Focus 580; Interview with Kevin Klose, president of NPR

In this part of the program we are live in our television studio with an audience. We want to say welcome to them and also welcome to our special guest Kevin close he is the president and chief executive officer of National Public Radio. Before going to work at NPR he served as director of U.S. international broadcasting overseeing the government's Global Radio and Television News Service is he was president of Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty. Before that he was an editor and reporter at The Washington Post he was there for 25 years. He was city editor Moscow bureau chief a Midwest correspondent. Deputy national editor he is the author of a book Russia and the Russians inside the closed society. He's the co-author of four others and this morning we'll be talking about the future of public radio and we very happy happy to have questions from people who are listening. People here in the audience people at home. 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 as always toll free anywhere that you can hear us 800 to 2 2 9 4 5. 5. Well thanks very much. I'm delighted to be here. The figure that I have now seen in print for the public radio audience 15

million. We think maybe it might actually be a few million more than that. But I think those of us who work in public radio have always had this feeling that it could be and should be bigger. How big could it be what do you think the potential is. I think the potential is substantially larger than that and then we are now in the two years I've been at NPR the the national audience the cume which is the sort of gauge of weekly listenership has risen from 13 to 15 million. I believe that we can make it a lot larger by being smarter about how we present ourselves to the democracy. And that means looking for new kinds of programming to reach new audiences. And some focus groups quite in depth and found we focused on people who don't listen to NPR programming to their local stations and ask them why don't you. And we played for them the kinds of programming that we do. And the answer is come

back. I should be listening to this. I don't listen to you because I don't know you're there. Over the 31 year history of NPR we've had very little money to spend on promotion and for reaching out to audiences most people listen to us by word of. They hear of us by word of mouth or because they sort of wander down to the left and end of the FM dial so we're looking at ways we can with stations create some specific targeted outreach to audiences that don't listen. In essence those people who do listen to us are a broad cross-section of Americans. The one sort of qualifier is people who are who have had college education of some some kind or other and also who are engaged in the activities of their communities. Those are the two sort of broad qualities. One thing I think we know is that we don't have a lot of people listening who are say. Much under 25

maybe not a lot of people listening who are under much under 30. That seems to be an audience that we have a hard time reaching. Is there something that we could be doing to attract. Younger people to listen. Yes I believe strongly in NPR and dialogues with our member stations of which there are three hundred that we can create programming which will be of interest to an audience that is younger to some degree and public radio all of us face the same issues that the print media that newspapers face which is newspapers are scrambling to figure out who under the age of 30 wants to read them. They have an enormous drop off and readership of people below the age of 30. Our issue is that our our general demographic for the average listener in the United States is about the age group is about age 40 to 44. So we are thinking about and we have created actually some programming that is targeted at a that audience that takes its information slightly differently than the way we've presented it over the 30 years

of for example all things considered in the 21 years of MORNING EDITION we've created a new program called The way in which is just sort of in pilot right now. It's a one hour news magazine that's post a little bit quicker with a slightly more intimate sound than THAT MORNING EDITION. And we're sort of working through to see whether we like how it sounds and we will have Station member stations help us in the listener in the listener side of it to hear whether it's has that pulse and that that sort of format that we're that we think might might be attractive to the 25 and and and that age age segment. It's morning here on focus 580 We're talking with Kevin close he's president and CEO of National Public Radio and questions are welcome we have someone ready to go on the phone and again here for people who are in the audience. Questions welcome to I have to do this. Give us a wave and we'll get somebody over to the mike to you with microphone first. Let's take a caller

here our line number for the caller is in a Rora. Hello. Yes hi good morning and welcome Kevin close. I think your program is a programming is wonderful. Here in Illinois and I my guess I fit into those carrot Gauri as you suggest I'm well over 30 so my college and into active activities in Iran. So what my question was this. Every time my sister comes to visit and she just left about two weeks ago she just threw raves about the programming on wy El Al but she lives in New York City and she says the programming is not as good in New York. Why would that be. Let me say before I answer the question that we have a great member station in New

