NPR's Hypocrite

aim.org ^ | July 18, 2003 | Cliff Kincaid

[dark_mooncat]

In a recent column blasting the new media ownership rules issued by the FCC, Tom Shales of the Washington Post quoted extensively from Bob Edwards of National Public Radio. He said, "Edwards used the example of the Dixie Chicks to show how monolithic media can manipulate public opinion." Edwards claimed that Clear Channel Radio, owner of 1,250 stations, "spearheaded" a campaign against the Dixie Chicks because its lead singer had said in London, on the eve of the war, that she was ashamed of President Bush.

Here is what Edwards said in his speech: "Is Clear Channel’s move on those Dixie Chicks an expression of patriotism or a business decision? Should Clear Channel have the right to ban the Chicks from its 1,250 stations? I think what individuals do is fine—burn the CDs if you want. What industry does is another matter. Clear Channel can say the Dixie Chicks are tools of Saddam if it wants to, but it should not be allowed to kill the livelihood of any recording artist based on politics."

...Edwards is an on-air personality for a taxpayer-funded version of Clear Channel. From his perch in Washington, D.C., he is nowhere near most of the people who listen to him. He is a hypocrite, pure and simple, who doesn’t care about the facts.

[dark_mooncat]

Somehow in thier twisted minds those on NPR and PBS consider their taxpayer-funded networks to be more 'legitimate' than their commercial counterparts. My theory is that ultimately they don't trust the judgement of the general audience: 'quality' programming would not survive in the marketplace, so we must be forced to support it with our tax dollars. More elitism.

[Mr. Silverback]

You should hear the barely-suppressed rage and derision in the voices on NPR when they talk about the trouble the folks at the BBC are getting. They are not happy campers.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Bo Bedwards is a buffoon. The people spoke and many Clear Channel stations listened. The local Clear Channel Station in Birmingham has had to be reminded several times that we don't want no Dixie Twits. If you email Clear Channel concerning local programming they direct to the local channel. No VRWC here, just listeners. Scru Bo Bedwards and Nazi Propaganda Radio.

[squidly]

He seems to think Clear Channel should be required to promote artists that they don't think would sell well, and by doing so expresses total ignorance of the recording/radio industry.

[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.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

There's only one??

[eniapmot]

NPR has many worse than Edwards: eg., Shor, or Terry Gross.

[Drango]

NPR has many worse than Edwards: eg., Shor, or Terry Gross.

Indeed...the problem with NPR is that although they assert they are balanced, there is not one single, on-air, conservative talent. Not one.

[pgyanke]

Apparently, the government has already annexed business in America!

I think what individuals do is fine—burn the CDs if you want. What industry does is another matter.

If you want to own and operate a business in Amerika, check your freedoms at the door.

[Tacis]

"Somehow in thier twisted minds those on NPR and PBS consider their taxpayer-funded networks to be more 'legitimate' than their commercial counterparts. "

You fall into the ultra left-wing trap, yourself. You accept the distorted language they use and, in doing so, accept their lie as truth. This bastardization of our language by the left is the greatest crime.

You, here, accept that there are two types of networks, "commercial," and the NPR/PBS. NPR and PBS are not "non-commercial!" They are commercial only they have defined commercials for themselves as not being commercial. They have worked the spin, redefined the words/concepts, and forced you to accept more than half their argument.

The left does this with most PC terminology and does it well. We have adopted terms like "affirmative active," "hpmophobia," and "undocumented aliens" as having the meaning that the left has forced on us. These are propaganda terms that are censorship.

So, the NPR/PBS leftist spew is tolerated because it is "non-commercial" broadcasting. It is commercial broadcasting with mostly left-wingers supporting the products they peddle.

[Tacis]

"Somehow in thier twisted minds those on NPR and PBS consider their taxpayer-funded networks to be more 'legitimate' than their commercial counterparts. "

You fall into the ultra left-wing trap, yourself. You accept the distorted language they use and, in doing so, accept their lie as truth. This bastardization of our language by the left is the greatest crime.

You, here, accept that there are two types of networks, "commercial," and the NPR/PBS. NPR and PBS are not "non-commercial!" They are commercial, only they have defined "commercials for themselves" as not being commercial. They have worked the spin, redefined the words/concepts, and forced you to accept more than half their argument.

The left does this with most PC terminology and does it very well. We have adopted terms like "affirmative active," "homophobia," and "undocumented aliens" as having the meaning that the left has forced on us. These are propaganda terms that are censorship.

