Read Jim Russell's "Who are you calling a corporate shill?"

Milam's tirade against NPR is valid in its concern about the influence of corporations on media content. Still, what's odd about his article, which trumpets the value of well-researched journalism, is that he fails to cite any concrete example where corporate influence has altered the content of a specific program. Instead, his particular criticisms of programming and content seem to be more the result of his personal predilection for "serious" subjects -- opera, Shakespeare, Chaucer (!) -- over more contemporary ones. One of the things I appreciate about NPR is the fact that they attempt to address issues as diverse as rock music, car repair and sports from a viewpoint that is substantially different from the typical mass-media program (e.g., compare "Only a Game" to the usual testosterone-enhanced drivel of sports radio). Perhaps Milam is forgetting the "public" part of public radio, and that there isn't necessarily anything wrong with programming that is sometimes just plain entertaining.

-- Brent Stringfellow

Lorenzo Milam levels two charges against public radio. Any regular listener can hear that public radio is indeed guilty of the first charge -- that anodyne reporting and an increasing volume of local TV news like "human interest" stories are replacing interesting and challenging journalism. Milam's second charge -- that public radio avoids covering subjects harmful to its sponsors -- is plausible but remains conjecture.

Strangely enough, Jim Russell responds to a different charge altogether, defending the increasing advertising in public broadcasting. It's as if he guiltily responds, "I didn't eat any cookies" when his mother asks, "Did you spill grape juice on the carpet?"

-- Mark Stenglein

Living so close to Canada has enabled me to enjoy listening to CBC Radio One and Radio Two for over 35 years. The writer of your article is correct in his assessment of NPR's plight. What he fails to emphasize is that as a programming service and not a public broadcaster it has been up to the local stations to rebroadcast the programs offered by NPR. The result is "boutique" programming, where programs are created with sponsors in mind. The more money from sponsors, the greater the likelihood the stations will buy it.

The CBC owns and operates the stations that carry its programming. Their programs are developed in its regional programming centers for distribution on a nationwide basis.

I, for one, am looking forward to using the Internet, satellite and Eureka 147 broadcasting delivery systems (IBOC is junk) to permit me to listen to the CBC and other fine public broadcasters at any time. I have recently discovered the Internet broadcasts of BBC Radio 3 and Radio 4. Most interesting! I only wish that Radio 4 was transmitted at 28 kbps instead of 8 kbps.

-- Richard Chelekis

NPR provides me with the strongest coverage of world events I've been able to find, including stories about places no one else covers. Added to that incredible news coverage is the literature I find on PRI's "This American Life" and the ethnic perspective I get on "Latino USA," the interviews I get on "All Things Considered," and the to-the-point financial news on "Marketplace" -- programming that is worth my yearly contributions. While Mr. Milam puts down "Car Talk" and "The Savvy Traveler," there are plenty of people I know who appreciate that. I wasn't born when NPR started, but I do feel that NPR gives me something that I cannot get anywhere else. And since he can afford an international band radio, he is free to listen to something else -- or to start a radio program that he feels is better. If it is, I'll listen. But until then, NPR is the best there is, and I'm grateful it's here.

-- Tanya Melendez

The Free Software Project
Read Andrew Leonard's book-in-progress on Linux and open source -- and post your comments.