National Pathetic Radio (Fitting Title)

Townhall.com ^ | March 15, 2011 | Cal Thomas

[Kaslin]

If the resignations at National Public Radio continue at last week's pace, there may be no need for Congress to defund the aging dinosaur, because there will be no one left there to turn the lights on.

The latest is Betsy Liley, NPR's director of institutional giving. Conservative activist James O'Keefe secretly recorded phone conversations between Liley and a man masquerading as a potential donor from a fictitious group called the Muslim Education Action Center, which the man said had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. The fake donor said his group was worried about a government audit. Liley told him that a $5 million contribution might not have to be reported to the IRS. Liley has been placed on administrative leave.

This incident followed the resignation of Vivian Schiller, NPR's president and CEO, and Ronald Schiller (no relation), another NPR fund-raiser, who was caught on video calling tea party members "seriously racist." Ronald Schiller also said, "Speaking of Zionist influence at NPR: I don't actually find it at NPR. ... No. I mean it's there in those who own newspapers, obviously; but no one owns NPR."

All of this is damning enough, but it begs the larger question of whether in a multimedia age the federal government should subsidize a network that could stand on its own if it wanted to. The same people who are quick to allege bias when it comes to Fox News and talk radio are just as quick to defend NPR from liberal bias, claiming NPR is, to borrow a phrase, "fair and balanced."

The problem for NPR and other media is not only bias, but also blindness. Large numbers of Americans believe NPR and the broadcast networks are hostile to their beliefs. Rather than address that justified perception, the media deny what to their conservative critics is obvious.

NPR's interim CEO, Joyce Slocum, told the Associated Press, "I think if anyone believes that NPR's coverage is biased in one direction or another, all they need to do to correct that misperception is turn on their radio or log onto their computer and listen or read for an hour or two. What they will find is balanced journalism that brings all relevant points of view to an issue and covers it in depth so that people understand the subtlety and the nuance."

If that were true, would the ultra-liberal George Soros have contributed $1.8 million to NPR to, according to Fox News, "hire 100 new reporters for 50 of its member stations"?

Space keeps me from listing all the examples of NPR's left-wing bias. Here are a few, courtesy of the Media Research Center (www.mrc.org). Rebutting the Republican rebuttal to the State of the Union address, "NPR's John Ydstie tried to claim both conservative and liberal economists disagreed with Paul Ryan on the notion there was a 'failed stimulus.' " That's called picking only those economists who reinforce your point of view and not naming them. It's like reporting, "some people say..."

Also according to the MRC, "The NPR weekend game show, 'Wait! Wait! Don't Tell Me!' did a mock interview using George W. Bush soundbites from his book tour to present him as a drunk in the White House." And, "NPR's Neda Ulaby set out to criticize conservative critics of the National Portrait Gallery's "Hide/Seek" exhibit of LGBT art, and included zero conservatives in her piece."

There is much more, including the reliably liberal Nina Totenberg. In her "reporting" on Elena's Kagan's nomination for the Supreme Court, Totenberg presented Kagan "as a modern-day Superman." Why not Wonder Woman?

In 1993, I wrote a column about comments made by Washington Post reporter Michael Weisskopf, who claimed that evangelicals were "largely poor, uneducated and easy to command." When some of them flooded the newspaper with their educational and professional bona fides, Weisskopf said he meant to say that "most" evangelicals were "poor, uneducated and easy to command." That triggered more protests. The Post ombudsman at the time, Joann Byrd, tried to defend Weisskopf, saying that readers needed to understand most journalists don't know any of "these people."

And the big media wonder why they are losing audience, money and credibility.

[rj45mis]

We can’t defund these commies soon enough!

[SMARTY]

NPR has been indistinguishable from propaganda for so long, that it is IMPOSSIBLE to listen to them.

None of their news is balanced and they are shamefully inimical to any but the MOST LIBERAL causes and views.

[Senator John Blutarski]

“In 1993, I wrote a column about comments made by Washington Post reporter Michael Weisskopf, who claimed that evangelicals were “largely poor, uneducated and easy to command.” When some of them flooded the newspaper with their educational and professional bona fides, Weisskopf said he meant to say that “most” evangelicals were “poor, uneducated and easy to command.” That triggered more protests. The Post ombudsman at the time, Joann Byrd, tried to defend Weisskopf, saying that readers needed to understand most journalists don’t know any of “these people.” “

..... LOL - too rich! You just cannot make this stuff up.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

I refer to them as:

National Propaganda Radio

and

Propaganda Broadcasting Service

[Spartan79]

One of the most memorable examples of bias courtesy of NPR occurred on election night 1992 when it was announced that Clinton had been declared the winner. I was driving in New Mexico listening to a local NPR affiliate and had all I could do to not drive off the road as I listened in astonishment as the NPR newsroom staff burst into loud and sustained cheering and clapping.