So, the NPR/PBS leftist spew is tolerated because it is "non-commercial" broadcasting. It is commercial broadcasting with mostly left-wingers supporting the products they peddle.

[bleach]

This is factually untrue. Clear Channel had no blanket ban on the Dixie Chicks. It was left up to the discretion of the local stations depending on the mood of the listeners. Cumulus was the only company, I'm aware of, that did ban the Chicks on a national basis.

[holden]

What are corporations, but voluntary associations of individuals who believe in and would foster the success through working toward giving the public what it seems ready to pay for?

To contribute to a corporation's success is a manifestation of caring, where bystanders are comparatively apathetic. Critical bystanders may reasonably be asked, "What are you doing with your time, talents and money that shows your concern is worth more or is more well directed than the individual owners and employees?"

If one has positive interests toward the public good and can be effective in carrying out those interests, the corporation may do well to hire that skill. More often than not, however, critics just look to tear down corporations and try to make themselves out to be more important than they are.

Any healthy corporation is always looking for good people, but many people the media delight to report about are specialists in breaking things and killing entities like corporations.

Privatization of government activities is often less expensive and allows a goal toward the public good to be accomplished more quickly than it would be through most any government entity. (Duh!)

HF

P.S. When we lose the choice of private association, as the Boy Scouts almost did, the government will need to be changed.

[sarasota]

NPR and the BBC are "in bed together".

[pgyanke]

I understand that the allegation against CCU is untrue. However, I was referring to the absurd statement in the article that individuals may make free choices but industry may not.

[amused]

This is factually untrue. Clear Channel had no blanket ban on the Dixie Chicks. It was left up to the discretion of the local stations depending on the mood of the listeners. Cumulus was the only company, I'm aware of, that did ban the Chicks on a national basis.

Some Clear Channel stations independently enacted a temporary ban and Cumulus only banned the Dixie chicks on their country stations while still playing their music on their top 40 stations.

[syriacus]

This bastardization of our language by the left is the greatest crime.

And changing the meanings of words is one of the first things manipulators do, when they decide they want to control minds.

[syriacus]

NPR and the BBC are "in bed together".

Both like to invite speakers like this man

Edward Said

Edward Said on Iraq and American Identity

Is America an imperialist power?  Scholar and author Edward Said discusses Iraq, Israel, and U.S. foreign policy. This talk took place on May 8th, 2003, at Kane Hall on the University of Washington campus. [snip]

While Said, who is fluent in Arabic and French, remains a sought-after commentator in this country on Middle Eastern politics, and is often heard on National Public Radio, his views are as likely these days to be broadcast and published abroad. He is a frequent commentator for the BBC, Canadian Broadcasting and on Australian radio. He writes about the Middle East and other subjects for The Progressive and contributes a twice-monthly column to Al Hayat, the London-based Arabic daily that circulates throughout the Arab world. Said, an accomplished pianist and scholar of music, is the music critic of The Nation. 

[syriacus]

NPR and BBC, together, brought this program to the world.

NPR News and BBC Present Global Call-In Program on Iraq

'Iraq: The World Speaks'

As debate over the threat of U.S. military action against Iraq takes on a more urgent tone, NPR News joins with BBC World Service to present a live, two-hour, call-in program to discuss the issues surrounding Iraq. The joint production, Iraq: The World Speaks, will be hosted by NPR's Neal Conan, host of NPR's Talk of the Nation, and Robin Lustig, host of the BBC's Talking Point.

Iraq: The World Speaks is an opportunity for voices on all sides of the issue to be heard, in a town-hall format, allowing people around the world to share their questions, thoughts and opinions on one of the most important international crises since the 1991 Gulf War. Correspondents from NPR News and the BBC will assist in answering questions from listeners.

The program aired Saturday, Feb. 15, from 1pm ET - 3pm ET on NPR stations, online at npr.org, on Sirius Radio's NPR Channel and via shortwave and satellite rebroadcasts on the BBC World Service and NPR Worldwide.

NPR News correspondents Tom Gjelten in Washington, D.C., and Peter Kenyon in Amman, Jordan, and BBC correspondents Kim Ghattas in Baghdad, Iraq, and Stephen Sackur in Brussells[sic!!!], Belgium, assisted in answering questions from listeners.

[Freedom4US]

The left does this with most PC terminology and does it well. We have adopted terms like "affirmative active," "hpmophobia," and "undocumented aliens" as having the meaning that the left has forced on us. These are propaganda terms that are censorship.

Those who get to define the terms of the debate win the debate everytime.