“She liked the Planet Money content,” Davidson said, “and, more importantly, she instantly understood that several things embedded in the Planet Money experiment were truly important to NPR’s future”—namely, the power of collaboration and entrepreneurship that produces passionate journalism with a dual radio-Web focus. “The old broadcast model was inherently only top-down. The ideas all had to be big ideas, with huge funding and huge pressure to be a success,” Davidson continued. “She saw at least one path to success here for NPR more broadly—to make everybody feel excited, that they can and should be dreaming big and exploring new ideas.”
Still, despite the good feelings and strong audience support for Planet Money, by spring 2009 unresolved issues had piled up and begun to press. Was this a permanent unit, or would Davidson and the others at some point return to their old jobs? How many stories should the unit do for This American Life and NPR’s news shows? Was there an expansion plan? What exactly was its relationship with This American Life? “Even to schedule meetings with the right people was impossible. It wasn’t happening,” Davidson said. He began to fear NPR’s bureaucratic process could take years.
He talked to Schiller about his frustrations and she agreed that the ad-hoc nature of Planet Money’s existence had to end. They set up a two-hour meeting in her office—scheduled in back-to-back, half-hour increments—with each department that needed to weigh in. For example, the finance department figured out how to move the team’s funding to the permanent budget, and the general counsel committed to working out the specific legal relationship with This American Life.
“I think everyone left the meeting feeling like they had been heard,” said Davidson. He recalled Schiller’s words as she closed discussion on one contentious issue after another: “Done and done.” He was stunned.
Before Schiller’s arrival, Davidson said, management had sent out several pronouncements on how the staff had to get on board with new initiatives, embrace technology changes, work in a different way. “We were sort of culture-change-fatigued,” he said. But in Schiller’s first year, “the real culture change I’ve seen is amazing.”
Just a few months after Schiller’s arrival, Fast Company magazine dubbed NPR “the most successful hybrid of old and new media,” quite a compliment after many acrimonious starts and stops in the digital realm. NPR went from nowhere in digital media to one of the savviest users of social media sites like Twitter and Facebook, to providing apps for phones that run on the Android program, to producing the popular Web sites NPR.org and NPR.org/music, and to building a digital infrastructure that allows member stations and members of the public to pick up NPR content and weave it seamlessly into their own Web sites and playlists.
“We were slow to the game,” said Kinsey Wilson, NPR’s senior vice president and general manager for digital media, who was hired in October 2008 from his position as executive editor at USA Today. He said NPR is not attempting to play catchup to build a portal-like news Web site; rather, it’s creating digital media infused with NPR’s sensibility, available on multiple devices. Using a $1.5 million grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, awarded in September 2007, NPR is putting its entire newsroom of 334 journalists, plus another fifty or so staffers, through extensive digital training, ranging from two-day sessions to in-depth, five-week programs.
Wilson and others acknowledge that the tension between the traditional radio mission and the digital future still exists within the NPR newsroom, and in NPR’s relationships with its stations. “One of the reasons the transition to new platforms is hard here is because of the dedication to craftsmanship. NPR online is not as perfect or honed as NPR on the radio,” said Dick Meyer, NPR’s executive editor, who described the newsroom as “mostly like a giant workshop of craftsmen who are incredibly devoted to old-world values and new-world goals and visions.”

Planet Money is the best thing to come to radio in a long time. I am not usually drawn to stories about the economy but seriously these are GREAT reporters with a more up to the moment sound and way of reporting that makes me WANT to listen.. Thank goodness the leadership at NPR now gets it. VIVA NPR.
#1 Posted by Marion Rice, CJR on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 01:32 PM
One of NPR's problems is that its programming is often confused with that from Public Radio International and American Public Media. And those producers have some excellent content, too, but they also have dreck such as the Howard Stern-eque "The Takeway" - one of the worst uses of the spectrum and airtime imaginable.
#2 Posted by Bill Johnson, CJR on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 03:18 PM
It would be good for the new folks at NPR to know of two mistakes in NPR's own past. Through some bad decisions, NPR single-handedly created its competition. (1) By refusing to consider carriage of Garrison Keillor's "A Prairie Home Companion," NPR spurred Mr. Kling and some collaborating general managers to create Public Radio International (originally known as American Public Radio) to distribute the variety show nationwide. (2) NPR employed and helped Ira Glass develop his extraordinary talent, but failed to support him when it came to developing "This American Life" which is distributed by PRI. (3) By NOT paying attention to the world of business and commerce, NPR left an opening for PRI to create "Marketplace." Later, when NPR decided NOT to acquire Marketplace for fear of a lawsuit, APM did acquire the program (and a law suit, which was settled out of court). I wish NPR and their public broadcasting competitors well -- the world is enriched by their programs. But, sometimes what appears to be a small mistake can blossom into a game-changing result.
