A person named "7/4"(?) posted a note poking fun of our message saying "You must be 13 or older to submit any information to American Public Media." He or she said "this is NPR. You don't have listeners under 65."

Funny, but wrong! Actually, we do have lots of listeners under 65! Only 7% of Weekend America's nationwide audience is age 65 or older. Here are the other age breakdowns:

24 or younger ......... 6%
25 - 34 ................ 20%
35 - 44 ................ 21%
45 - 54 ................ 26%
55 - 64 ................ 21%
65 or older ............ 7%

So, about a quarter of our audience is under 34. Another quarter is mid 30's to mid 40's, another quarter is mid 40's to mid 50's. And, the final quarter is 55 or older. Seems like a pretty nice bell curve to me.

Jim Russell
Executive Producer

As I mentioned here last week, I will pick one of stories each week that I think is worthy of further discussion -- one that raises questions in my own mind.

I was troubled this week by our story on National Turnoff TV week and the TVBgone device. I thought this piece was annoyingly and predictably anti-television (what a surprise – radio people who are anti-TV!), with not even an attempt to balance the treatment. The TVBgone device is controversial, but we rather childishly avoided even considering whether the device and the “practical joke” of going into a bar and stealthily turning off TV’s … infringes anybody’s rights. I’m curious what you think? Is anyone else troubled by this?

Jim Russell
Executive Producer

I like to pick stories we do, to discuss how we did them. This week, it is our interview with the Mother and the Fireman, and the little girl who was in that famous frontpage picture with the Fireman after the Oklahoma City bombing. Oklahoma City, A Decade Later

Bill Radke’s intro had me riveted to the interviews, but I can’t decide whether this piece contributed to my understanding, or whether it just let me wallow -- like a voyeur -- in a woman’s still-raw grief. Is this a story that we ought to have done – did it serve some valuable purpose or was it just a “media event” like a made-for-TV movie? I am troubled by this piece … not in the way we handled it, which was excellent and sensitive … but by whether we should have done it at all. While we really do want to get very close to people we talk to and about in our show, does there need a socially valuable purpose for doing so … to avoid mere voyeurism? If so, did this piece pass the test?

Jim Russell
Executive Producer