Here’s a new reason to despise National Public Radio.
It’s run by cowards, who now have decided that live interviews with conservative Americans should not happen because of the potential that NPR’s hosts and their bias will look foolish.
Let me explain.
NPR is a liberal propaganda wing of the Democrat Party funded by American taxpayers like us. Half a billion of your tax dollars per year go into the Corporation for public broadcasting which helps fund NPR.
NPR and its affiliates around the country (OPB in Oregon and Northwest Public Broadcasting in Washington) operate with tax exempt status and often with facilities purchased by taxpayers.
The rest of us in commercial broadcasting pay our own way. If you listen, you help pay the bill (advertising) and if you don’t, you don’t.
That’s an honest relationship.
NPR shows distinct political bias in its news coverage every day.
I hear it and can cite examples of stories it does cover and doesn’t; questions it’s hosts ask and those they don’t.
Full disclosure, Joel Pollock who is at the center of this latest decision to censor Conservative voices, was on my radio show last week. He did fine and we agreed on Steve Bandon.
My producers will tell you that I invite folks I disagree with on my show every single day. For 20 years, a hallmark of my show is “naysayers go first”. Naysayers routinely get more time on the air with me than callers I agree with.
NPR has now decided to interview conservatives only on tape and not ‘live’. This means they can edit the interviews when the conservative gets the better of the interview using facts and logic. I don’t do this and I think it’s highly unprofessional.
To be Blunt, it’s cowardly.
If you and I weren’t paying the bill for this unprofessional and biased journalism it wouldn’t be any of our business.
We are, so it is.
I’m sure someone on this post will mention that my show has lots of opinion in it.
But it’s clearly labeled as such and voices from all points of view go on the show without editing.
I resent my tax dollars, taken at the point of a gun, fund this kind of biased propaganda all dressed up as “news”
Pollak, who serves as Breitbart’s Senior Editor-at-Large and In-house Counsel, defended its Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon from false and defamatory claims of antisemitism and “white nationalism.” He also turned the tables, pointing out that NPR has “racist programming,” including a story that called the 2016 election results “nostalgia for a whiter America.”
NPR listeners were apparently outraged that anyone from Breitbart News had been given an opportunity to defend the website and its chairman.
In her response, “Listeners: Two Recent Interviews Are ‘Normalizing Hate Speech’,” Jensen concluded that the live format had allowed Pollak to get the better of host Steve Inskeep.
She suggested that future interviews be taped: “In addition, in my opinion, these interviews should not be done live. Inskeep is an excellent live interviewer, but live interviews are difficult, especially when there is limited time. A little contextualizing never hurts.”
Jensen went on to argue that “contextualizing” had worked for a similar interview with former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, as well as for an interview Nov. 17 with white nationalist Richard Spencer. (Pollak responded to the latter interview in an article Nov. 18 rejecting NPR’s attempt to link Bannon and Breitbart with white nationalism.)
Notably, Jensen’s recommendation mirrors the language of a critique by the left-wing pressure group Media Matters, which complained that “the interview failed to contextualize the true extent of Breitbart’s extremism under Bannon’s leadership.”
Bannon was recently appointed Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor to President-elect Donald J. Trump. He took a leave of absence from Breitbart News in August when he was appointed Trump campaign CEO.
Jensen applauded the use of the term “white nationalist” to describe Bannon, although she noted Bannon had disputed that term. She linked to an internal NPR memorandumsuggesting the term “white nationalist” be used in stories on the “alt-right.”