NPR's Seven Secrets of Feigning Objectivity

[Avid Listener]

Help me to understand the philosophy that guides you in our conversations in the forums.

Is there a difference between genuine civility and false civility?

Is civility an 'evil view' in your version of a well functioning world?

Isn't civility a little bit like pregnancy.... "Either you is or you ain't!" ? It doesn't matter if you became pregnant via what civilization considers a legitimate set of circumstances, or if you became pregnant via less than socially acceptable arrangements. Pregnant is pregnant.

Now, apply that to civility. I don't care if your broadcast operation (radio or TV) does 'civility' because of what civilization considers a legitimate set of rationale, or your operation dispenses a diet of 'civility' because of a gun being held to your head.... You have, you ARE civility.... or you are uncivil.

I can see the scene now over at the household of the "Leave it to Beaver" family setting. "Honey, would you turn off the TV. That program is broadcasting FALSE civility and I am afraid it is going to warp the children for life."

When someone's idea of being "civil" ends up sounding like an 18th century fop, it's probably not genuine. Anyone who has been alive more than a few decades can usually tell if someone is probably being sincere or not. It's one of those life skills we pick up with experience, like noticing little cues in body language that reveal when someone is lying. It's not a perfect science, it's an art. But those who understand it don't need to have it explained, and those who need to have it explained will never understand it.

 

[Albert19X]

I'll do a little article bashing. The author references James O'Keefe's laughably manipulative NPR sting with a straight face. That same piece of citizen journalism that even The Blaze condemned as dishonest. Using O'Keefe to support your argument should carry the same penalties as violating Godwin.

 

[TheBigA]

When Morning Edition starts to sound like Fox and Friends, I bet we won't hear so much kvetching from the wing-nuts about "subsidies."

They won't know, because they don't listen.

None of the people who want to defund NPR were vocal about it during the Bush administration. This all started after 2008.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Anyone who has been alive more than a few decades can usually tell if someone is probably being sincere or not. It's one of those life skills we pick up with experience, like noticing little cues in body language that reveal when someone is lying. It's not a perfect science, it's an art.

Whoa. We're into the confusion of apples and oranges. Being 'totally truthful' and being 'civil' are not automatically synonyms, and not completely co-dependent on each other.

If I walk out of the house in the morning to get in my car to go to work, and my next door neighbor is doing the same, and he asks "How are you today?" And as a CIVIL being I smile and say I politely say: "I am fine and looking forward to having a great day." And I climb in, start the car and drive away. I have just demonstrated being CIVIL.

Now, had I chosen to be TRUTHFUL I would have growled a bit, told him that his barking dog kept me awake for an hour about 3 A.M. and the I just finished picking up the trash in my yard where his pot-smoking daughter and her boyfriend sat in the car for two hours throwing their burger wrappers and other assorted trash into my yard.

Being civil is telling the pastor on the way out of the church that his sermon was good.... when it was actually a stinker. (There is nothing more uncivil than getting into a fist-fight with your pastor while other people are trying to gracefully exit the worship.)

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

CIVIL: polite but not friendly : only as polite as a person needs to be in order to not be rude

 

[FredLeonard]

Being civil is telling the pastor on the way out of the church that his sermon was good.... when it was actually a stinker. (There is nothing more uncivil than getting into a fist-fight with your pastor while other people are trying to gracefully exit the worship.)

That is a lie (dishonest). There are all sorts of "civil" things you can say other than saying a "stinker" was "good." Besides, if this preacher is any kind of public speaker, he knows when he has bombed and you loose all credibility. This is why mother told me never to believe compliments.

Lesson: Never attend a church that doesn't have an exit for people who don't want to chit-chat with the pastor.

 

[JeffM]

When someone's idea of being "civil" ends up sounding like an 18th century fop, it's probably not genuine.

Sounding like 21st Century Fox isn't genuine either. (You decide...)

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Well Fred, I had a wonderful explanation of the give-and-take going on here "for your eyes only" but it turns out you don't play the Private Message game.

