In the When Will They Learn? department, incoming National Public Radio president Gary Knell seems to suffer from the same misunderstanding that has plagued public broadcasting executives for years.
NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik reports that Knell says he hopes to “calm the waters a bit” at NPR after recent political controversies, and to “depoliticize” debate over the future of public radio. Knell is quoted saying, “It’s not about liberal or conservative; it’s about fairness…. We’ve got to make the case we’re delivering a fair service.”
Sigh. It’s as if he doesn’t see the road behind him strewn with efforts to “depoliticize” the public broadcasting debate, which is code for appeasing public broadcasting’s conservative enemies by adding more right-wing content and censoring things they might not like.
But the thing is, politicians are political, and some of them want there to be no more publicly funded…anything, but certainly not broadcasting, which they demonstrate by voting to zero out its resources every chance they get. No matter how calm the waters are.
About Janine Jackson
With relatively rare exceptions, I’d say that public broadcasting hasn’t “deliver[ed] a fair service” …
But a pretty damn poor one.
This struggle’s about the promise of public broadcasting, not its performance to date.
Agreed, Doug. As Ralph Nader said recently “The real tragedy is that citizens\’ movements should not have to rely on the commercial media, and public television and radio are disgraceful â┚¬“ if anything, they are worse. In thirty-some years, [Bill] Moyers has had me on only twice.â┚¬Ã‚ That IS an absolute disgrace.
Knell clearly doesn’t understand the conservative criterion for “liberal”: There’s hard-right propaganda, which, for them, is “fair and balanced”. Everything has a liberal bias, including anything that Knell would consider “fair”.
[…] http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/10/07/you-cant-take-politics-out-of-the-public-broadcasting-debate/ […]
He actully may understand the criterion but like NPR just goes along with it in deference
to corporate underwriters.
Of course, I knew this as soon as I heard his comment. If they persist like this, I ‘ll stop supporting them. What’ s the point? There are already plenty of the “right” side of opinions, we need Public Television and Radio for other opinions. Don’t they get it? Koch and his cronies are out to totally wreck our country and , you know what, I don’t think I even care because I won’t be around that long – I’m already 74 years old. It’s another generations’ fight.
Actually I watch public television for the drama and mystery and Ken Burn specials, and occasionally Nova. I just ignore politicians these days. But I did send in my checks to Eliz. Warren, D. Kucinich, etc. And one to Obama.
To find out more about what’s going on, read “The Nation”.
The new NPR Ombudsman is a great ombudsman … for NPR. But not very good for the NPR listeners. He lists a critique of them and then counters those negative thoughts and makes excuses for them at the end of just about every post he does.
Tom, you’re dead on. The only time I’ve seen that guy criticize NPR in regards to any of their reporting so far was an instance where he stated they might have been “too hard” on local chamber of commerce organizations. So he’ll crack the whip when business interests complain to him, but otherwise he’s a cheerleader and criticism deflector.
I’ve pretty much quit NPR for anything except Car Talk. It used to be all I listened to for 20 years but I don’t see them being fair and balanced anymore. Too often in the past few years I’ve heard interviewers ask questions that obviously called for follow up questions and in depth questioning but they were never asked and the whole interview was just soft balled garbage. Now I listen to AM radio instead to Thom Hartmann, Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz, etc. I’m not sure what happened but I think they became so afraid of funding cuts and they have been co-opted by business donors.
Cool.
I will listen- and contribute- because I need the breadth of coverage (whatever ‘opinions’ may be implied therein). I will also listen to Democracy Now & As It Happens & a bit of the Eurovoices. It all matters… and one way to see it is to remember what those voices were saying 10 & 20 years ago… and How. That’s a measure of the power that we’re all up against, in the long run… and I’m also getting near 70 (& go back with NPR to 1972 and a car battery running an AM station at night from Corvallis, Oregon). I mean, even if I’m still driving a 30 year old VW it doesn’t mean that I’m unaware of what’s on the road today. NPR still ‘works’… but I’m not so sure about the America that I remember… ^..^
If public radio were truly “public” and received all of its funding from the “public,” I wold be much more inclined to support it. I know otherwise, sadly, when “fundraising” week rolls around.
I agree with Alan G. From being an avid supporter until 1980, I stopped when WQED in Pittsburgh started running commercials and the station got taken over by “liberal” republicans, including the wife of a billionaire. I highly recommend Jerry Starr’s book Airwars endorsed by Moyers, although it is a bit old now.
Not sure you get it. NPR news should not be part of the original NPR because it is a membership association and the association lobbies the congress for money. True or not, it then appears that NPR must cater to the congress. NPR gets no appropriation form the Congress. Nil. Not a penny. NPR news can be both objective and removed from the direct political link by being a separate organization. The association can then lobby the congress for their funds, which go to the local station any way. Stations air a lot of programs that do not come from NPR.
