• Welcome to our new home!

    Please share any thoughts or issues here.


NPR editor speaks out: How National Public Radio lost America's trust

NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism
This is being reported by several conservative outlets, but I had to include this link to the report by NPR itself. The suspension started last Friday, but they're finally getting around to 'splainin' it today

NPR has formally punished Uri Berliner, the senior editor who publicly argued a week ago that the network had "lost America's trust" by approaching news stories with a rigidly progressive mindset.

Berliner's five-day suspension without pay, which began last Friday, has not been previously reported.

Yet the public radio network is grappling in other ways with the fallout from Berliner's essay for the online news site The Free Press. It angered many of his colleagues, led NPR leaders to announce monthly internal reviews of the network's coverage, and gave fresh ammunition to conservative and partisan Republican critics of NPR, including former President Donald Trump.

Conservative activist Christopher Rufo is among those now targeting NPR's new chief executive, Katherine Maher, for messages she posted to social media years before joining the network. Among others, those posts include a 2020 tweet that called Trump racist and another that appeared to minimize rioting during social justice protests that year. Maher took the job at NPR last month — her first at a news organization.

In a statement Monday about the messages she had posted, Maher praised the integrity of NPR's journalists and underscored the independence of their reporting.

"In America everyone is entitled to free speech as a private citizen," she said. "What matters is NPR's work and my commitment as its CEO: public service, editorial independence, and the mission to serve all of the American public. NPR is independent, beholden to no party, and without commercial interests."

The network noted that "the CEO is not involved in editorial decisions."

In an interview with me later on Monday, Berliner said the social media posts demonstrated Maher was all but incapable of being the person best poised to direct the organization.

"We're looking for a leader right now who's going to be unifying and bring more people into the tent and have a broader perspective on, sort of, what America is all about," Berliner said. "And this seems to be the opposite of that."

He said that he tried repeatedly to make his concerns over NPR's coverage known to news leaders and to Maher's predecessor as chief executive before publishing his essay.

Berliner has singled out coverage of several issues dominating the 2020s for criticism, including trans rights, the Israel-Hamas war and COVID. Berliner says he sees the same problems at other news organizations, but argues NPR, as a mission-driven institution, has a greater obligation to fairness.

"I love NPR and feel it's a national trust," Berliner says. "We have great journalists here. If they shed their opinions and did the great journalism they're capable of, this would be a much more interesting and fulfilling organization for our listeners."
 
"In America everyone is entitled to free speech as a private citizen,"

Unless you suggest that one of the premier government media organs is somehow being dishonest.

Then you get sent home.
 
Unless you suggest that one of the premier government media organs is somehow being dishonest.

Then you get sent home.

It's not a violation of the First if a "corporation" does it. Even if the first two words in the name are "National" and "Public" because tax dollars built the thing.
 
It's not a violation of the First if a "corporation" does it. Even if the first two words in the name are "National" and "Public" because tax dollars built the thing.

Then the CEO should not have said that employees of NPR have free speech rights.

I've been in this long enough to be perfectly aware that free speech right do not apply to your employer or employment.

But I didn't say that, Maher did.

I'm just calling out her hypocrisy.
 
IMG_6734.jpeg
 
So I'm two margaritas to the wind.

Pop Quiz (Self Introspection)

Uri Berliner is a senior business editor and reporter at NPR. His work has been recognized with a Peabody Award, a Loeb Award, an Edward R. Murrow Award, and a Society of Professional Journalists New America Award, among others.

Given that; when was the last time, outside of this thread, that "Uri Berliner," or his prestigious work, was mentioned on this site? What does he normally write about? What are his positions? Is he anyone that we would be talking about if it were not for his recent essay in The Free Press?

Outside of the most recent hub-bub, his wiki page only mentions:
Berliner was born in 1956 as the only child of lesbian rights activist Eva Kollisch and photographer and artist Gert Berliner, who married in 1948 and divorced in 1959.[1] Gert's parents were captured by the Gestapo, sent to Auschwitz concentration camp, and executed in 1943. Uri graduated from Sarah Lawrence College.

Who is this guy?
 
Who is this guy?

Just a standard-issue, garden-variety left-liberal who's "old school" enough to recognize, object to, and complain about what progressivism has become. His remarks are of interest primarily insofar as they come from "the horse's mouth".
 