York WNYC now with your web NYC OK. Okay next question. Well I just like I said I just rave about that you know I oh I kill all my friends about your programming and if you know what I tell them what it's 580 et cetera et cetera I just I couldn't live without it. And thank you much. Thank you thank you very much. And on behalf of the New York audiences. Thank you very much too. Yeah don't worry they can't hear you. Well other calls are questions welcome 333 W. while toll free 800 1:58 doubly Well here's somebody else. Champaign County Line 1. Hello. I may not realize my position. It is well yes that's true. You know now that we're on the web people in New York could be listening. Yes and people in Kazakhstan and in Karachi and in and in very very far places on the web. This is enormously important to the future of of the aisle

and the University of Illinois. Anyway we cut in on you so Harry are invited I guess I'm concerned about the funding. No no but there is a big emphasis I must respond to but I think it's probably not a federal government. I don't like what I've seen over the past with CPB. I actually don't know what the status mechanism for funding whether there's there was always talk about having a three year forward cycling funding so that there would be some isolation of political influence on content. Well I'm rather unhappy. I think there are a lot of good things that the bill does locally but I think at the NPR level on a nationwide level rather unsatisfied with the reporting of these and you maybe foreign affairs issues corporate corporations. I see it's pernicious stadium and another corporation like the Emirate of Kuwait are funding

NPR. And I think that I actually have a suggestion for this. Sort of funding structure I think this is obviously going against the other examples we have from Europe are kind of going the other way. You know more fixed and can't be licensing fees for receivers and that sort of thing I'm not suggesting that here but I do have a suggestion that I really see that there's been self-censorship going on in NPR there's been a chilling effect because that's the term they use in the case because of maybe the struggles and and frankly I guess I see you're inside the beltway Washington USA. Connection as being maybe one of the solutions that's been drawn I think. I mean I don't expect you to take that sympathetically.

I'm very negative. Part of the phenomenon. Let's write a reply you know I got you have you made several points and let's let's give the guest a chance to respond. Let me say that the issue of funding is very important to us and we do receive a an amount of federal support directly. Our budget this year will be about one hundred million dollars at NPR we spend close to half of that on news gathering and production. Just to take the budget piece of it the fee we have direct federal funding of a anywhere in any typical year between one million and three million dollars of that hundred million it's very very small. When NPR started 31 years ago it was 100 percent federally supported. Over the years the Congress has moved it from federal support to community based and based on foundation and corporate underwriting. And they've been very insistent that we find means other than federal tax dollars to

support what we do for you. NCP BMF CPB we apply to CPB for for Project grants in a competitive in a competitive environment with the PR I and other producers both independent and stations of new kinds of programming. And we also receive some federal support through the National Science Foundation for our science and health coverage and from the national donor for Humanities for some of our cultural presentations. Well I don't know what's going to hang in the air but I think that we could creatively This is a modest proposal because I don't expect it will go anywhere soon if an advertising tax where commercial media are taxed at some rate of what they spend on advertising rather than it being a tax write off. I think it should be taxed as you know this is a way of recouping that the public aspect of the airwaves and some fraction of that should be fixed

and then some to different sorts of public things including you know FM which is another story and I'm sure you probably get a call on that. But I just I just I mean I do question your credentials The Washington Post a long time ahead Welter Pincus an ex agent an asset of the CIA covering Intel. The shoes and I got to have a bit of discretion but if you're 30 years there you're your problem and I just think it was just too much inside Washington and now people are going to tell you that answering their stories sometimes from American media as well. Oh um yeah we do have somebody else waiting here and I want to promise that we will get right to them I mean I I would like to follow up on one thing that the caller asked and you may indeed want to make further response maybe I'll let you do that first. Well I'd like to say on the issue of so-called self-censorship the news operation at NPR as it is is a courageous smart

independent news enterprise it is run by qualified journalists who are both in public radio and in the print media and we take a backseat to nobody in in proving our independence and our credibility on our integrity every day of the year with regard to foreign coverage or foreign coverage is extensive. We're the only American network and this is what's extraordinary about NPR and its member stations where the only American network whose foreign coverage is actually expanding. We're doing more foreign coverage. We've expanded our our foreign bureaus. We now have 11 thanks to the voluntary support of listeners to their local stations and to foundation support. And also to corporate underwriting and the corporate underwriting has never influenced the news enterprise any more than it would in any other credible presenter of daily information and high quality news and information with regard to its who our foreign coverage let me just finally say we have an ambitious

series coming forward through the year on globalization which which is very important we're going to take our microphones to the far places of the of the world where to look at the issues involved in the engagement of global enterprises. And third world and fourth world countries to see what the impacts are and what this what the social and economic realities are. We over the years certainly have gotten comments from people about our underwriting. There are people who would wish that we had less there are people who say that's a commercial I don't care what you call it that's what it is. But you know not a not a lot I guess I cannot remember quite the reaction that I have heard from people to NPR's current underwriting from the government of Kuwait. And I have to confess that that was one that when I heard I thought Gosh couldn't you have passed this one by one what was the thinking on that end. And now looking back on it would you say maybe we should have passed it by.