Suffice it to say that both Avid Listener and GRC have in-depth knowledge of how church members (including clergy) sometimes deal with one another.

What really has to sting is when your church DOES HAVE alternate exits and someone took the time and effort to instead stand in line and then lied through his/her teeth while shaking hands.

 

[FredLeonard]

GRC: Well, one thing preachers and public radio have in common. They look at the "take" from the collection (pledge segment) to see how well they (the show) did. No pledges, show is dropped. Poor collections, preacher is dropped.

Too bad preachers don't follow the example of St. Johnny of Carson, who knew when he dropped a "stinker" and knew what to do about it.

Reminds me of an episode of "The Andy Griffith Show" in which Opie and his friend print up a neighborhood newspaper based on things they overhear grown ups say (including comments about the preacher's sermons). Andy, Barnie and Aunt Bee are able to retrieve most of the papers - except for the one left at the rectory.

 

[Avid Listener]

Whoa. We're into the confusion of apples and oranges. Being 'totally truthful' and being 'civil' are not automatically synonyms, and not completely co-dependent on each other.

No, they are not identical. But they are similar enough for the one to serve as an illustration of the other. If one can understand that honesty can be recognized through subtle clues, then one should be able to understand that genuine versus feigned civility can also be recognized through similar, but not identical, subtle clues.

 

[FredLeonard]

Let's compare being disingenuous and being civil.

On NPR: Host thanks guest for coming on. Guest thanks host for having him. That's civil. Idle flattery would be disingenuous: "Steve that was such a wonderful interview. You made me see things I had never realized before. Your questions changed my life."

Sorry, I've near heard anything like that.

Sometimes I hear "that's a good question." But everybody knows the guest is stalling while he thinks of an answer.

Some people seem to think hosts should play Perry Mason but Mike Wallace was the only one who was ever able to pull that off. The gaggle currently on "60 Minutes" try to do it and the attempt is almost laughable. When Fox does it, it is laughable.

And some people want "debates" of the "Jane, you ignorant slut" variety. SNL should have discredited that 40 years ago but some people never learn.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

GRC: Well, one thing preachers and public radio have in common. They look at the "take" from the collection (pledge segment) to see how well they (the show) did. No pledges, show is dropped. Poor collections, preacher is dropped.

Don't confuse a few colorful, highly visible preachers with "The American Church" in general. You are way, way off target here.

Too bad preachers don't follow the example of St. Johnny of Carson, who knew when he dropped a "stinker" and knew what to do about it.

Reminds me of an episode of "The Andy Griffith Show" in which Opie and his friend print up a neighborhood newspaper based on things they overhear grown ups say (including comments about the preacher's sermons). Andy, Barnie and Aunt Bee are able to retrieve most of the papers - except for the one left at the rectory.

We all have our favorite stories, some fictional, some based of fact, about funny things that happen between church and community at large. But our funny stories are just a speck on the big painting.

 

[FredLeonard]

Sorry, GRC. But it's no accident that they take collections right after the sermon. And regardless of "color" or "visibility," preachers who don't fill the plates, don't last. Those that do, get more prominent churches. Organized religion is show biz. Megachurches are Broadway. Small neighborhood churches are community theater. But it's all show biz.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

But it's no accident that they take collections right after the sermon.

Wrong. There are probably more places of worship in this country that "pass the plate" BEFORE the sermon. Your basic Evangelical process is that at the end of the sermon there will be an invitation, an altar call, and NOTHING in those churches is more sacred, more protected than the time at the end of the sermon when people are invited to "walk the aisle".

A number of years ago the Southern Baptists had an internal architectural organization that used to advise churches to NEVER include a balcony in a new building.... unless you could have a stairway of steep sloping seating down the sides so people could get up out of their seat and make a journey in the direction of the "altar". NEVER disrupt the flow by asking them to take stairs going back toward the lobby where they had an opportunity to get cold feet and not turn back toward the front but just keep walking.

And regardless of "color" or "visibility," preachers who don't fill the plates, don't last.

No, in "main line churches" in particular, that is the duty of the "Stewardship Committee". The lay-persons of the church are responsible for organizing some method of raising funds.