This incident reportedly cost NPR and affiliate stations thousands of contributors. Now they warn the staff on election nights about such outbursts. The bias is still there and obvious, but at least they don’t openly cheer (from what I’ve heard; I haven’t voluntarily listened to them since.)

[SampleMan]

If National Proletariat Radio doesn't give the upper middle class white liberals their socialist ear candy with a healthy dose of conceited pretentiousness, who will?

[GOPJ]

...comments made by Washington Post reporter Michael Weisskopf, who claimed that evangelicals were "largely poor, uneducated and easy to command." When some of them flooded the newspaper with their educational and professional bona fides, Weisskopf said he meant to say that "most" evangelicals were "poor, uneducated and easy to command." That triggered more protests. The Post ombudsman at the time, Joann Byrd, tried to defend Weisskopf, saying that readers needed to understand most journalists don't know any of "these people."

Open mouth, insert foot, and chew...

[Tax Government]

Most journalists are intellectually poor, uneducated and easy to command.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Has anybody seen the similarities between NPR and ACORN? The people could be interchangeable as far as their immediate willingness to break the law. Its just unbelievable.

[Scanian]

I would suggest that as a Post “journalist,” Michael’s gaffes were simply a case of him “actin’ natcherly.”

Or IOW, MSM journalists are extremely stoopid...and Ron-boy Schiller proved that once again.

[Theophilus]

evangelicals are "largely poor, uneducated and easy to command."

Who could ask for better enemies?

[MsLady]

My Uncle Eli had a PhD in Nuclear Physics from the University of Notre Dame. He graduated at age 23. He coined the term "single event upset" which concept was critical to the development of successful modern satellite communications. He authored and collaborated on numerous scientific articles, chaired international meetings, and developed several patents. His second career as a consultant saw him elected to fellowship in the American Physical Society and also the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.

Smart, smart man and a devout Catholic, who believed in the saving grace of Jesus Christ. Ignorant my foot. Christian's are very diverse with those not so smart and those highly intelligent, from poor to very very rich. Unlike snobbish leftists who think they are all that. There arrogance stinks like yesterdays diapers.

[Cuttnhorse]

Your post got me to checking my own circle of politically active friends...of all my pals that I consistantly exchange emails, all but about 5 are college grads, mostly with science degrees...about half have advanced degrees, are currently employed in their professions and all but a couple completely despise Obama and everything he stands for.

The higher education level is well reflected in Tea Party activists as well. The left wishes we were all a bunch of uneducated hicks.

[MsLady]

Exactly...I only have a HS diploma. But, I received Advanced Personal Training Certification from National Academy of Sports Medicine. After spending about 12 years bodybuilding, studying nutrition and how the body, muscles, tendons function. The Academy recommended that you have a 2-4 year college degree in the medical field before taking the test. If you didn't have that, they recommended going to your local college and enrolling in a biology class. I study completely on my own, with a little help from my hubby. I passed the test and went on to be a personal trainer. You can learn anything you want to on your own, if you are willing to read, study and do.

And my hubby got most of his college education through the military. He started out at as an E2 in the Navy and retired Lt. Commander 22 years later.

[Cuttnhorse]

Good for you and your husband...E2 to Lt. Commander is very impressive.

I got out in 1968 as an E5 Quartermaster in 3-years...loved the Navy, (Swift Boats Viet Nam, Tin Can Mayport, Fl) and probably would have stayed but always wanted to go to college. Have a B.S. in geology and have worked all over the world in mineral exploration. Life is good if a person is not afraid to work at it.

[MsLady]

My hubby loved the Navy also, but after 22 years he was ready to retire. He was in the first gulf war and on several ships. If he'd stayed in he would have made Commander but, that would have been another 5 year commitment and he really didn't want to stay in that much longer.

Sounds like your job is fascinating. Geology is very interesting. I haven't read a lot about it, just bits and pieces here and there. If I had the time to study and read up on everything that fascinated me, I'd have to have 200 hour days...lol

[rhema]

[matginzac]

Quel IDIOT!!!!!!!
No surprise....