Well I should say you're. The first criticism of this of this decision came from NPR's ombudsman and you can see it on our website at npr.org. Jeffrey Dvorkin who is the first woman to represent the public's interest and public questions and public criticism about NPR and to explain NPR to our to our listeners on our Web site wrote a column which she writes on a regular basis criticizing the decision and saying he didn't think we should make it our underwriting rules and regulations are very carefully drawn to allow both us to exercise the full rights of free speech but also to be to be to recognize when there when we have the right to say no we don't want that under underwriting. We looked at the Kuwait underwriting credit very carefully. We had a lot of debate at NPR management two years ago we had an underwriting credit very similar from the Federal Republic of Germany.

Celebrating the 10th anniversary of the of the of the demise of the Berlin Wall and. And we felt that this was in the same vein. We have received substantial amount of criticism and I will I will tell you that we we will reconsider going forward. What are all the parameters of our underwriting our underwriting processes and policies. Our guest this morning Kevin close he's president and CEO of National Public Radio we have several people on hold we'll try to get in as many as we can again for our audience here. There are people who'd like to ask questions. We'd certainly be happy to take one. Let's we'll do that we'll go to an audience member. Hi my name's Mary Ellen Page and I am here via Phoenix Arizona and I listen to KGO as in Phoenix and I'm surprised by the total lack of local programming before 6:00 in the evening. And I was just wondering. I actually enjoy the news programming on Cape Jazz. On public interest and I am Raymond and TALK OF THE NATION. But I was just wondering

does NPR promote local stations to do more local programming or do they want their stations to do more national programming. Hey what can I tell you it's a 60s collaborative right you know the way that every station and program director and station manager makes decisions on what they're going to put on the air based on how they best understand they can serve the interests of their community. And in Phoenix for example there are two stations there cage as a and k Bach and they have their formatted differently they're very similar to AM and FM which are formatted quite differently and they have the same station manager as well. Yes and it's similar to here. So you know if if you if you're in the Phoenix area and you want them to change their programming to take in different kinds of programming. Right a recall. Right and we don't have any real say so we present to the stations what the quality of the programming is and it's up to them to to decide what they want to take. Let's go back to the phones have somebody who's been patient in Champaign line to go ahead.

Yes it's sort of interesting. Well it's very interesting. You know what. I turned on the program to ask a question about the underwriting by Coit And then there was all this discussion about it but the discussion actually didn't go right deep enough for me to withdraw my support after 15 years because I was so deeply offended that I've been offended by increased corporate sponsorship because some of the corporations that do sponsor programs are are so inappropriate. When you have major polluters supporting nature and things like that and I've I've bet my time on you know not really you know not said anything. But when the when the Emirate of Kuwait

underwriting came on that was a political statement. That was a political statement that said that this war was good that this incineration the Iraq issue is good that this. Continued starvation of Iraqis was good and I demonstrated against that war with my infant in my back and I. Was happy to see it disappear. I was I was talked into not withdraw my support until this program until I could hear what you had to say and I haven't heard it again on the local station and I do not think that political advertisements or whatever you want to call am I belong on the station. I actually don't think that a large corporation underwriting belongs on the station or in NPR.