You apparently have no experience dealing with or being in the kind of churches in this country that just plain mistreat their pastors.... treat them in some cases like "indentured servants". "We will tell YOU what to do, Rev, and if you don't, we will send you packing." And that may be as many as half the congregations in this country.

I don't know how this in any way really fits in with our discussion of radio or television. Or the objectivity of NPR. This side-discussion just demonstrates that we all live in our own little reality on some subjects, and we really don't seem to have the ability to see some of the weirdness that goes on in our own communities. We don't really understand a lot of things about broadcasting, and we really don't understand a lot of things of religion, and we really don't understand a lot of things about the political process, but it doesn't seem to discourage us from setting ourselves up as experts on some or all of these topics.

I've been the guy who delivered the message: "Rev. You are through." and I've been the guy who when someone else delivered the message, I walked out arm-in-arm with the Rev, and I never went back.

Been there. Done that. Got the tee-shirt. In fact, I take great delight in getting dirty and sweaty mowing my front lawn wearing the tee-shirt from the place where I walked out with the pastor.... wondering if any of those folks who pushed him out observe the tee shirt and what value I place on it.

But, I am CIVIL about it, and they are CIVIL about it. When they drive by and honk, I wave back.

 

[FredLeonard]

Wow! An "evangelical" - more accurately, fundamentalist or holy roller? And you listen to public radio? Who'd have thought that was possible. These same people who keep trying to shove their own dogma and repressed "morality" down everybody's throat. The home of the religious right, Focus on the Family, Creation "Science," Hobby Lobby and Chick Fil A?

An altar call in church? Certainly not in those churches of, derived from or in communion with Anglicanism. Strange to have an altar call in churches with no altar, where the pulpit is in the center because it's all about the preacher as star of the show. An altar call for the already churched smacks of brainwashing technique.

Are you sure you wouldn't prefer Salem? They are "civil," too.

And given some of the highly critical comments about big city people lately, it's interesting that "civil" refers to characteristics and behavior of city people. As does "civilization."

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

This is a conversation that should not take place in public if it is going to continue. I'm very sorry you don't accept Private Mail where I could explain where your train has jumped the track and it not be a big public show.

No where did I say that I AM the people and church groups I was explaining to you. Years ago , before there was a Salem, I was the manager of a commercial AM station selling time in the "Preach and Teach" style of radio. Part of my job was to play referee when the programmers began to attack each other on the air. Part of my job was to host a daily call-in talk show with guests in the studio. When local churches brought someone prominent (seminary president, denominational executive, well know evangelist) to town to appear at their church, we would have those people as guests on the show.

In my lifetime I have personally been attached to, affiliated with, or involved in SEVEN different "brands" of church. Been a part of 23 different "congregations" in nine different states. I left the farm and went to the same conservative "preacher factory" college that Mike Huckabee went to when he finished high school. I have with some regularity attended lectures and seminars in recent years at a couple of seminaries in Georgia that are known for their liberalism. I function as a centrist in a church group that is somewhat left of center but has a lot of grumbling constituents who have not given up on the idea that we are supposed to be conservative. Figure that puzzle out Lenny.

I guess I'm like the kid who grew up across the street from Disneyland and said: "That enables me to be anybody I want to be!" (He knew how.)

Now. Can we discuss radio and the society that radio attempts to serve... and have a discussion with some integrity? You got us into this side-track by making some claims about preachers that just were not right. I don't have to like ALL preachers, but I feel an obligation to be honest in my description of them... even the ones I don't like and the ones I disagree with.

And that is tied to my beef with Talk Radio. A "Talker" does have to like or agree with all politicians, but should feel some obligation to be honest in their description of the people they don't like and don't agree with.

