• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Is NPR Biased?

F

FredLeonard

Guest
This charge is frequently made here, generally without specifics or substantiation. People who make it seem to hold it as self-evident truth.

Is NPR biased? By NPR, in this context, I mean the networks morning and afternoon news magazine programs (Morning Edition and All Things Considered).

Bias: Noun. a particular tendency or inclination, especially one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

Sociologist Gaye Tuchman, in her ground breaking study of news organizations as work places, found that news people are faced with often unexpected or emergency situations and have to make them routine in order to deal with them quickly and effectively. To do this, news people have set of implicit and explicit news categories, which are generally agreed upon and understood. Stories are assigned to categories and then handled in a specific way - the same way other stories in that category were handled previously.

NPR handles political stories based on equivalency. He said; she said. There are two (and only two) sides. Both are given equal weight. Because of political pressure from conservatives in congress or at the CPB, NPR is sometimes accused of giving undue weight to the conservative position. To the extent NPR personnel show their own preferences, it is in position. The favored position is presented last, following the word "but" and with points made in the first position specifically refuted.

NPR has a particular interest in group identity and victimization of group members. NPR stories often assume that when a member of a designated victim/entitlement group faces any kind of personal set-back, it is the result of overt prejudice against the group to which that person belongs. Whenever possible, NPR prefers to have reporters/interviewers who are also members of the group in question provide sympathetic coverage. Women cover women. Hispanics cover Hispanics. NPR devotes an arguably inordinate amount of time to such topics.

NPR's obsession with race, gender, ethnicity and gender preference is reflected in its Code Switch and Race Project teams which have been singled out for special criticism, including by CPB's Ombudsman.

When a White male's accomplishment is reported, it's a personal accomplishment. All other accomplishments are victories for a particular identity group. Contrast NPR's stories on Baba Wawa's retirement and Mike Wallace's passing.

NPR has a special interest in high concept cable dramas (especially on HBO) and covers them deeply, while ignoring other - possibly more popular and influential - programming.

NPR presents myths, folklore, superstitions and religious dogmas of various primitive or indigenous people (American Indians, in particular) as factual.

NPR personnel use Apple products and seem to live in an Apple-centric universe. Iphone, Ipad and Ipod are frequently used as generic terms in NPR stories and Apple products are often singled out for special mention in more general coverage of technology issues.

NPR has a special fondness for nostalgia-laced David and Goliath stories about business struggling to keep going in a changing business environment (not unlike terrestrial radio). Last week NPR carried multiple stories about the trials of one brick and mortar bookstore.

I don't assume NPR is trying to produce "propaganda" to extol their views. More likely, they operate in very insular organization culture where some ideas and viewpoints are beyond question. But based on the dictionary definition, yes, NPR is biased.

It's too bad no one else in broadcasting is doing serious and in-depth news.
 
But if there was, I'm sure you'd find something wrong with it.

And you'd do hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. However, if somebody else was doing serious and in-depth news, competition might provide at least a partial corrective mechanism.

Now, go back to drinking industry Kool-Aid.

People like you are responsible for the miserable state the industry is in. Not competition from new media. Not the economy. The mind-set you express here several times a day.

Please note: You complained about a lack of specific in other posts complaining of NPR bias. I provided specifics. You did not respond to those specifics. You just took another cheap shot at me for daring to criticize.
 
Last edited:
People like you are responsible for the miserable state the industry is in.

Wow. Those who can...do. Those who can't complain about those who do.

"Someone else" IS doing serious in-depth reporting. TV, newspapers, internet, BBC, cable, etc. Lots of competition.

Please note: You complained about a lack of specific in other posts complaining of NPR bias. I provided specifics. You did not respond to those specifics. You just took another cheap shot at me for daring to criticize.

But they're not really specifics. They're just cherry-picking generalities that prove your point. Maybe you don't know what "specifics" are. If I responded to every one of your incorrect generalities, I'd be here all day.
 
