Morning Becomes Apoplectic

LA Slime ^ | 7/30/03 | Rob Long

[Drango]

COMMENTARY
Morning Becomes Apoplectic

			Times Headlines TR> more >

By Rob Long, Rob Long is a contributing editor to the National Review.

I don't have an out-box on my desk, but I do have one of those toast-rack-looking things. And each slot is crammed with to-do items: receipts, bills to pay, orphan phone numbers, that sort of thing. Right now, the first slot is occupied by two pieces of mail: a notice from KCRW, Los Angeles' most prominent NPR radio station, reminding me to renew my membership and a note from the Bush/Cheney '04 campaign, reminding me to send in the maximum allowable individual contribution.

The Bush check is an easy one to write. He's a good president, and I want him around for another four years. The KCRW check, though, is a tricky one. I like the music programming, but the rest of its NPR schedule drives me up a tree: the squeaky-voiced commentators oozing smug self-satisfaction, the unfunniness of its "funny" pieces and, of course, its ludicrous and geriatric liberal bias.

But I listen. And I contribute. And I'm not sure why.

~snip...LA Times article. Please go to the link to read the rest...

[Drango]

Rob Long is a contributing editor to the National Review.

Sleeping with the enemy IMHO.

[Drango]

*NPR/PBS* Ping list

If you want on or off this *NPR/PBS* ping list, please FReepmail me or just bump the thread
AND indicate your desire to be included. You must opt in! Don't be shy!
This is a low to moderate activty list.

[Drango]

Exploding at the inanities on NPR is about the only release we repressed, uptight Republicans allow ourselves. There's something wonderfully therapeutic about spraying your own dashboard with angry spittle.

LOL

[mhking]

Last week, I was stuck in traffic, listening to an inane NPR report about the proposed prescription drug giveaway to the elderly. When they began to interview an old guy who complained about the cost of drugs, the reporter started using her "sad, concerned" voice with the "things are better in Scandinavian countries" overlay filter. (You know the voice.)

I found myself getting angrier and angrier and repeating over and over, alone in my car: "What's his net worth? Tell me his net worth!" Which, of course, they didn't. Because it was probably $1 zillion, like a lot of old people. I shouted: "Why don't we send the money directly to Carnival Cruise Lines and eliminate the middleman?"

He likes the music, as do I - I listen to KCRW's music-only service (Yeah! No inane, whining commentators!) on the 'net -- it's MP3 streamed at kcrw.org if you're interested. He also likes (as do I) yelling at the moronic liberals they have on from time to time, as well.

Just damn.

If you want on the new list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...

[Timesink]

Bump! Add me please!

[Timesink]

He likes the music, as do I - I listen to KCRW's music-only service (Yeah! No inane, whining commentators!) on the 'net -- it's MP3 streamed at kcrw.org if you're interested.

They also have a swanky all-news stream at kcrwworldnews.com.

Well, the audio quality is swanky anyway. All the stream does is air NPR News, VOA News, BBC News and a couple of PRI news/talk shows in rotation (for the most part), live, every three hours around the clock. But it does at least do it at the highest bit rates I've found on the net (RealAudio at 32.1Kbps, MP3 at 44.1KBps).

He also likes (as do I) yelling at the moronic liberals they have on from time to time, as well.

Apparently a lot of us do. There was a study published not too long ago that showed that a majority of NPR News listeners are conservatives. (It was posted here on FR at the time, but I can't find the link.)

Personally, I think the reason for this is that a lot of us live in areas without a single decent commercial all-news radio station, yet almost all of us can pick up at least one NPR station no matter where we are. (Hell, I'm in West Virginia and I can get FIVE different NPR stations from three different states.) Worse, even if you do have a commercial all-news station, it's almost certainly locally-oriented except for a top-of-the-hour newscast from our favorite liberals at CBS News or ABCNEWS. So if you're commuting to/from work and you want serious national and international news, you've got no choice but NPR. And obviously, more conservatives want such news than liberals.

All in all, just one more reason to sign up for Sirius Satellite Radio. Yeah, they have two all-NPR channels, but they also have an all-Fox News channel! (Remember, XM has THREE CNN streams, is partially owned by Clear Channel, and is not making a profit! Sirius has only a CNN Headline News stream (the least offensive CNN channel), no Cheap Channel involvement, and is profitable, which means you won't risk ending up with a $300 paperweight in your car in a year and a half!)

[Drango]

Apparently a lot of us do. There was a study published not too long ago that showed that a majority of NPR News listeners are conservatives.

