[louisphilippe]

A result is the suggestion of spontaneous speech and unadulterated emotion. The irony is that such presentations are highly rehearsed, with each caesura calculated and every syllable stressed in advance.

This is actually a major problem with the entire TV and radio age. People who seem awkward or fake in front of a camera are actually normal people. It is simply not natural to talk directly to a camera lens as if it is a person, it is not natural to speak in a folksy way to a generic audience that you cannot see. People who seem natural in front of a camera, are actually slick, well-practiced professionals. Thus in the modern era, all politicians and most public figures end up being essentially actors.

[drdeadringer]

It occurs to me that a decent segment of the public figure that politicians and public figures have acting skills.

Can you expand on why acting authentic, and the authentic seeming the opposite, in front of the camera is "a major problem with the entire TV and radio age"?

[jobu]

The problem is not that the genuinely authentic seems unauthentic, it's often just boring and/or clumsy. I've heard some actual impromptu audio from radio hosts and at times they come off as nervous, bumbling idiots (i.e. normal people).

To me, the NPR voice is more like the way I sound in my head, before I open my mouth and begin babbling incoherently.

[drdeadringer]

I have found this to be true for myself as well -- NPR Voice in my head, babbling idiot in front of the camera. I should try to improve that.

[hcrisp]

If you really want to hear about it, this isn't the first time a unique voice was used to convey authenticity. It might have involved his informal rambling and all, and how his crazy life was falling apart, and all that kind of stuff, but I don't feel like going into it if you want to know the truth.

[jerrya]

Because it's not authentic, it's "acting authentic".

There's a 1987 movie called Broadcast News which touches on the issues of how reporters portray the news and what can happen, and why it might be considered unethical to add touches and flourishes that add authenticity to inauthentic events.

NPR Voice is attractive, I enjoy listening to it, but what else can they sell me while they use that voice?

If NPR Voice is not spontaneous but heavily practiced, rehearsed and edited, how is it different from propaganda?

[drdeadringer]

How do you suggest a newscaster speak the news if not in a practised manner?

Granted that an "authentic-sounding voice of authority" can put credence behind inauthentic events, but can not the opposite also be true? By this token, I'm going to have a hard time believing something authentic when I hear it on a typical AM radio broadcast. Doesn't there need to be an amount of consideration of the listener in either situation despite or because of the type of voice being used? "Surely Ira Glass can't be telling me the moon is actually purple right now." "This babbling talking head is really telling me JFK just got shot? Is he serious?"

I appreciate the tip on "Broadcast News"; by coincidence, I'm going to be catching "Truth" at the theater later today, a film about the CBS//Rather fiasco based off the book.

[maxerickson]

I was recently impressed when I watched Nightly Business Report, which is now produced by CNBC. A wide range of their staff appear to effortlessly change their delivery for the different audience.