Last edited:
CBS Radio network has a weekend news show covering news stories in depth. The Wall Street Journal daily morning news show covers stories in depth. Perhaps not BBC like in depth (i.e. one half hour per story), but they're a lot more in depth than the top of the hour news reports.

NPR is o.k., but a lot of artsy stuff is included with the news (especially on the weekends) that I find about as interesting as TV infotainment.
 
NPR is o.k., but a lot of artsy stuff is included with the news (especially on the weekends) that I find about as interesting as TV infotainment.

Some people are turned off by that content, others are addicted to that content.

And the content that you would be happy if they left out, is the very content that attracts other people. In our discussions here in the forums, I am convinced there a number of people who post here that have a little neon sign that goes off in their head that blinks "LIBERAL, LIBERAL" when that content comes on. I'm thinking of feature material where someone reminds us today is the birthday, maybe a century ago, of some great writer or musician or poet or even an inventor.

People who are entertained and comforted by such reports have brains wired in such a way that they probably have jobs or professions that are demanding, maybe requiring them to do web searches all day long on work related stuff. They get up on Saturday morning, whip up a serving of Belgian Waffles or something, and then sit back and drink in the content. What a luxury to let someone else dig out hard-to-find content.

Yeah! Tell me that this is the birthday of American writer Eudora Welty and remind me what she wrote about. I might just head for the library and pick up one of her books I told myself 7 years ago I was going to take the time to read.

Tell me that on this day in the 1400s some up-and-coming warrior defeated the king of Brownbackisrtan, thus setting in motion the establishment for the first time the nation of modern Italy.

Tell me that some nation over in the shadows of the Himalayan Mountains has finally made peach with some obscure meditation group founded as a split off of Buddhism in the early 1900s and included them in the new government.

If all that bores you, irritates you, then by all means... switch to Fox News, Fair and Balanced.
 


Some people are turned off by that content, others are addicted to that content.

And the content that you would be happy if they left out, is the very content that attracts other people.

You have put your finger on why the broadcast model is doomed. One size fits all. They report; they decide. The broadcast model is like the Outer Limits: "We will control everything you see and hear." That's the broadcasters' fantasy. Being the gatekeepers. Deciding what's important and what's not. Setting the agenda (and the schedule). Having people unable to leave their cars because of some "driveway moment." That's the core of broadcasters' resistance to new media. They can't stand the thought of giving up that illusion of control.

Radio used to have one advantage. Speed. It could describe breaking news almost immediately. It could not provide the depth newspapers could.

And radio was inflexible. Everybody got exactly the same content - like it or not - as long as they stayed tuned. But newspapers allowed people to decide which stories to read and how much to read, and when to read. On demand audio gives people that same freedom.

Sounds like you still believe in the myth of objective journalism. Too bad.

Brownbackistan
a pseudo-Christian fascist state where the arts are not publicly funded, women's reproductive rights are relentlessly attacked, public school funding is drastically cut, voter suppression laws make it nearly impossible for new voters to register to vote, and social services are turned over to evangelical "Christian" groups, all done with the backing of the Koch brothers.
Brownbackistan is a place where civil responsibility takes a back seat to religious intolerance and corporate greed.
by skidawgkc22 June 25, 2011

See also: "If This Goes On" by Robert Heinlein.
 
You have put your finger on why the broadcast model is doomed. One size fits all. < s n i p > On demand audio gives people that same freedom.

NPR (and some other broadcasters) seem to understand the dilemma you describe. Have you notice how many stories on NPR, and in our case in Atlanta, on the local outlet, have a tag line directing you to their website if this is a story on which you would like more detail. We will not bore everyone with all the minutia, but if you are an informationaholic on this story... here is your fix: www.somethingsomewhere.org

Here is an example of how it can work. I was still half-asleep one morning recently but I had an earbud stuck in my ear listening to Morning Edition... drifting in and out. I heard a feature story that I knew I should back-track and listen sometime when fully awake. A few days later I am talking to my adult daughter and she mentioned half-way hearing a story on NPR as she fought her way through a three-hour commute to her consulting assignment site. So I took the time to track it down. Within an hour I was able to send her an e-mail titled: "It this what you heard?"

http://www.npr.org/2014/03/04/285580969/when-it-comes-to-vaccines-science-can-run-into-a-brick-wall

NPR Feature [/URL]

(This broadcast is an example of why many conservatives are not fans of NPR. They don't like being 'called out'.)