And we have the same problem of honesty and ethical behavior when it comes to this tension between city-folks and country-folks. In these threads I have only poked at Northeastern Cities because you and others began poking at Small Market Guy and "Flyover Country".... what ever that is. My oldest child went to NYC after college and spent several years there. She's a "City Girl" and she opened my eyes to how life in the city works. I have the best of both worlds. If I meet you in an airport and you say: "Where ya' from?" I can say Atlanta. (9th largest market in the country.) If it's not rush hour I can drive to down town Atlanta is 40 to 50 minutes. On the other hand, I live in a county where the ONLY city is a whopping 6,000 people. When I stand in line to pay for my coffee at a convenience store, I am likely to be in-line behind someone in bib-overalls who is kinfolk of Junior Samples who was on Hee Haw. And I can strap my car on my backside and be in the parking lot along the Appalachian Trail in 40 to 50 minutes the other way.

So loosen up your mind a little bit. Try having conversation with folks rather than out shouting folks. Life is fun when you take the time to smell the flowers along the trail.

 

[umfan]

The big difference, NPR is not objective, yet tries to portray itself as such. Most of the rest of talk radio makes no such pretense. The offensive part, NPR gets public dollars to not be objective. NPR troglodytes on one hand claim the subsidy is small, yet argue vociferously that it should never be taken away.

If NPR wants credibility, make it without the subsidy. Then it has no more obligation to be objective than any other station. That would be honest. The current state is a lie.

NPR is not objective. Anyone who claims they are is a liar.

 

[TheBigA]

The offensive part, NPR gets public dollars to not be objective.

That's not true. NPR gets public dollars through an appropriation spelled out in the Public broadcasting Act. Nowhere in that law does it say anything about being objective, or even about doing news programming. They also get public dollars from local stations who use that money to buy their programming. But when Congress discusses the federal appropriation to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, they never discuss objectivity. That's not the issue at all.

 

[FredLeonard]

The big difference, NPR is not objective, yet tries to portray itself as such. Most of the rest of talk radio makes no such pretense. The offensive part, NPR gets public dollars to not be objective. NPR troglodytes on one hand claim the subsidy is small, yet argue vociferously that it should never be taken away.

If NPR wants credibility, make it without the subsidy. Then it has no more obligation to be objective than any other station. That would be honest. The current state is a lie.

NPR is not objective. Anyone who claims they are is a liar.

NPR may have their own perceptual biases but at least they don't make stuff up.

NPR does not get a "subsidy." Repeating the lie does not make it so (no matter what Goebbels said).

As of next month, NPR produces only two programs: Morning Edition and All Things Considered. Plus TOH newscasts. These are news programs; not talk shows. You are talking apples and oranges.

WUOM, Ann Arbor and its repeaters in Flint and Grand Rapids get a "subsidy." But you're a "fan." I don't see you saying anything about them.

You people on the right keep saying "NPR" is biased but I never - ever - see any specific examples of bias, let alone any indication that you actually listen.

NPR's largest source of revenue is fees from stations to carry programs. Number two is "spots" - money from corporate sponsors. They are even rejiggering Morning Edition to allow more time for spots. Stations get the largest piece of their revenue also from corporate sponsors. So, with all that corporate money, if NPR is going to slant one way or another, which way would they go?

Funny, I never hear you public radio haters complain about all your tax dollars going to the University of Michigan sports program - or to pro sports teams, owned by really, really rich people. You like sports, so it's OK. Righties don't complain about government money for stuff they like or approve of. You know, war, corporate welfare, new stadia, subsidies for parochial schools....

WUOM is at 91.7 FM, in case you have trouble finding it.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The big difference, NPR is not objective, yet tries to portray itself as such. Most of the rest of talk radio makes no such pretense.

Well, give us some reference points that we can compare to.

Maybe the folks at NPR come up a bit short if the measurement is "Are they objective?"

Just for comparison, just so I can calibrate my Objectivo Meter, point me to the sources, the outlets that are truly objective... as you measure objectivity. Who are our role models. When one of my bone-head friends insists he/she is not an extremist, who/what can I point them to and say: Listen to this for awhile. Then you will know what is objective, and then you will know what I know... that you are just plain bone-headed.

Now, if your list of objective resources gets too long, go ahead and use two messages to squeeze them all in.


This ought'a be good!

Just how far down the list does NPR come in? Or does it show up?