And I know it costs money but to sleep with the devil. Get your your job. I'm as bad in my opinion so I would like to know if you if you are going to support more political writing. Well let me first make a comment. I appreciate hearing your views. I would say that if if you if you're opposed to corporate underwriting and opposed to other kinds of underwriting then perhaps you should not withdraw your support of the station but actually help support the station because we we by the nature of the laws. Passed by the Congress have been encouraged to do corporate underwriting and to fund underwriting that is. That represents the wide place in this democracy for free speech. I would like to say about the Kuwait underwriting credit that whether you agreed or disagreed with what happened in 1991. The facts are that there was some kind of an invasion of

what was a sovereign entity that was not Iraq and that and that there were changes forced on those people and they were and they were interventions in an international level and the Kuwait underwriting credit pays tribute to what happened 10 years ago. It's an event you may not agree with but but but there it is and it's sure it happens. There are a lot of things that happen of a political nature. I just don't think that it's there. As far as my increasing my support I support as much as I can and I have for a very long time. But I'm not a rich person but that has nothing to do with whether you should have Cargill or Exxon or other corporations underwriting your programs especially. I don't know if Exxon still supports nature shows up on the television side but. When I mean it's just incredulous to me to hear

the corporations funding nature. It's it's it's a lie. It allows those corporations to hide behind so to make a show on lions or conservation. Well I'm going to I'm going to jump in I hope the caller will forgive me. We're already at the midpoint I know I have other callers. Appreciate the points that you made and I'd like give some other people a chance to do the same and I don't know if you want to say anything in addition to what you've already said. I appreciate the exchange of views. Our guest is Kevin close he's president chief executive officer of National Public Radio. You want to call and talk with him. We do have about 25 minutes I just encourage people to try to be brief just so that we can get in as many people as possible. 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 toll free 800 2 2 2 9 4 5. And again people who are here in the audience. I think we have someone else I'd like to ask a question.

Yes Mr. close some one of your listeners just still under 30. But my question regards a low power FM radio which was basically been killed in Congress last year and you as the president of NPR went on record is very vociferously opposing this new service which would have allowed you. You're shaking your head already it would have allowed a lot of new small stations to go on the air. And my my question regards the fact that these stations are a lot like some other stations already on the air called translators wage to you while Al has one at one point one FM that operate basically under the same rules basically the same technical guidelines except they can originate their own broadcasting. And my question is why did NPR so it was super silly. Speak out against this. Yes it's a good question and I'd be happy to answer it. In fact we believe and have said so very very strongly and very positively that we believe low power low power FM a new system that was proposed by the FCC and

by its den chairman Bill canard actually could be very complementary and compatible with with our member stations. But we believed that there were unresolved technical issues which have not to this day been resolved arising from the potential for interference from the new transmitters to existing public radio stations with specific regard to the way for example DBIL reaches its translator stations. And it may it may apply here but it certainly pas in the West. There are two specific issues one had to do with what are known as radio reading services to the blind which are carried on sub carriers by more than 100 of our member stations. Those sub carrier transmissions are extremely vulnerable to interference from nearby low power or any other interference because the spectrum is whatever it is it's a finite spectrum and any additional transmission across any spectrum has the potential for raising raising interference issues. We asked the FCC to check whether there wouldn't

be substantial or significant interference to the to the radio reading service for the blind on the sub carriers. FCC very reluctantly did some testing and has never made public what the results were of the testing as to whether the receivers used by people who were vision impaired which there are about 2 million listeners in the United States to these radio reading services. And these are very simple radio services provided mostly services by volunteers who read from the local newspapers what the supermarket specials are for people who can't get the information that way. They read what the bus schedules are and where polling places are. They're very very important to people who can't receive information by sight. We never got a satisfactory answer to that and we felt it was a major issue that had to be paid attention to by a public service commission such as the FCC. The second piece of it had to do with. Within interference the electronic interference from low power

transmitters to the very translators you're talking about repeater stations that carry a main station signal to very remote areas in the West and the Mountain West and in the northwest. These repeater stations are very important to the distribution of NPR programming to isolated pockets and communities where there is no weather radio or anything else. And we also asked them to make protections available to those translators systems and we felt that the FCC was not responsive. Therefore we had another. Another way to redress our issues and that was to go to a legislative solution. The legislative solution that is that is in place allows for the roll out of more than 100 LP FM stations in different places in the country and ask for independent testing to see whether interference to existing public radio stations will occur or not. And that's where we're at. I don't think that's a refusal to accept or a denial of LP FM. I do think that you don't try out something you don't build a car and then put it on the highway without testing it out and that's what I think the FCC was trying to do.