I listen to a lot of NPR and I'm sure a lot of Freepers do. Listening doesn't mean we agree with the slant of their reporting or agree with the fundumental flaw of government funding.

I remember the study, but can't find it either. I'm not sure it used the word majority, but there were a suprising percentage of conservaties who listen to NPR.

[The Great RJ]

I also beat the liberal drivel of NPR and the mind rot purveyed by top 40 radio by using Internet sources. Radio Netscape is commercial free and gives me over 100 stations each playing only a single type of music.

[tsomer]

I listen to a lot of NPR and I'm sure a lot of Freepers do.

I'm guilty as well. But if you go to their local website you see a couple of interesting things:

-They're into merchandise in a big way: dvd's and cd's, table radios and such. That's more than the canvas bags and coffee mugs of a few years ago.
-Good luck trying to find an up to date financial statement, as another freeper pointed out. Of course salarys are off record.
-Check out the show line up; it's on the same intellectual plane as Oprah. What's happened to that educational mandate they spoke of when they first started?

In short, we have a virtual state sponsered monopoly metastasizing and invading every related area of commerce to the point that it is now undermining private business. It has become as vapid and idiotic as the "big three" networks that they're displacing. Why is this happening? Have they gained that much clout?

Go ahead and listen if you can stomach it, but don't give them anything. I expect they'll be clipped back before long.

[Springman]

I hate to admit this, but when I'm
on the road from 10 to noon, sometimes I listen to Diane Reams(sp?). That's when Gleen Beck
acting strange. Then after a few minutes of herand yelling WTF a few times, I can handle Mr. Beck again.

[Drango]

Here is the weekly screed from NPR's chief apologist... http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman/index.html

---

Media Matters

July 30, 2003

Journalists' Opinions: The Eunuch in the Harem?

By Jeffrey A. Dvorkin
Ombudsman
National Public Radio

Can NPR journalists express their personal opinions when they speak or write for other media?

That's the question asked by some media critics and many listeners. They object whenever NPR reporters appear to reveal their opinions on the issues of the day.

NPR encourages its journalistic staff to speak in public. But they are expected to hold to the same high standards when they appear in other media as they would in their regular duties on NPR.

A number of NPR journalists appear in other media. Senior News Analyst Daniel Schorr's essays first heard on NPR often appear as a weekly column for The Christian Science Monitor. Other NPR journalists are frequently asked to pen their observations for op-ed columns around the country.

Still other NPR journalists have regular duties on some of the national television talk shows. It's on television where the temptations and dangers of personal opinion seem the greatest, in my view. On television, the challenge is for NPR journalists to stay in their role as reporters and to avoid any punditry that might be viewed as personal opinion.

NPR's Nina Totenberg and Tom Gjelten regularly appear on PBS where the discussions are often weighty and the tones are measured. PBS hosts often urge their guest to voice their opinions, but few NPR listeners find that problematic.

Some listeners find this more troublesome when it comes to FOX News and the regular presence of NPR's Juan Williams and Mara Liasson. That issue came to a head with reference to statements made by Liasson on FOX.

'Disgrace...'

Last October 3, Mara Liasson on FOX News Sunday commented on the arrival of Congressmen Bonior and McDermott in Baghdad prior to the start of the war:

These guys are a disgrace. Look, everybody knows it's 101, politics 101, that you don't go to an adversary country, an enemy country, and badmouth the United States, its policies and the president of the United States. I mean, these guys ought to, I don't know resign.

Few NPR listeners wrote to me to complain last fall (NPR listeners evidently don't watch FOX very much). But Liasson's remarks were recently revived by Norman Solomon, a media critic for FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), a liberal media watchdog.

• Read Solomon's article.

Solomon concludes his column:

...if a mainstream political journalist like Mara Liasson was so quick to suggest 10 months ago that McDermott resign for inopportunely seeking to prevent a war, when will she advocate that the president resign for dishonestly promoting a war -- or, failing resignation, face impeachment?

Another regular critic of NPR's coverage is Ali Abunimah. He agrees with Solomon but adds:

My reading of NPR's guidelines is that they (NPR journalists) are not "pundits" and not giving opinion, but rather analysis. If this is not opinion and not punditry, where do you draw the line? If your political correspondent believes that criticizing the president is unacceptable behavior, you need to tell her to check what country she thinks she lives in.