#3 Posted by Jim Russell, CJR on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 04:59 PM
#cjrfail. only mention of npr's diversity failings is in the context of criticsm of another high priced vp? can we get a re-write? did editor note the omission? npr is national public radio by and for white folks. what about the rest of america??
#4 Posted by amazing, CJR on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 07:12 PM
Is it coincidential that these changes at NPR have ocurred since Obama was elected? Not that I specifically attribute it to him. Nevertheless, sadly no mention was made of the dictatorial thought-police administration brought in by the Bushies.
#5 Posted by Hadassah Weinreb, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 12:43 AM
So if NPR gets all this money the author seems to believe it will get, can we cut it off the public dole?
#6 Posted by Dan Gainor, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 09:49 AM
It is disappointing that no where in this article is it pointed out that "NPR", has morphed into an almost Frankenstein distortion of what most people think, to this day, it ought to be, an alternative and critical compliment to corporate "for profit" media. Corporatizing and profitzing seems to be its total purpose now.
#7 Posted by vpa, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 11:17 AM
NPR has serious problems with its arts coverage that both it and the CJR should look into.
NPR has many sponsors that are major music, and publishing companies. See this list of sponsors.
http://www.npr.org/about/annualreports/NPRSponsorsDonors08.pdf
Their influence on reviews and content is obvious. No matter what NPR says, the NPR reviews of music and books are all positive, and almost all the works reviewed come from the major art and media corporations.
What is not reviewed is also obvious. It is any work of any artist that opposes corporate art, or any artist that supports any new movement of art that is not controlled by mainstream corporate art, or any art advocacy group that is against corporate art. There is also no tough fair coverage of the music or publishing industry.
The last problem of NPR's coverage is the most damaging. NPR refuses to answer these concerns and explain how it chooses what art is covered, and why it doesn't cover most independent artists, new art movements, or art advocacy groups.
No matter what NPR claims, the truth is in their coverage and their website reviews is slanted and unfair.
#8 Posted by Tom Hendricks, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 12:31 PM
The news portion of NPR will thrive if it focuses on gathering and disseminating facts and reasoned analysis. Don't chase ambulances and don't follow other reporters to the day's or week's sensational new story, no matter how big it is. We can get our fill of such "news" elsewhere. The recent report of an analysis of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's database of sudden acceleration complaints is a good example of what NPR News should be doing. Its not expensive (no flying reporters around the world) but very high value. Get good at collecting, analyzing, putting in context, and reporting the facts and listeners will beat a path to your door. No one else is doing it.
#9 Posted by Warren Tighe, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 12:38 PM
The spawning of APM and then PRI gave programmers at LO CAL public stations and NPR affiliates a bigger store. Listeners really don't see (well, hear) all these entities as competing with each other. Listeners are the winners, as each local station can buy, or not, the likes of This American Life or A Prairie Home Companion.
#10 Posted by stillfresh, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 12:48 PM
This is a very good read about a wonderful organization and its new leader.
We are appointment listners of NPR. Sunday afternoons are the best. as my wife and I share preparing dinner. Very cool.
#11 Posted by Jay Suber, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 12:50 PM
Remember the1977 movie "Network"? It is well worth watching this finely scripted and acted ensemble film about the growing corporate ownership of network television news again. The story told also applies to network radio news by extension. If profits for the owners and entertainment for the audience are the only values society derives from "The News" there was not, is not now, and never will be, truthful, accurate timely and comprehensive news in television media. Neither NPR at one end, nor FOX at the other, can long afford to disadvantage it's corporate advertisers in any fundamental way, shape or form. That is why real news is not and never will be tolerated once confined by for profit media or corporate sponsored media.
#12 Posted by J. Bridy, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 01:56 PM
I listened to "Planet Money" on the above poster's advice - they sound like giggly adolescents. I guess it's a generational thing...
#13 Posted by JLD, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 07:19 PM
>>"and serve audiences of all backgrounds and interests."
I'll believe that when I hear it. What are you going to be doing to serve the Tea Party crowd?
#14 Posted by James, CJR on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 07:32 PM
Ms Schiller is sending the right signal to NPR staff and local stations -- it may be an anarchic system as Ms Seymour says, but it is *a system* with interlocking parts. Where one succeeds, all succeed. What local stations must do is focus on bringing superb journalism to their communities. (Some will choose music and that's fine.) It's the historic underdevelopment of news resources at the local stations that makes NPR's assistance both vital and challenging. For stations, these are the best and worst of times -- but time to get it right seems to be in short supply.
