Was this newsletter shared with you?
Subscribe now.

NPR Public Editor by Poynter's Kelly McBride

By way of introduction to this week’s newsletter, I want to share some varied reactions to a Morning Edition interview with a controversial author.

It’s not uncommon for a Trump loyalist to agree to participate in an interview, and then attack the interviewer, in order to score points with the president and his base. Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep ran into one of these buzzsaws Tuesday morning when he tried to interview author and former White House staffer Michael Anton. The interview went off the rails after Anton suggested that before Trump was elected, liberals were monopolizing America’s cultural institutions, and Inskeep asked him to back up the statement.

Instead of doing that, Anton went on a hyperbolic attack, condemning all of journalism and education as liberal elites. Inskeep was having none of it. He interrupted Anton with examples that countered the diatribe. But Anton was not interested in engaging in a true dialogue. Several letters in our inbox suggested some frustration among listeners.

Some of them wanted to hear more from Anton. John Thomas wrote, “Inskeep should interview instead of debate, interrupt & bully the guest.”

Others were frustrated that NPR gave Anton a platform at all. Crystal Fleming said, “I write to express my alarm and dismay regarding NPR's decision to provide a platform to Michael Anton, a known white supremacist, antisemite and xenophobe, enabling this individual's harmful and dangerous ideas to reach an audience of millions.”

But over on Twitter, many listeners were cheering Inskeep on for putting Anton in his place.

Sally Landau called it NPR interviewing at its best: “Steve Inskeep, in his smart, persistent, and Midwestern nice manner pressed Michael Anton (author of new book upholding all that is Trump) for truthful answers.”

This range of reaction — all over the place — is typical for a confrontational interview. I share this sample of replies because it reminds me that even when we hear the same interview, we respond uniquely.

As you read through our replies to your fellow NPR fans, you may recognize a hint of your own questions and curiosities. Or not. Just know it’s a sampling, not a science.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer addresses the state during a speech in Lansing. AP/File Photo

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.

Michigan militia language

John Vidal writes: I say this with the love of a loyal listener, for the love of god please STOP saying “put her on trial” (and ask your affiliates to stop) in relation to the vigilante kidnappers in Michigan!! Every time that phrase gets repeated in the media — in any context — a white supremacist chuckles because you’ve handed them a PR win and a little more legitimacy (at least in the eyes of their potential sympathizers).

Vigilantes by definition do not have the ability to “put her on trial” (just the reverse). It’s like saying a burglar put his homeowner victim “on trial” and passed sentence for losing their stuff. It’s delusional (and part of an epidemic of delusion) so stop paying lip service to it!!! Stop talking about it like it’s a thing.

Pat Suozzi writes: Words matter; names matter. What you call something matters. It is time to call these white supremacists groups what they are: terrorist organizations. Calling them "militias" suggest that they have some type of legitimacy. They use this term as part of their recruitment efforts to try to appear patriotic (2nd Amendment mentions "militias") and legitimate. But they're not. News should tell the truth. People rely on NPR to be truthful and accurate. Call them by their name: terrorists!

You both make solid points that journalists should consider, but cannot always accommodate. We’ve written before on the word “militias.” While these groups are not government sanctioned, like the National Guard, they describe themselves as militias and that is the word commonly used to refer to unofficial or informal groups of armed individuals organizing for the purpose of challenging current legal structures.

When it comes to their stated purpose of “putting Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer on trial,” in most news stories it remains unstated that this is illegal and preposterous. The journalists behind every news story must make certain judgments about what information is commonly known by the audience. In this case, it’s a safe bet to assume that most news consumers understand that only officers of the law can put people on trial.

It’s also important to note that throughout history, many non-government organizations have created alternative legal processes, including churches, cults and revolutionaries. By its very definition, democracy means that the governed participate in the creation of the government and submit to its laws. It’s a heinous idea to suggest that a band of armed men would kidnap an elected official and put her on trial in an extra-judicial court of their own creation, but saying it out loud demonstrates how insane their ideas are, without actually calling them insane. — Kelly McBride

Responding to the New York Post

Carolyn Abbott writes: Someone please explain why NPR has apparently not reported on the Joe Biden, Hunter Biden story in the last week or so that Joe did know about Hunter's business connections in Europe that Joe had previously denied having knowledge?

