Last week a veteran NPR reporter and editor published a fair and formidable critique of the organization he has worked for for 25 years. (Audio track included)
As far as I’m concerned National Propaganda Radio can dry up and blow away. Stick a fork in it. I was a loyal listener and patron for decades, until 2015 when it revealed its shameless bias toward Hillary Clinton and its ever-increasing wokery. Gah!!! I can’t bear even seeing its logo without feeling revulsion.
Once a proud (and superior feeling) NPR junkie, I literally feel like I have to wipe off the indoctrination slime that spews out of the radio dial while listening to this station. For me my full stop it was the day I heard Robin Young “interview” Tulsi Gabbard. It was an ambush attack rather than someone genuinely interested in delving into Gabbert’s opinions. NPR’s bias is second to only Rachel Maddow’s insanity show.
Quick followup, I just saw that Uri Berliner has been suspended from NPR. What a joke. Real journalism not welcome here. Just FYI, here's Matt Taibbi describing the new CEO of NPR:
"...she’s never worked in journalism, which is very obviously the bigger problem when examining someone’s fitness to run a public news network with over 1000 member stations.
Maher’s been a WEF global leader, board member at Signal, banking manager at HSBC, a member of the Foreign Affairs Policy Board (FAPB) at the State Department, a fellow at the Truman National Security Project — pretty much everything but a journalist. The closest thing to a journalism job Maher held was chief communications officer at Wikimedia. In newsrooms such people are called flacks, and reporters often have good relationships with them. But a good flack is distinguished by skill in preventing truths from reaching the public, which is more like the opposite of journalism, raising the question: how was this person hired, and based on what qualifications?"
I can still remember the early days of public television and radio as a kid growing up in South Georgia. Back then it was called educational where they offered instructional programming during the day and cultural/scientific/artsy shows at night. Somehow this all morphed into what has become dupers delight for effete highly educated snobs who obviously know the score about everything and everybody. So many friends and family bought into it and cannot see how foolish they look trying to appear to be so smart. Well the way that they fell for the Stupid 19 drivel was a dead giveaway. But instead of accepting their folly and being curious enough to listen and find out how they’d fallen for a massive con, they just pretend like they are correct about it all and they have all those soft spoken hosts to keep their delusions of grandeur in tact. After all only idiots follow Trump and believe vaccines are dangerous. But They are just so much better than all that.
I used to tune into the news while driving and the nightly news when I had time. I stopped watching early on in the pandemic due to the lies and lack of scientific information about the virus.
Every now and again I check out the evening news and politically all I hear is the advocacy of the Democratic Party. Wouldn’t it be great to have news about all parties? And real honest news of what’s happening in the US and world.
I do still support public television for the shows they produce of entertainment and learning. This is where they shine. Not the news.
I'm curious. Is there any news source that Madhava's readers consider a "fair and balanced" source of actual journalism? As for me, I listen to (and look at) news sources on both sides of The Great Divide, to learn what both sides are touting as "news," and think about what agenda is behind their pieces.
It took me a long time to really understand that everything I read or hear that is "news" was chosen to be presented, and that those choices are always made for specific reasons. And, of course, there are reasons behind news organizations choosing *not* to present stories as well.
As far as I’m concerned National Propaganda Radio can dry up and blow away. Stick a fork in it. I was a loyal listener and patron for decades, until 2015 when it revealed its shameless bias toward Hillary Clinton and its ever-increasing wokery. Gah!!! I can’t bear even seeing its logo without feeling revulsion.
Thanks for highlighting this incredibly important crack in the media omerta code. May many more come forward! There must be a lot more who are fed up, and see the writing on the wall for these shill outlets. By the way, check out Matt Taibbi's humorous take on the new CEO, if you can get there from here, it pairs well with this essay. https://www.racket.news/p/new-npr-chief-katherine-mahers-guide?publication_id=1042&post_id=143617923&isFreemail=false&r=1g01a&triedRedirect=true
Once a proud (and superior feeling) NPR junkie, I literally feel like I have to wipe off the indoctrination slime that spews out of the radio dial while listening to this station. For me my full stop it was the day I heard Robin Young “interview” Tulsi Gabbard. It was an ambush attack rather than someone genuinely interested in delving into Gabbert’s opinions. NPR’s bias is second to only Rachel Maddow’s insanity show.
Quick followup, I just saw that Uri Berliner has been suspended from NPR. What a joke. Real journalism not welcome here. Just FYI, here's Matt Taibbi describing the new CEO of NPR:
"...she’s never worked in journalism, which is very obviously the bigger problem when examining someone’s fitness to run a public news network with over 1000 member stations.
Maher’s been a WEF global leader, board member at Signal, banking manager at HSBC, a member of the Foreign Affairs Policy Board (FAPB) at the State Department, a fellow at the Truman National Security Project — pretty much everything but a journalist. The closest thing to a journalism job Maher held was chief communications officer at Wikimedia. In newsrooms such people are called flacks, and reporters often have good relationships with them. But a good flack is distinguished by skill in preventing truths from reaching the public, which is more like the opposite of journalism, raising the question: how was this person hired, and based on what qualifications?"
I can still remember the early days of public television and radio as a kid growing up in South Georgia. Back then it was called educational where they offered instructional programming during the day and cultural/scientific/artsy shows at night. Somehow this all morphed into what has become dupers delight for effete highly educated snobs who obviously know the score about everything and everybody. So many friends and family bought into it and cannot see how foolish they look trying to appear to be so smart. Well the way that they fell for the Stupid 19 drivel was a dead giveaway. But instead of accepting their folly and being curious enough to listen and find out how they’d fallen for a massive con, they just pretend like they are correct about it all and they have all those soft spoken hosts to keep their delusions of grandeur in tact. After all only idiots follow Trump and believe vaccines are dangerous. But They are just so much better than all that.
I used to tune into the news while driving and the nightly news when I had time. I stopped watching early on in the pandemic due to the lies and lack of scientific information about the virus.
Every now and again I check out the evening news and politically all I hear is the advocacy of the Democratic Party. Wouldn’t it be great to have news about all parties? And real honest news of what’s happening in the US and world.
I do still support public television for the shows they produce of entertainment and learning. This is where they shine. Not the news.
Good riddance NPR.
NPRs failure is in being unable or unwilling to see Biden as HE is; belligerent and truth challenged.
https://odysee.com/@thisweekinfascism:3/biden-is-also-a-fascist
I'm curious. Is there any news source that Madhava's readers consider a "fair and balanced" source of actual journalism? As for me, I listen to (and look at) news sources on both sides of The Great Divide, to learn what both sides are touting as "news," and think about what agenda is behind their pieces.
It took me a long time to really understand that everything I read or hear that is "news" was chosen to be presented, and that those choices are always made for specific reasons. And, of course, there are reasons behind news organizations choosing *not* to present stories as well.
See ya!👍👍
You spoke for me, exactly what I would have said.