#15 Posted by Michael Marcotte, CJR on Sat 6 Mar 2010 at 01:36 PM
I think NPR is corporate pablum. Just because it is longer than the rest of the garbage doesn't make it better. There are plenty of academic studies which show that it's particular brand of bland, faux objectivity is no different than most other mainstream news. Shiller is cultivating NPRs mainstreamness in order to occupy a journalistic space filled with talking-point influenced propaganda. NPR is safe "news" for old, white folk.
#16 Posted by don pasqueda, CJR on Mon 8 Mar 2010 at 11:47 AM
Having listened to and read several of Shiller's remarks regarding NPR, especially those talking points channeled through the NPR Ombudman, I don't believe a thing she says. Shiller is a propagandist. NPR sounds like VOA. And Planet Monkey not only SOUNDS childish, it IS childish. Listeners (and readers) of NPR content who cannot distinguish between REAL context, REAL research, REAL facts, and REAL analysis will continue to confuse NPRs stylistic evolution with substantive changes. Shiller is a cosmetologist putting lipstick on the NPR corporate pig.
#17 Posted by don pasqueda, CJR on Mon 8 Mar 2010 at 12:15 PM
What don pasqueda said.
Also, nprcheck2.blogspot.com
#18 Posted by Geoff Hagopian, CJR on Mon 8 Mar 2010 at 03:42 PM
I tkink...emphasize think...you are GREAT!!!
#19 Posted by Mary Wilinsky, CJR on Tue 9 Mar 2010 at 03:45 PM
One issue that desperately needs reporting: NPR is decidedly anti-union, beginning with the people who are responsible for its sound.
The union (NABET) representing engineers at NPR is at a critical stage in contract negotiations with the company. Many engineers are afraid this will be their final contract because NPR is downsizing the engineering staff. NPR's contract offer consists largely of buyouts, plus a diminishment of benefits, rights and working conditions that are designed to make engineers not even want to work there any longer. Employees in the other union at NPR, AFTRA, are next on the chopping block when they go to negotiate their next contract next year.
What NPR is offering NPR engineers:
The company is offering 2.5% wage increases per year for five years, with the first increase starting next January (meaning two years without a raise). In exchange, for the next five years you must surrender all job jurisdiction, the right to bargain over health care and benefits, the right to get the company 403(b) contributions restored to its former level, the right to bargain over working conditions such as the various leave policies (which become dictated by the employee manual, which management can change at their discretion), the right to influence the number of slots available for vacation, and the right to get paid double time for any work past twelve hours in a day. Buyouts between 10-14 months salary, including COBRA (keep your health care if you pay for it yourself) to 15 employees. The remainder subject to layoffs anytime. Company can have as many as 50% temps.
To register your feelings on this issue join a Facebook Group called People Who Like People Who Work @NPR:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1662444465&ref=search#!/group.php?gid=342906561926
#20 Posted by Lars Hoel, CJR on Mon 22 Mar 2010 at 02:56 PM
For all the money spent, lost and looked for, it should be pointed out that NPR has not had a successful, long running radio show, produced "in-house" in 20 years. All the new and creative show ideas have come from outside the organization: "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell me...," "Science Friday," "On The Media" 'Planet Money," Radio Lab," etc, etc.
The last group of programs to be produced by the network - "Bryant Park Project," "Day To Day," "Tavis Smiley" to name but three were all dropped or let go.
While it boasts of it's money raising prowess, NPR has lost the DNA of its program creativity as some of it's best and most creative producers have been fired or left for a less stifling environment outside of the Mother Ship for a breath of "Fresh Air," Woops. That's produced outside, too.
No wonder NPR has dropped the word "radio" from it's credits.
#21 Posted by Harry Bannerman, CJR on Mon 12 Apr 2010 at 06:08 PM
Lost in all of this is the effect that NPR dictates have had on local stations — like our KUT in Austin, which has channeled a too-large portion of its budget into schemes such as the ill-fated HD radio channels (filled by canned content supplied by NPR and the like) and an increased local-news budget. Which has resulted in the loss of local jobs, local shows, and, ultimately, local interest. This had led to a formation of a national website (keeppublicradiopublic.com) and Facebook site (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=112566211435&ref=ts#!/pages/Keeping-the-Public-in-Public-Radio/107942542579499?ref=ts) uniting protesting listeners from Austin, Boston, Gainesville, and other cities opposed to the machinations of those not familiar with the problems faced in the hinterlands.
#22 Posted by Craig Hattersley, CJR on Sun 9 May 2010 at 10:56 AM
NPR's HD Radio is a farce!
hppt://hdradiofarce.blogspot.com
#23 Posted by Greg, CJR on Sun 9 May 2010 at 12:27 PM