Just a standard-issue, garden-variety left-liberal who's "old school" enough to recognize, object to, and complain about what progressivism has become. His remarks are of interest primarily insofar as they come from "the horse's mouth".

Exactly. An anachronistic relic from a time when American liberal orthodoxy did not require so very many hypocrisies and denials of reality as modern woke theology demands.
 
https://twitter.com/i/status/1780580866646851842

New NPR CEO Gave Ted Talk Asserting “Truth” is a “Distraction”
Says it’s ‘getting in the way of getting things done’.
https://modernity.news/2024/04/17/new-npr-ceo-gave-ted-talk-asserting-truth-is-a-distraction/
{Paul Joseph Watson | 17 April 2024}

New NPR CEO Katherine Maher gave a Ted Talk during which she asserted that “truth” is a “distraction” which is “getting in the way of getting things done.”

Calls are growing for NPR to have its government funding withdrawn after a series of tweets by Maher were uncovered in which she supported far-left causes, including endorsing racial reparations and making claims that the planet is “burning.”

But the content of the Ted Talk she gave is raising even more eyebrows.

Maher ludicrously suggested during the speech that far-left Wikipedia had a model “which actually works really well” in determining “what the truth really is.”

Acknowledging that Wikipedia writers are “not focused on the truth, they’re focused on something else, which is the best of what we can know right now,” Maher suggested the “truth” was not a priority.

NPR’s CEO Katherine Maher on the truth:

“Our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.”

https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1780492620634202153


“In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done,” she said.

Maher went on to claim “there are many different truths” based on the feelings, environment and perception of different individuals.

In other words, there is no objective truth and the truth is whatever left-wing journalists and biased Wikipedia editors say it is.

Elon Musk has blasted NPR in recent days, asserting that the network has “become a hard left propaganda machine that tolerates no dissent.”

That was in response to comments by award-winning veteran senior NPR editor Uri Berliner, who was suspended after sharing concerns about the state of the mainstream media.
Berliner lamented the “declining ratings” and “sorry levels of trust,” calling on the legacy press to go back to square one “with the basic building blocks of journalism.”

Musk also highlighted how Maher (who puts pronouns in her bio) has a history of working for corrupt, globalist institutions.
“While NPR often claims that public funding accounts for only a small portion of its budget, the outlet’s parent company, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, received $525 million this year, $126 million of which went to public radio stations. Because much of NPR’s public funding is indirect, channelled through member fees paid by local stations, it is able to claim financial independence,” reports Unherd.

Last year, Twitter placed a label on NPR’s account describing the outlet as “State-affiliated media,” with owner Elon Musk commenting that the description “seems accurate.” [see this thread - OB]
 
I used to listen to NPR everyday for years because it was connected to my favorite Jazz station. I contributed to the station and was a regular follower.

I don't listen to jazz on the radio anymore because I can't stand NPR I hope they go under.
 
At first their playlist was listenable, now it is mostly modern rubbish and atonal garbage.

The DC area NPR affiliate does pretty well with their playlists, but there's still the Saturday afternoon opera.
I love classical music, even going into some of the modernist stuff, but opera, in general, may as well be Noh theater to me. As my dad used to say: hours of caterwauling with a nice aria in between.

Then one beautiful spring Saturday morning last year, I was inexpertly making up some way-too-strong CBD oil from a not-low THC strain and accidentally licked my fingers before going to Hobby Lobby.
And while I was sitting in the parking lot too scared to go inside, I heard this:



I had one of those moments of profound beauty that was carved into my entire soul for life, and NPR's crappy programming was responsible.
I can't hate on it entirely.
 
Who is this guy?

The great thing about having my first principles straightened out is it's easy to make absolutely correct snap judgments.
This is all I need to know, straight from his pen:

Despite our missteps at NPR, defunding isn’t the answer.


There are only two majority opinions on this. The first position is you never defund a government program, at all. Maybe there's a need sometimes for an external entity like an uber-powerful superpower to invade and topple your government and put in all new programs that will never be defunded, but the idea of removing funding from a program is otherwise anathema.

The second position is you call for defunding a program you really don't like, and score some political points off of calling for defunding, but never actually tie it off. So it's the same as the first position but with some lie theater to advance some parasite's personal lot in life.

Both positions are abhorrent and we've seen both expressed in articles in this thread. I didn't read the whole article and I don't need to - he's clearly in the first category, and that's all I need to know.
 
Back
Top