There are many, many red flags in that New York Post investigation. NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik detailed most of them here. Intelligence officials warn that Russia has been working overtime to keep the story of Hunter Biden in the spotlight. Even if Russia can’t be positively connected to this information, the story of how Trump associates Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani came into a copy of this computer hard drive has not been verified and seems suspect. And if that story could be verified, the NY Post did no forensic work to convince consumers that the emails and photos that are the basis for their report have not been altered.

But the biggest reason you haven’t heard much on NPR about the Post story is that the assertions don’t amount to much.

“We don't want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don't want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions,” NPR Managing Editor for News Terence Samuel told me. “And quite frankly, that's where we ended up, this was … a politically driven event and we decided to treat it that way.”

The handful of stories that NPR has produced about the NY Post investigation have been limited to how Facebook and Twitter are restricting distribution of the story or how families of those seeking treatment for addiction are impacted by the portrayal of Hunter Biden's struggle. — Kelly McBride

Biden’s long history on race

Kristopher Weiss writes: Why on Earth, three weeks before the election, would you dig up Joe Biden’s history on busing? You’ve had a year to do this and you cover this now? What could your editors possibly have been thinking? This is not new and was covered during the primaries so that isn’t the reason. I’m interested in knowing how you made this decision.

Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep states the purpose for this two-part series after he establishes that Biden’s record on race, and particularly busing, is a controversial one. “That story is relevant to the way he would govern today even though it stretches back decades to the start of his career,” Inskeep says in the piece.

I would be more concerned if NPR was ignoring this history and was not closely examining Biden’s track record. NPR’s mission is to create a more informed public. To do that, it must ask and answer questions on behalf of voters.

The segment begins: “What is Joe Biden’s record on race?” If we as voters are going to understand who Joe Biden was in the 1970s and who he is now, we need to comprehend the details. There are many young Americans who know very little about the legacy of busing, and are unaware of Biden’s political history beyond his tenure as Barack Obama’s vice president.

You’re right that this is not a new issue. NPR owes its audience a report that goes beyond new developments and instead provides deep context. As a candidate for the country’s highest office, Biden’s records on race and busing are deeply relevant to the challenges we face today. NPR also reported on Biden’s stance on busing in 2019, after his now running mate, Kamala Harris, asked him last year to agree that he was “wrong to oppose busing in America” during a Democratic presidential debate.

This story provides valuable insight into both Biden and busing. It was accurate and informative. NPR fulfilled its mission here. — Kayla Randall

Pseudonyms and the NPR ethics code

Mason Gibb writes: I did appreciate the story on Morning Edition (2020-10-12) about how Indians on an American work visa may be subjected to discrimination and reprisals based on their caste. However, I am curious why NPR has ignored its own ethics policy in its reporting. To quote: "Guideline: Don't create pseudonyms for sources whose names we withhold. When we decide to withhold a source's name from a story, we don't invent a pseudonym for that source. Again, our job is to present factual — not fabricated — information. Instead, we use pronouns and descriptions to make clear who is speaking or whom we're referring to. (Or we may refer to him or her without using a last name, if the source is comfortable with that degree of anonymity, and the situation meets our standards for granting anonymity. See the section on transparency for more.)"

This story originated from a Rough Translation podcast episode titled “How To Be An Anti-Casteist,” which explored India’s caste system in the U.S. tech sector. And you’re right: NPR does not create pseudonyms. After speaking with Nicole Beemsterboer, a supervising producer in programming at NPR, I learned that this is a different scenario — and a rare case.

“NPR does not assign pseudonyms, and this is not a case where we assigned a pseudonym,” Beemsterboer told me. “This is a case where someone is using a public-facing name to speak to the media and this precedes his speaking to NPR.” In other words, NPR did not create this alias. This source was using an alternative name in other places and requested that NPR do the same. NPR agreed but also made an effort to be transparent with the audience.

After interviews with Sam Cornelius and through their own reporting, NPR staff determined that the Dalit man met the organization’s high standard for anonymity, according to Beemsterboer. She said she also had conversations with NPR’s Managing Editor of Enterprise Gerry Holmes about this. “It is my editorial judgment in this case that using the source’s public-facing name creates more of a record for people to follow and is more transparent than not using the name,” she added.