Well but as a follow up to that your transmitter stations are low power stations. Actually there are already existing out there and so it sounds more like you're saying well are our low power stations or translators they don't interfere because they're ours. But these other stations we can't control them. They're a threat. Their call interfere. The issue with the translators is that they're like a series of Christmas tree lighting set. If you interdict and they're linked many of them and I say it may not be a you may link by my microwave to yours or your translators but others use the sub carriers to to make the inputs from the mother station out to the Out to the translators. That sub carrier is extremely susceptible to interference from low power. It is that piece that we were looking for for protection and we didn't get it. If you interdict one in a sequence of say 7 or 8 translators they all go down. That's why it's like a serious lighting set and so the damage to existing public service nonprofit community based Public Radio by the indifference of the FCC to simple

issues that we ask them to look at which they refused to do cause us to take the legislative route with the FCC being different than the FCC. It's interesting you know I talked face to face with canard and we had many direct meetings with FCC staff and many of many of the previous members of the previous FCC and I will tell you that they did not reach a positive result with them there. I think that is in part is because Chairman canard for his own reasons and their estimable reasons. Wanted to get low power out the door very fast and they were not willing to do that. What I felt were realistic and rational testing before they put it in the other on the highway. Thanks for the question let's go back to somebody who is on the telephone listening this is Urbana line 3. Hello. Oh yes. In contrast to an earlier caller I would have to say and I've been I've lived in many areas that this country I would have to say that the local problem with

the programming. Yeah it's the worst that I have ever experienced. Thank you very much. With the exception of Davis and one one real complaint I have had and voiced to the program director with concerning listening to news about pork bellies. What is it 10 20 minutes on every hour. I'm not interested in pork bellies I'm not interested in sport. And with the exception of David and that seems to be about all there is I on a local programming when I have complained to the program director and I asked for the address of the ombudsman. He told me that he is hurt. Many complaints similar complaints and that it would do me no good to write to the ombudsman because they can. He can schedule programming as he wants to.

I had understood National Public Radio. And another complaint I have is that I think there's no place for the thinly disguised Christian hour which occurs on Sunday afternoon. I think that there's no place on public television public radio for that. I'm not I'm not sure how to respond to questions about our own programming I guess I would still direct anybody who had comments to our station manager dance Milani or our program director Jay Pierce. I think one tends to over emphasize the presence of those things one doesn't like because in most cases any man thought of very well actually as far as the markets are concerned I think it's more like five minutes out of every hour and unless you count the places where we're doing the extended programming I I guess I would have to say that for a long long time this station has had a very strong commitment to provide this kind of information to a very significant segment of our audience that is people who are involved in agriculture and in fact over the years I think

the amount of air time that we've spent has actually shrunk. So I guess I there's not very much we can say to somebody who who to whom it doesn't mean anything other than we would appreciate your patience. And I think that if you would find something else to do that five minutes and then come back you would find it actually it was very quick. Well for some people yes five minutes isn't much for some people two minutes would be too much. And you know Mr. Reich Losar has no control over the amount of time we spend talking about pork bellies. So I don't know that he had nothing to say about the merits of the debate either. I will say that I was I spent four years and Chicago as Midwest bureau chief for The Washington Post and part of the part of the fascination of covering the Midwest is that this is a place that has direct needs to know about such things as the latest price of pork bellies. I mean there's a lot of a lot of people engaged in farming out here and it's a very serious issue with them. It's what their lives are. Senator and and

and as we become this global enterprise that the that the U.S. economy is these issues. Are important to the listeners. But I'll leave it to the judge of the program director AWOL. I want to ask about something else and then we'll get and we'll take some other callers and I hope people will forgive me if this seems to be too much of an in-house kind of question something that people in public radio would think about. But but here it is I know that you've been spending a lot of time traveling around talking about new media movement of NPR onto the Internet. I know that sometime soon there will be a satellite network launched to provide satellite radio to people in their cars and NPR is going to be providing programming. Now if someone if they want to can listen to NPR by going to NPR on the web. And as there are more and more ways for a program producer like NPR to distribute its programming. One might ask would you need us for.