Sounds like you still believe in the myth of objective journalism. Too bad.

Yes I do. I'm sorry you refuse to accept the idea that in some cases it happens. I have practiced the art at one time myself (professionally... for real money) and as an amateur today for organizations of which I am a member/participant.
 
Last edited:
Conservatives are now anti-vaccine? Good grief.

The resistance to being vaccinated is just one thing that people get tattooed on their brain and my observation is not that conservatives are against vaccinations. but the implication of the story is about the mental process people go through when they get it in their head that something is a fact and it is not, but try and talk logic and convince the person what they believe is fact.... is NOT fact.

Isn't that the behavior pattern we are seeing from the group that is referred to as the "extreme right wing base" of the Republican party. You can spend three days explaining that their understanding of what Obamacare is and is not, and you are not going to get them to modify their understanding.

It is a description of the vice-grip mentality that the 'birthers' have on the Presidents birth and birth certificate.

It's a description of the mental process (or lack of process) in trying to have a rational discussion of how the create an equitable tax system in our country. What is the old saying: "Don't try to confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."

Just as you suggested that maybe I needed to listen to the video on the patent issue, I encourage you to make sure you heard the psychological premise the commentator was making.

There are some conservatives who have their minds made up and they are not budging.
There are some liberals who have their minds made up and they are not budging.

The reason some of us are so dis-enchanted with Talk Radio is that it is the dispenser of "mental super glue" to make sure that these people with opinions that are locked in place like a bear trap never, never turn lose and look at the facts.

And some of us are dis-enchanted because Talk Radio keeps attaching new mental bear traps day after day just in case the super glue doesn't keep the original bear traps in place.
 
Last edited:


The resistance to being vaccinated is just one thing that people get tattooed on their brain and my observation is not that conservatives are against vaccinations. but the implication of the story is about the mental process people go through when they get it in their head that something is a fact and it is not, but try and talk logic and convince the person what they believe is fact.... is NOT fact.

Isn't that the behavior pattern we are seeing from the group that is referred to as the "extreme right wing base" of the Republican party. You can spend three days explaining that their understanding of what Obamacare is and is not, and you are not going to get them to modify their understanding.

It is a description of the vice-grip mentality that the 'birthers' have on the Presidents birth and birth certificate.

It's a description of the mental process (or lack of process) in trying to have a rational discussion of how the create an equitable tax system in our country. What is the old saying: "Don't try to confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."

Just as you suggested that maybe I needed to listen to the video on the patent issue, I encourage you to make sure you heard the psychological premise the commentator was making.

There are some conservatives who have their minds made up and they are not budging.
There are some liberals who have their minds made up and they are not budging.

The reason some of us are so dis-enchanted with Talk Radio is that it is the dispenser of "mental super glue" to make sure that these people with opinions that are locked in place like a bear trap never, never turn lose and look at the facts.

And some of us are dis-enchanted because Talk Radio keeps attaching new mental bear traps day after day just in case the super glue doesn't keep the original bear traps in place.


All of that is well and good, but your example (anti-vaccine) is a perfect example of a non-partisan issue that appeals to ignorant people of all stripes. It's not about "left and right" or even about "talk radio". These crazy conspiracies are generally incubated online where the most ignorant people have a voice just as loud as the most educated. Aside from Alex Jones, no one is preaching that kind of stuff on the air.
 
All of that is well and good, but your example (anti-vaccine) is a perfect example of a non-partisan issue that appeals to ignorant people of all stripes. It's not about "left and right" or even about "talk radio". These crazy conspiracies are generally incubated online where the most ignorant people have a voice just as loud as the most educated. Aside from Alex Jones, no one is preaching that kind of stuff on the air.

