2021年4月23日 星期五

The Daily: Radio Nostalgia

How we put our show on the airwaves. Plus, a trip through Radio Garden.

Hey everyone, Happy Friday. We're dedicating this real estate in your inbox to something delightful and nostalgic: the radio.

We have lots of love for podcasting's early pioneers and predecessors — the giants of radio who have told stories, and developed new forms of journalism, on air for decades. And, many of you who listen to our show on your phones might not know that it is also carried on over 250 public radio stations around the country.

So whether you're still in love with radio, or ready to rediscover it, read on, and let us know about the last time you heard The Daily on the radio.

Mohd Rasfan/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Putting The Daily on the Airwaves

By Desiree Ibekwe and Mahima Chablani

ADVERTISEMENT

The Daily officially came to radio in April 2018, premiering on 16 stations. Theo Balcomb, a founder of The Daily, shared in this newsletter some context on our show's first foray onto the airwaves. Nearly two years on, our radio reach has grown to hundreds of stations around the country, so we wanted to dedicate this newsletter to some of the work our small but mighty radio crew does that you might not know about.

Every weekday, Diana Nguyen, a producer on our team, along with Marc Georges, an editor, works to bring The Daily to the hundreds of radio stations across the country that carry the show. Their goal: cutting down the episode, whatever the length, no matter the topic, to 22 minutes, the time allotted for our show on public radio — and delivering to those stations by 3 p.m. Eastern.

"Some days it's really easy, some days it's super hard," said Diana, who recalls the mammoth 45-50 minute episodes we published during last year's election cycle.

Decisions about what to cut can also be heartbreaking. "Sometimes I have to cut whole sources," she added. This was the case with Abel Oleson, the vintage shirt-wearing, mustachioed bartender in "How a Small Bar Battled to Survive the Coronavirus," our episode about a California bar.

ADVERTISEMENT

Michael Simon Johnson, a producer who was part of the original team led by executive producer Theo Balcomb, helped make the show radio-ready in its early days. When experimenting with and setting up bulletproof processes, there was one big question they had to broach: What if news changes by the time the episode goes out to air? There were radio stations that didn't air The Daily until the evening, and a few hours for a breaking news episode can be a death knell.

"For podcast listeners, it's fine," Michael said. "They know that the episode came out in the morning. So if you listen to it later in the day after some big event has happened, it's fine because you know you're listening to something in the past." He added, "But that's not going to fly on the radio."

So the team has to be flexible and alert to any changes that could upend an episode. Here, Michael recalls one particularly hairy situation:

Michael Simon Johnson on the stoop of The Daily's roving Brooklyn bureau.The New York Times

"Back in 2018, we did an episode about how the Trump administration was going to respond to a suspected chemical attack that killed dozens of Syrian civilians. President Trump had promised retaliation, but we didn't know what that was going to look like, so the episode was speculative. It came out in the morning and started to air on the radio stations throughout the day. And then in the evening, the decision was made to send U.S. airstrikes to Syria. At the time, I was at dinner. I was monitoring the situation the whole time and I had my work computer with me because I knew I might need to work if news came out.

I left dinner, went outside, used my phone as a hotspot, opened up my laptop and started chatting with Theo Balcomb and Michael Barbaro. Michael recorded an update to the episode and then I opened up our editing software, Pro Tools.

I was sitting on the stoop of a random apartment building in Dumbo, Brooklyn, updating this episode and sending it out to the stations that needed it. It took maybe 15, 20 minutes. And then I went back to dinner and I was like, 'Sorry, everyone, uh, we just bombed Syria. And I had to deal with this."

ADVERTISEMENT

A Radio Road Trip

Radio Garden

A few months ago, a link started circulating in a few of our audio-related Slack channels at The Times. It was to a website called Radio Garden, and the link revealed an interactive map that looked something like a zoomed out view of earth at night, with small lights clustered in cities around the world. Those lights represent radio stations, and spinning the map changes the sounds, enabling users to scan station signals from Albuquerque to Almaty, Kazakhstan.

From our searching, we've discovered there are a surprising number of country music stations across Europe (including a particularly good one in Hof, Germany), which has reminded us that airwaves are still a vehicle for American soft power, as they have been for the better part of the last century. But, looking closer at the lone lights scattered across continents, you can still hear localism, alive and well, in a diversity of languages. Take a look, and in the meantime, here are two listening recommendations for stations both familiar and foreign:

  • "My lockdown had a few phases, but throughout them all, I was consistently pretty nostalgic. So when I found Arctic Outpost on radio.garden, I was ecstatic about the discovery. This AM-MW station plays early 20th-century jazz, blues, big band and vintage country — the kind of music that makes you wanna curl up under a blanket with hot coco and watch the snowfall — and it's hosted by Cal Lockwood out of Svalbard, Norway, which is apparently 'one of the world's northernmost inhabited areas.' Cozy!" — Parin Behrooz, production coordinator for narrated articles.
  • "I'm bad about taking the time to make playlists, and am mostly ambivalent about their fundamental value proposition: total listening control. I love the lack of choice that comes with radio, the serendipity of listening to songs that someone, somewhere has chosen for you (a real, actual person, not an algorithm). Radio Garden has thrown me from my work day back to my hometown — with Alice 107.7 transporting me from London to Little Rock, Arkansas, with an O'Reilly Auto Parts jingle that doesn't seem to have changed in at least a decade. I'd encourage you to find your favorite childhood station, if you can, and listen for the sounds of home." — Lauren Jackson, this newsletter's editor.

On The Daily this week

Monday: We look at the tense and difficult diplomatic triangle between Iran, Israel and the United States.