I think Solomon and Abunimah are substantially correct -- but only up to a point. NPR reporters, hosts and ombudsmen should not be in the business of making their own opinions known about matters of public controversy. When they do, the public quickly senses that NPR compromises its ability to report in a fair manner.

In this pundit-crazed media culture, there are more than enough people who opine as soon as the klieg lights come on. NPR and its listeners deserve a better form of public discourse.

Up to NPR Standards?

Bruce Drake as vice president of news is responsible for NPR's journalistic standards.

My guidelines are simple: an NPR News reporter should not say something on a television talk show, the Internet or a public speech that they could not say on-air for NPR in their own reporting. NPR listeners need to know that the journalists they hear on our air are committed to accuracy and fairness. Our listeners need to know that our journalists do not come to the stories they cover with an agenda, meaning that they must maintain a firewall between their private opinions and their professional performance.

Liasson realizes that her spoken words can't be retracted:

I certainly shouldn't have said it. I don't believe it is in any way representative of remarks I make anywhere, on Fox, PBS, NPR or in person about the news. I would encourage people to read the entire transcript from 10/3/02.

Many television talk shows -- not only on FOX -- make their reputations for delivering opinions and emotions. But FOX especially seems to pride itself on its appeal to unfurled patriotism with a conservative perspective. That frequently infuriates many NPR listeners (but not, it seems, FOX viewers) because of the openly ideological premise that some find jingoistic and downright un-journalistic. NPR listeners also object to the high emotional content of the programs and resent seeing NPR reporter participation.

In my opinion, that journalistic tone on FOX can often resemble a food fight rather than a reasoned discussion. The programs can be very entertaining, but no one would confuse them with the Oxford Union debates.

NPR as 'Liberal Media?'

Some listeners just don't understand why NPR would allow its reporters to lend their own credibility and that of NPR to FOX programs. FOX hosts often imply that NPR reporters are the embodiment of liberal journalism by placing them against openly conservative personalities. This may confirm in the minds of some viewers that NPR must be as ideologically committed in its own way as FOX is to the conservative cause.

The lure of speaking one's mind is tempting. In my experience, journalists who have been in the business for a while often fall victim to the siren song of punditry... much like the eunuch in the harem, some journalists end up resenting having all of the responsibilities and none of the pleasures.

NPR's Ethical Standards

NPR is in the process of writing its own ethics guide. It can't come too soon because of issues such as this one where Liasson appeared to abandon her role of reporter. Situations such as this one inevitably come back to haunt both the reporter and NPR.

The New York Times happens to have a very succinct code of conduct for its journalists that could just as easily apply in this case:

102. In deciding whether to make a radio, television or Internet appearances, a staff member should consider its probable tone and content to make sure they are consistent with Times standards. Staff members should avoid strident, theatrical forums that emphasize punditry and reckless opinion-mongering. Instead we should offer thoughtful and retrospective analysis. Generally a staff member should not say anything on radio, television or the Internet that could not appear under his or her byline in The Times.

NPR and The New York Times both have strong reasons for maintaining the high journalistic standards of their organizations.

But in NPR's case, are those standards being enforced?

Listeners may contact me at 202-513-3245 or at ombudsman@npr.org.

Jeffrey Dvorkin 
NPR Ombudsman 

[Twinkie]

They play that folksy music to show what plain, though
brilliant, folks they are. Folksy music, then liberal
commentary, then Nina Totenberg, then folksy music,
then the interview of the quirky artist, then more
folksy music - -

[WorkingClassFilth]

I listen to NPR for three reasons:

1) It's the only FM my 1972 transistor radio in my basement shop reliably picks up.

2) It pays to know what the Marxists you subsidize with your tax dollars are spewing.

3) I love listening to the bleating entreaties when the fund raisers are on.

Beyond that, there is absolutely no need for any sort of public financing of these boat anchors. Kill them all and let God sort out and reassign their frequencies.

[an amused spectator]

I used to listen to National Propaganda Radio on the half-hour ride into work and back each day. These days, I can't listen for more than a couple of minutes at the most, even when I'm just monitoring.

I actually have a phrase for the thing about their "news" that pisses me off the most. I call it "the NPR But". That's where they'll tell you part of the reasonable side of the story, and then they'll drag in some no-name to "rebut" the "wild-eyed" common sense view, starting with the phrase "But critics like ---- say that the sun actually rises in the West on Tuesdays...".

Half the time I'll recognize the no-name as someone like Morris Dees, whose politics I'm aware of, but I know that most of the rest of the world has no idea who the guy is.