Well because our corps. That's a fair question the the issue for us all of us in public broadcasting and in fact in all the media is we are not the we didn't create these new platforms. Satellite radio the Internet the online space. The question is are we going to be there or not. As an intellectual and creative activity for the democracy because we can't determine how the democracy how the citizens are going to come to their information what sources of information they will use. For us I believe that with our member stations we need to be there powerfully and we will be there in a series of identities. As NPR as well as other as other stations present themselves on their websites online and in the satellite radio services that we are we've created to 24 by 7 channels on one of these new radio private radio satellite corporations called Sirius Satellite Radio. It's a kind of cable radio system. It's a subscription system. We've just gone live with these two channels. We don't know who's going to be

listening to these new services. It may be people who are listening to local stations. Who will migrate just by nature to a different means of receiving their information. It may be people who have never listen to their local stations and it may be people who don't listen to anything at all who will now come into the services. The issue is is the democracy going to make use of that new platform and should we be there. My my belief is very powerful Yes and I believe it in essence that that we're trying or we're trying to do is to create once and play it everywhere. If we if we can do that we will get economies of scale we'll get reach intellectually and creatively and reach into that into the way that democracy gets its information. Well that there are a number of stations now public stations that are webcasting. We're doing a lot of other people are doing. I think there also is a strong feeling that it should not simply be taking what we are broadcasting and putting it out over the web it ought to be more than that. King said that then what is

the more that it should be. Well we see the we see the Internet space as a very powerful place to to present first of all radio is magic. In my estimation I spent many years in print. I happen to come out of a radio background my parents already are produces in the 30s and 40s so I grew up around microphones. The reason radio is magic is because you can't see it and because it can be with you wherever you are in your life you can be jogging. You can be driving you can be washing the dishes you can be patting the dog you can be comforting a child and you can have the radio there with you. So it's a very intimate space. It's a space. It's a it's the only mass medium in my estimation of the mass media of the imagination because you cannot see it. You can only imagine what the voices are telling you in a Susan Stamberg has said. We do the best pictures in broadcasting Public Radio. The issue for us is how do you get that magic to another platform for example online

space which requires is looking for video presentation as well as text as well as audio. We're trying to figure out how you come into that place to to save the magic protected and strengthen it but also reach into the new medium. We did a series if I may this is a slightly longer answer but we did a series recently called prison diaries on All Things Considered it was a series of segments by teenagers who were incarcerated. There is a website that matches the teen diary segments of all things considered if you go to the website what you will see is a visual presentation by a Hockney like assemblage is a photograph still photographs of the environment that these children are living in the interrogation rooms the study rooms the dormitory whatever it is it's there on the website and as you look at the website you can hear the audio coming down. So it expands the encounter. It doesn't interfere with the audio experience but it augments it. We think that's where we can explore creatively the webspace and bring something new to the to the public broadcasting community.

We just have about 10 minutes left in this part of the show. Kevin close is our guest he's president and CEO of National Public Radio I want to try to get some more calls callers will help us by being brief so please do that we'd like to get in as many folks as we can let's go next to Taylor Behl line for Rio. Those who are genuinely civilized countries like France and the Scandinavian and National Public Radio and television are working on a starvation budget and their corporate sponsors. But this this is what really gripes me I'm particularly concerned with your music programming but I've got something to say about it. Your other programming for example this fresh air thing to me it's been going downhill that's more and more involved with pop with pop and mass culture. As regards music programming. It's really the classical equivalent of

music's greatest hits and you're daring. I remember one night in the wee small hours I was listening to your EP and the outlet and I heard something by some entity a Ignatz Brule. Bruce and I could understand after having heard it why I had never heard of this character. That's not your idea of daring as as regards 20th century music there are there are major 20th century composers work you never hear on the public radio for example. It was gentle Barry Oh but we did know a dollop Karlheinz Stockhausen. Here we are in the 21st century and I would say and the last year if I do less and 24 hours a day every day of the year I doubt I would have heard an hour's worth of music by all those people combined and I just exasperates me to the point that occasionally I feel like screaming.

Well let's get it again get a Comment From Guest I don't I don't know how much you get involved in we program music pro-US NPR as that is the nation's premier presenter of classical and jazz music in the public radio system and in December National Public Radio was distinguished by the by the nation by President Clinton awarding us a National Medal of Arts for 30 years of excellence in presenting classical jazz. Presentations folk comedy drama and commentary on the cultural life of the democracy. We were very proud to receive that in recognition of 30 years of the kinds of presentations we do our premier classical show is called performance today. It's a two hour seven day a week show and it does the highest quality recording or a live presentation of classical music in in companionship with our member stations.