Tuesday: A wave of bills has been introduced across the United States that affect transgender youth. We look at the motivations behind and the impact of these measures.

Wednesday: A jury found Derek Chauvin guilty of murdering George Floyd. We explore the verdict and listen to the reaction on the ground in Minneapolis.

Thursday: How a recent shooting at a FedEx facility exposed the flaws in Indiana's "red flag" gun laws.

Friday: What the spectacular fall of a breakaway tournament for European soccer says about the future of the world's biggest sport.

That's it for The Daily newsletter. See you next week.

Have thoughts about the show? Tell us what you think at thedaily@nytimes.com.

Were you forwarded this newsletter? Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox.

Love podcasts? Join The New York Times Podcast Club on Facebook.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for The Daily from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

On Tech: When is online nastiness illegal?

Deciphering between political rhetoric and dangerous threats online isn't always easy.

When is online nastiness illegal?

Steffen Ullmann

Digital life has complicated an already tricky question: How can the authorities tell the difference between hateful or menacing rants that contain empty threats, and those that might lead to violence?

My colleague Nicole Hong, who writes about law enforcement and criminal justice, said it's never been easy to draw this line, but social media has cranked up the volume of both political rhetoric and dangerous threats. That has challenged the police and the legal system in the United States to sort out what are simply words and what are red flags for a credible threat.

Nicole spoke with me about how law enforcement assesses online threats and what may have changed after the riot at the U.S. Capitol in January.

Shira: Where is the line between constitutionally protected speech and illegal threats?

Nicole: One question is whether the words are inciting others to violence. Another is: If you threaten someone with violence, would a "reasonable person" view that as a serious threat?

I imagine that most people who post hateful or threatening messages online don't act on them. But sometimes posts are a precursor to violence, as we've seen with several mass killers and believers in the QAnon conspiracy theory. How do law enforcement and the criminal justice system tell the difference?

ADVERTISEMENT

Law enforcement has really struggled with that for a long time, and it has only gotten more difficult with social media.

When there is threatening rhetoric online, law enforcement officials may wait to see if someone takes concrete action, like ordering bomb-making material, or commits an unrelated crime that gives them an opportunity to intervene. Or law enforcement might talk to the person about an online threat.

When online threats cross the line from protected speech to crimes is a largely unsettled area of the law, and there are so many people on the internet saying things that are violent or threatening.

Is part of the challenge that some people are more likely to post a menacing message online than threaten a member of Congress or the school principal on the phone or in person?

ADVERTISEMENT

That's right. Sources in law enforcement have told me that there has been an exponential increase in menacing rhetoric online. Look at any social media site and you can see how overwhelming it is for law enforcement to figure out who might be a risk for violence in real life and who is just ranting.

Should law enforcement have done more about the online threats of violence ahead of the Capitol assault in January?

There were so many posts that foreshadowed what would happen, but it's still not clear whether there were individuals who should have been arrested solely for violent rhetoric.

Americans have constitutional protections for political speech. And many people in law enforcement told me that posting broad threats — let's storm the Capitol or let's overturn the election, for example — were most likely not specific enough to justify an arrest.

ADVERTISEMENT

It's all tricky. Now some people in Congress, law enforcement and the public are asking whether more should have been done to monitor or stop people in advance. Law enforcement officials have told me that the Capitol attack made them less willing to wait to see if someone who makes a violent threat online follows through with it.

You wrote this week about a man in New York who made threats against members of Congress after the Capitol riot but didn't follow through and is being criminally prosecuted. Is that an example of lowering the bar for threats?

It's unusual for someone to face criminal charges hinged solely on speech, and that's why I wanted to write about it. A similar case in 2016 ended without a conviction for a man in Orange County, California, who had blogged about beheading members of the F.B.I. He said it was satire and constitutionally protected speech.

In this new case, the man's lawyers say that he never bought any weapons or did Google searches for weapons, he had no plans to carry out violence and no one did so on his behalf. We'll see how the jury assesses all of that.

Even if someone might not intend physical harm, verbal attacks can still feel threatening to the person on the receiving end.

Absolutely. That shows how the limits of the law diverge from the lived reality of people who are targeted.

The government has a very high bar to prosecute people and deprive them of their freedom for saying threatening things on the internet. Law enforcement tries to target the most specific violent threats. That leaves untouched a huge universe of rhetoric that victimizes people. That likely shifts the burden to internet companies to better police themselves.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

If you've found this newsletter helpful, please consider subscribing to The New York Times — with this special offer. Your support makes our work possible.

Before we go …

  • The people were authentic, but their messages weren't: Facebook has rules to prevent people from faking their identities online to coordinate and spread messages. BuzzFeed News reported on a company assessment after the Capitol attack that found that focusing on fake identities held Facebook back from taking action against real people who worked together to spread falsehoods about the election.
  • Fooled by a chain on the steering wheel: Using a weighted chain and a roll of tape, engineers with Consumer Reports easily circumvented a Tesla feature that is supposed to prevent people from using a driver assistance technology without anyone in the driver's seat. The car drove itself on a closed test track. This would be illegal and dangerous on a public road.
  • Turning the tables on the criminals. A college student who is a computer security researcher found a glitch in a payment system used by hackers who locked up people's computer systems for ransom. Some people were able to take back their computers without needing to pay the criminals, CyberScoop reported. (A reminder: "Ransomware" is bad.)

Hugs to this

Hunter, a chocolate Lab puppy, flopped on the floor to take a snooze. It's Friday. Let's all be Hunter.

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you'd like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018