The perception of you or the congress about whether NPR is “right” or “left” is irrelevant to what they really are. People hear what their bias and environment and background allow them to hear. Personally, I hear the most in-context and objective long form stories, along with the best music web site and on-air interviews with musicians/songwriters/singers, the funniest shows (Wait, Wait), the best analysis (On The Media), the most interesting stories (Outlook, Soundprint, Studio 360, This American Life), The best science (Science Friday), the best in theology and life (Krista Tippet on Being, Speaking of Faith), world views from 18 worldwide news bureaus (The World vs none for the mainstream media or cable opinionaters), the most thoughtful and insightful shows (Diane Rhem), and hours of other programs not labeled as “news”. It is the best $1.35 per capita the congress spends, bar none. SInce folks talk as if they have the freedom to direct how congress spends their tax dollars, then I will withdraw my support for lifelong congressional pensions, healthcare, long term care, and all wars of choice, just to name a few, and to direct my dollars to public radio, even if they do send a few bucks to NPR.
To many blogs here lament the inclusion of right wing beliefs into NPR.I don’t think they believe,or are even saying ,that NPR is predominantly leaning right.They just seem to hate the fact that it is not the sole home of the left anymore.As a conservative I see the conservative voice moving toward parity in a wide range of things.Bout time
@ Dwight Bobson: NPR in context and objective? Excuse me for a moment while I roll around painfully on the floor laughing ruefully. The same NPR that ignored Occupy Wall Street for days before dismissing it, mocked the Wisconsin protests and finds a way to work the fear of Al-Queda into nearly everything? The same NPR whose corporate sponsors are practically a rogue’s gallery of why there’s an Occupy Wall Street in the first place? The same NPR that won’t call torture torture? The same NPR that lets all pro right wing talking points go unchallenged?
Morning Edition and All Things Considered is a right wing, pro corporate love fest. If anything, the Republicans should be doubling their funding for NPR’s efforts in “getting their message out” instead of cutting it.
I’ve been listening to NPR since the late 70’s and as far as I’m concerned, they jumped the shark the moment they hopped in bed with the Pentagon on the lead up to the Iraq war and especially when the invasion started. They’ve been nothing but totally on board with the government line without question or challenge ever since. NPR news and some of the other shows you name as enjoying for analysis all live in the same Washington insider propaganda bubble. Maybe you should try listening to Democracy Now for some contrast. While not all shows are by NPR, they seem to all hew to the same line.
This has been long documented both here at FAIR and also at NPRCheck
http://www.nprcheck.blogspot.com/ Link also at my name.
@ Patrick Lynch. Hate to see your definitive comment on NPR slipping on down the bottomless blog pit where all things are no longer considered. Hope you get back here whenever FAIR takes one of its gentle little half-swings at some public radio corporate puppet or other.
Just above, by the way, you omitted two of my favorites: David Horowitz, with Allison Keyes in bemused attendance, trashing Howard Zinn the day after he died (All Things Considered, January 28, 2010) and Terry Gross soft-balling C. Peter Wagner, a protestant minister and obvious nut case who claimed he knew which members of Congress were “afflicted” by demons but was unwilling to identify them (Fresh Air, October 3, 2011).
NPR/PBS … the worst bad joke ever foisted on the public. Funded by corporations and “charitable” trusts. Peddling what the ruling class wants us to hear.
Mike, I’m embarrassed to say it but I’m kinda siding with you. granted, I’ve only been listening to NPR for 3 years and have not heard the 1975 NPR that some people here are yearning for.
But I gotta say, the one political issue that intimately affected me, the bittorrent blocking, was wholly ignored by NPR save for 15 seconds of “oh, BTW” AFTER the issue had been fiercely fought over for about a year.
And blocking bit torrent was right wing. It was a huge issue for us under-30 folk, and yet it was wholly ignored. But when I listen to NPR they seem liberal… but when I know what is not being talked about they seem conservative, but I like science friday, but I hate the weekend fluff, but I like terry gross, but car talk sounds so phoney……..AAAAUUUGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!
[…] Jensen did find time to quote the radical-left Noam Chomsky lovers at Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) from October 7: "The media watchdog group…criticized Mr. Knell earlier when he said he wanted to […]
I savor, lead to I found just what I was having a look for. You’ve ended my four day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great day. Bye
[…] the waters” and “depoliticize” the debate over public radio (FAIR Blog, 10/7/11) in response to Republican politicians’ desire to cut funding for public broadcasting. […]
[…] http://www.fair.org/blog/2011/10/07/you-cant-take-politics-out-of-the-public-broadcasting-debate/ […]
[…] Janine Jackson pointed out here (10/7/11), when you hear about new NPR boss Gary Knell talking about his desire to "depoliticize" […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
In today’s world being fair is being liberal isn’t it? And freedom of speech is limited to liberal talk. If another liberal millionaire is not sponsoring this web site, there will be no “fair” just like media matters. Same story with NPR. Why is it even surprising
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public broadcasting, a statement that was criticized by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, a media watchdog […]
[…] record on this count is mixed. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting took him to task early in his term for comments saying he wanted to “depoliticize” the debate over public radio. Janine […]