We do a lot of field production with member stations finding the best performances year round. Both America in America and abroad and we're increasingly we're very interested in modern music and we don't hesitate to put it on the air. And so I would just say to the listener I thank you for your comments and I'm very pleased to be able to say that we that the recognition of NPR I think is well deserved. Let's go on. Next is champagne wine number one. Hello. Yes. Keep it very brief. Long time listener long time supporter of the National Public Radio and our local station I absolutely love the news coverage. Listen to it quite frequently I do want to agree in part with the first caller talking about censure censorship and the chilling effect he brought up cause of fund raising and I'm afraid that the cause of the change in news coverage over the last eight years is more toward a fear of being labeled a liberal media I'm afraid

and in my opinion that as I've watched NPR coverage over the last eight years especially NPR is bending over backwards with news coverage coverage to appear not to be a quote unquote liberal media. And I think that NPR is actually supporting conservative and or Republican tenets principles or ideas through. The coverage by not challenging on some of the things that conservative school of thought have to say and by under emphasizing some of the things that a more democratic or liberal school of thought has to say. And so I think there's been a decided change because of the fear of appearing to be one of the quote unquote liberal media. Now it's true that NPR does carry some decided liberal shows as the hour long specials may be tucked away on a on a late evening or sometime in a weekend afternoon or something. But I'm talking about the mainstream news coverage of All Things Considered and Morning Edition where the real news gets reported. You know in an allegedly simple straightforward way I think there is where the biases come in. Over the years and I'd love to hear a response to

that. Thank you very much. Really appreciating the show again. Love the programs but I thought this is something that needs to be brought up. Thanks for the call. It's something we've heard a lot from listeners. I don't dare suggest to Robert Siegel that he presents the news in a simple way. I think that our coverage has been as comprehensive. I think we are very responsive too to trying to embrace the wide spectrum of political ideas and the dialogue in this country. And I will tell you I don't I'm not a conservative nor liberal when it comes to these issues. I'm trying to stay on the news and to make sure that our discussion and our commentary and our analysis is is wide ranging and intellectually curious and precocious and that doesn't really have a political character to it. With regard to our reporting you know we are the recipient of many many awards and prizes for the kinds of report Taj we've done most recently we received Dupont Columbia University

gold medal for a special and a series that arose out of the special on the war crimes in Kosovo. I would tell you that NPR has been at the forefront of covering that issue and the rise of the issues of human international human rights courts to judge and gauge issues of war crimes we will stay on that story aggressively looking at all the issues around that. I think we do may be certainly one more maybe a more let's go to Urbana line too. But I think you could learn something from a station call in program. Never stop anyone from Eric there. It's wonderful you know they just take people in order and I've never got that feeling from NPR on the national level because I've heard any kind of contrary or really disturbing point of view aired on NPR. So I kind of agree with a couple of previous callers that

I would rather just that self-censorship. I just wanted to ask you Would you go so far to. I mean we hear a lot of people say that report that government people will tell the BATF you know don't air a particular person or story because it's in the best interest of the country would you go so far as to block state bluntly if you don't believe in this such suggestions. And can you give us an instance where that was that where you didn't cave in to that kind of a suggestive for people saw rather that Zappa was just talking about more overt censorship. In the two years and two months that I've been at NPR we have. We have not caved in to such to such demands but I will tell you as well there has not been such demands in my experience at The Washington Post. Most of the time when there is an effort by by the government to prevent publication or broadcast of a media report it has to do with what are broadly considered to be

ordinarily considered to be national security issues. And and we have at the Washington Post we were criticized severely on many occasions for publishing things which various various governments and administrations felt shouldn't be published and were not in the national interest but we felt it was in the national interest for the public to know. We're just about what we're going to have to stop. I have to apologize to anyone who is holding. Because we've used the time we very sincerely AWOL care what you think about the programming you can write if you can call us the people at NPR do feel the same. You can get in touch with him. You're going to have ways yes you can call me or write me or better yet talk to the ombudsman. But if you want to write me or send me an e-mail it's a close k k l o s e at npr.org G and and our address in Washington by snail mail is NPR 635 Massachusetts Avenue Northwest Washington D.C. 2 0 0 0 1.

All right thanks very much. Our guest this morning Kevin close he's president and CEO NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO.