem, with a brilliant reporter hosting a balanced panel, constantly challenging our assumptions, and proffering discussions in our car that we wouldn't have without that extra push. It's a show that makes us think, question our previously held beliefs, and either modify or defend them in a fact-based way - and that intellectual growth is why we listen to NPR. I gather the show is new here and not yet beloved - and I've heard that before, the left accusing her of giving conservative pundits too much time, the right lambasting the show as left-leaning - and in my book, that means it's probably a balanced show. Give it time, it's one of the best shows out there.
Listener Andrew wrote:
I have been listening to your station since September of last year. I have found that the stereotype of national public radio being a liberal fireside chat is true, but thankfully, there is concise reporting and excellent music. Your pieces on the mortgage crisis and car dealers charging poor people exorbitant rates on auto loans misses or ignores an important point - that these are adults choosing to live outside their means and choosing to mismanage their money. When you use regulation to clean up after adults you simply increase their long term dependence and fail to allow them to take ownership of their failures and grow from them. You devalue the hard work and diligence of people that make mature decisions. You succeed brilliantly, however, in feeling good about yourself which, I feel, is the underlying motivation of liberalism as a whole.
When I was a naive, bright eyed freshman in college, I got taken in by a phony magazine subscription scam and lost quite a bit of money. But I learned to read the fine print, do research and not buy into things that seem to good to be true. I learned, in other words. This and other experiences were painful but I am all the more informed and a better prepared adult. I am glad that some paternal government did not swoop in and save me.
I remain a loyal, sporadically aggravated listener… Thank you being willing to air criticisms and opposing viewpoints.
I wrote to Andrew and recommended an NPR story on how a group of brave Chinese farmers defied the Cultural Revolution and instituted entrepreneurship. Their comments on the debilitating psychology of socialism were scathing – and not something that some people expect to hear on NPR.
Paul Reinmann wrote:
Keep up the great work! I appreciate your invitation for feedback. I also enjoy listening to the feedback each week, as I catch it. My feedback on Feedback is for you to always weigh the responses and keep in mind that only those responding have certain (their own) concerns in mind. ((Mine inclusive)) Please consider this small, but vocal, input when you consider programming changes.
PS. We support you all the way, appreciating what you do with so little funding, while at the same time producing a great listening experience.
And PSS. I heard a recent comment about the Diane Rehm show being biased. Hmmm, I see it as informative and objective. Anyone can throw a political stone anywhere. Tsk, tsk, tsk, but kudos to freedom of speech. Cheers!
Listener Jack wrote:
As a long time listener and supporter (17 years), I have to speak up about the news. I am a certified news junky, and if I miss an hourly news cast, I go into withdrawal. I know the hours you “go short” for the Cultural Calendar, etc., but have I not noticed that now every hour is short? Why? If it is money, tell us how much more you need.
Congratulations to Jack, who’s the first to point out that we’ve quietly reduced the amount of news by one minute-48 seconds twice each weekday, at 9:04 and 11:04. The reason was not financial; it was to give just a little bit more music to our classical listeners from 9 am to 1 pm.
We’d love to hear from you on Friday Feedback, for your questions and comments, likes and dislikes about any aspect of the station. You can also send us feedback with an email message. Or call our Feedback Fone: 910-292-WHQR (9477). And thanks for your feedback.