According to NPR’s Ethics Handbook, the organization “may withhold a source's name who talks to us on tape or on the record, if that individual might be put in danger, legal jeopardy or face some other serious threat if their name is revealed.” It’s apparent that India’s ancient social hierarchy is something that continues to shadow the individuals NPR spoke with. This story and the Rough Translation episode point out the serious threats Dalits face in India when outed, so it’s understandable how — given those delicate circumstances — NPR chose this route. “In rare cases, we agree that someone’s identity should be protected for their safety and, in this case, we did that,” Beemsterboer said. — Amaris Castillo

Person first, condition second

Garrett Matlick writes: I'm listening to Morning Edition right now around 7:15 AM on 10/15/20 and there is a segment about emergency response, titled “Cities Aim To Remove Police From Most Psychiatric, Substance Abuse Calls." As a family nurse practitioner (also working on my doctorate with an additional certification in psychiatric mental health), I am concerned about the language used in this segment. Mr. Westervelt refers to one individual as a "semi-homeless alcoholic" and uses the term "drug addict" as well. This outdated language further stigmatizes many individuals who are experiencing homelessness and/or have an alcohol or substance use disorder. The terms "addict" or "homeless" ultimately describes individuals as if those are permanent characterizations whereas "experiencing homelessness" or "with an alcohol use disorder" describe a socioeconomic barrier or current pathological condition. I am very disappointed to hear this type of language used on NPR.

NPR Correspondent Eric Westervelt agrees, and most of the time makes it a practice to not equate an individual with a condition. This story was a rare slip, he said. Over the past several months, he has written dozens of stories about how Americans are trying to change policing and issues with the prison systems. Last month, he wrote about how crisis intervention teams struggle to help people living with mental health issues. Westervelt talked with Noel King on Morning Edition in June about how trying to reimagine policing is working in some regions and how that impacts people living with mental illness.

Throughout his coverage, Westervelt said he is careful to word his language around mental illness and disability in a person-first way. For example, Westervelt said he wouldn’t describe a person with an addiction as an “addict.”

“Occasionally, mistakes happen,” he said about this audio story.

Westervelt pointed out that in the final digital piece associated with the audio story, he more fully described Steve, the man in the story who is recovering from a heroin addiction.

Economic, clear writing is key to the broadcast style, which sometimes makes it difficult to use lengthy descriptions in every instance. It’s reassuring to see Westervelt’s other work where he usually names a person first, and then describes the circumstances relevant to the story. — Meredith Roaten

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.

‘Portraits of Resilience’

Samantha Reinders for NPR

GOATS AND SODA How Do You Survive A Pandemic? These Women Have Lessons For Us All

A Jordanian mother, pregnant with her third child and afraid to leave her home. A laid-off single mother in Wisconsin who creates a fun ritual/distraction for her son. An Afghan doctor, forced to flee her country and currently serving on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic in Sacramento, Calif. These are just snippets of stories in a breathtaking special report published earlier this month by NPR’s Goats and Soda.

Over the course of three weeks in September and October, the project captured the images and stories of 19 women as they face the challenges of this global pandemic. Each story is short and rich in detail, a window into one woman’s life. It was a huge undertaking that sent NPR’s international correspondents across the globe to collect these stories of resilience. Sometimes plans were canceled because COVID-19 struck interview subjects or, in one case, a reporter, according to Goats and Soda editor Marc Silver. “We hope you find strength and hope in these profiles,” Silver said in a newsletter this month.

It’s worth noting that NPR is promising more stories like these. If there’s a woman in your community who could be a good fit for the project, you can email goatsandsoda@npr.org with your nomination and “Women’s Stories” in the subject line. It may be the next story NPR features. In the meantime, take a moment to read these moving stories that say so much about one’s inner strength when faced with today’s unprecedented stressors. — Amaris Castillo

Behind the Scenes

This is how the news gets made. We want your ideas for how we can do it better.

Daniel Alarcón is the host of NPR’s only Spanish-language podcast, Radio Ambulante, which tells stories from across Spanish-speaking countries. Alarcón has worked remotely since he started the podcast, but he said he does miss being able to report in the field.

When the world started locking down in March, Alarcón was on a reporting trip in Chile and had to rush home before more travel restrictions were put in place. Even though he has worked remotely for a long time, he said working with two school-age children and his wife Radio Ambulante CEO Carolina Guerrero, also in a New York City apartment hasn’t been easy.

The 10th season of Radio Ambulante premiered in September, and Alarcón said the narrative storytelling is meant to be an escape from the everyday.

Here is how he works from his home in New York City.

This is where Alarcón works from home.

How have you adapted season 10 of Radio Ambulante for pandemic times?
I'm super proud of this season, not just because it was produced under these circumstances, but also because we made the deliberate decision to try to produce something that was a little friendlier, a little funnier, a little less serious, a little more delightful. We felt like the news being what it is, our audience wanted and deserved a respite from all that.

What episodes were your favorites?
There's one coming up coming up in December that — I can't say too much about it. It's kind of an immigration story turned on its head, and it turns into a story about overcoming domestic violence. It's completely surprising and a really moving story.

There’s also a two-part series that we just produced about a kind of pyramid scheme in the Dominican Republic. We had a really good team that was gathered just before the pandemic hit. We also have pretty incredible, incredible access to these WhatsApp groups among people who are very close to the story. That gives us this kind of authenticity and realness that makes up for the lack of on-the-ground reporting.

Another piece coming up in December that I’m just crazy about is an immigration story, or at least it appears that way at first, but becomes something else: a story about fame and notoriety, misogyny, violence, and what it means to be a strong woman.

How has not being able to go out into the field affected the podcast?
Two of our reporters were at the southern Mexican border when the pandemic hit and had to rush home before the borders were closed and a lot of stories that were just underway had to be reconceived as a result of Covid-19. Thankfully, a lot of the stories being released in the first half of the season were reported just prior to the travel and the public health restrictions. Perhaps listeners won’t notice the difference until the second half of the season.

More stories are retrospective. More stories are reported remotely. We've come to rely on on source tape, meaning not tape that we gather but that our sources gather for us, whether it's recording on their phone when they're when they're doing things where normally we would be accompanying them or it's things like voice mail, sent via What’s App, that would take the place of scene tape that we might try to get in a normal reporting situation.

Audio reporting is perhaps perfectly suited or better suited for this stuff than other kinds of reporting. Still, I miss being in the field and going places

What’s been the most challenging part of working during a pandemic?
We live in an apartment in the city and so I have two kids doing school from home. My wife Radio Ambulante CEO Carolina Guerrero, also works from home. So we're all just in a tight space and it’s hard to have quiet and try not to be interrupted by the kids or the dog.

The hardest part is parenting and overseeing online schooling while also trying to work, write, manage a remote team, do edits, and not failing at all of these tasks. I can report it’s nearly impossible to think with a 7-year-old in the house. The first thing that he asks for no matter what the challenge is for his parents. He’s a normal kid. The hack I’ve stumbled upon is not one I would necessarily recommend, which is working super early in the morning before everyone wakes up or super late at night.

Radio Ambulante has prioritized building a community around these podcasts. How have you been able to keep up that engagement during a pandemic?
We're planning a dance party before the New Year. We launched and revamped our new membership program and we launched our online store. So I think people are engaged because Radio Ambulante is still a pretty unique proposition.

There are other narratives in Spanish, but most of them are from one particular country or one particular kind of story. We built this really international regional audience because of where we have staff in more than a dozen cities across Latin America and Europe and the United States. And we also, you know, have an audience to match, you know. So far this season, we tell stories from Argentina, from the Dominican Republic, from Puerto Rico, from Peru, from Ecuador, from Colombia, This is just who we are.

There’s been a constant stream of bad news for several months now. How do you take a break from all of that?
I've been biking , which is a nice distraction. But undoubtedly the best thing that's happened during the pandemic has been watching my kid learn to read. When all this all started, he was in the second half of first grade and he wasn't a big reader. Usually in my life I teach [college classes at Columbia University] at night, so at least one night a week I'm not available. I might go out and play soccer one night. Then I have to travel or do readings or events for work. I was gone a lot.

Something simple like being home every night to read to my seven year old has been fantastic because it quickly went from me reading books to him, to trading a page from me and a page from him. And now, he’s reading on his own. Watching that develop over the course of the last several months has been really incredible. Now, he reads like a maniac.

The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Researchers Amaris Castillo, Kayla Randall and Meredith Roaten 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

Kayla Randall, National Public Radio

Meredith Roaten, National Public Radio

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.