Well, what the hell. While we’re kicking around the NPR ombudsman, let’s at least give him this: There’s a reason he got that way. Apparently dealing with NPR listeners can make a man cray-zay.
Yep, there’s a new hilarious ombudsman’s column up. (Dude, I am so bookmarking this.) What does it do to a man’s soul to deal with nitpickers of this sort day after day? You be the judge:
Andrew D. Smith, of Hartford, Conn., thinks that the use of the term “interpreter” is wrong:
“On Tuesday’s report (9/23) concerning the statements made by Jacques Chirac at the United Nations, the NPR reporter twice said that he was ‘speaking through an interpreter.’ Wasn’t Jacques Chirac simply speaking? And weren’t we listening through an interpreter?
“The need for an interpreter was ours, as English language listeners. Somehow the phrase used by the reporter implied that Mr. Chirac lacked the ability to be understood and that an interpreter was his need, not ours.”
Mr. Smith is right. President Chirac speaks to us through a ‘translator,’ not an ‘interpreter.'”
Glad we got that cleared up. But there’s more:
I listen to NPR because it is the only place to get the quality and amount of news I want, that is why the speaking style of many of your newsreaders and reporters bothers me.
Many of them say “aw” instead of “o,” as “ecawnomy” for “economy.”
Some readers say “sojers” for “soldiers.”
Some say “industrul” for “industrial”
Some say “jer” for “juror.”
Most say “tearist” for “terrorist.”
Some say “tore” for “tour.”
Some say “Bawb” for “Bob.”
Others say “tode” for “told.”
Some say “veekle” for “vehicle.’
Some say “busted” when they mean “broken:” “…boarding up busted windows…”
But not one letter about “NEEK-a-raw-hwa,” with the full-espanol pronunciation? I guess we don’t hear much news out of there anymore.