I have this memory of the most recent Presidential Nominating Convention for Republicans... it Tampa wasn't it? And watching the conversation flare up and then die down pretty quickly, When Michele Bachmann did go on a binge of talking about the subject. Watching the fracas die down, you sit home and get the feeling that the "handlers" behind the scenes reeled her in rather efficiently..... but not completely. So, yes, one can say with some legitimacy that the Republican Party, the Conservative base of the party "flirts" with the vaccination issue from time to time.

I fully understand the how "the crazy conspiracies are generally incubated....." and my observations are first hand and go back to the era before the Internet was even a dream floating around in someone's head. My father was born into this world as a sickly child. His entire life he searched for answers to his various health problems and he had issues that the medical world was not yet ready to deal with. At a teenager, I remember living in a house that looked like an Outlet Mall store for Rodale Press.

I conclude that most Talk Show hosts are not and probably cannot be experts, up to speed on all the hot conspiracies of the day. But I also conclude that Talk Show people who 'rise to the top' are able to spot a good trend going when people boil over beyond the Internet conversations and want to make it part of the larger conversation... the conversation that takes place in Talk Radio. They allow enough weird conspiracy stuff into the content of the show to get the conspiracy people boiling, and shape the conspiracy story to make it appealing to what you would refer to as 'the more intelligent audience' sector.

All of my lifetime the fluoridation of drinking water has been a topic that percolates to the top. Talk Radio is not doing an even handed job of dealing with the claims and denials of global warming. Talk Radio gets a D or F grade for it's handling of issues relating to access to the voting mechanism in this country. The way Talk Radio is handling the ACA or Obamacare should be an embarrassment to the broadcasting industry.

Here is the one to watch, right now. The handling of the story about waiting lists at VA hospitals. Here I would suggest that journalists of all stripes, print, broadcast and other, are not demonstrating their game. I would no suggest that the waiting list problem is not real. But where is the talk, where the reporting on WHY is there a wait in the first place? Where is the story describing the typical doctor you would see at a VA Hospital. Is he/she full-time or part-time. Is there an internal scandal on how doctors are scheduled? Is there an internal scandal on how those doctors are paid?

What we have is an opportunity for Talk Radio to demonstrate whether it is an effective communication tool for the American society, or is it dominated by people who only reach into the pot for a serving of seemingly scandalous information while ignoring the less sexy part of the story.

I brought Shankar Vedantam and his sometimes whimsical delivery into this thread not to prove or disprove anything about vaccinations, but to let his observations about human behavior and social sciences help us understand the power struggles in the news of the day, and how they are incorporated into the conversations of Talk Radio.
 


Some people are turned off by that content, others are addicted to that content.

And the content that you would be happy if they left out, is the very content that attracts other people. In our discussions here in the forums, I am convinced there a number of people who post here that have a little neon sign that goes off in their head that blinks "LIBERAL, LIBERAL" when that content comes on

....snip....

If all that bores you, irritates you, then by all means... switch to Fox News, Fair and Balanced.

I don't think the words "liberal, liberal" when I hear the artsy pieces that NPR plays -- I just think "dull, dull".

The OP referred to NPR's being one of the only networks with "in-depth news", and the artsy stuff I often hear on NPR is not in-depth news. And they seem to have a lot of it. I think they often do well with their in-depth news, and other times they have too many pieces on obscure fiction authors and the like. Maybe it's just the time of day I'm hearing them that they play a lot of it.

The delivery is often quite sedate, like they're on valium, which doesn't help.

I don't think they should yank it from their network. That's what the tuner knob on the radio is for.

As for your reference to FOX, I prefer the BBC and CBC.
 
I don't think the words "liberal, liberal" when I hear the artsy pieces that NPR plays -- I just think "dull, dull".

The OP referred to NPR's being one of the only networks with "in-depth news", and the artsy stuff I often hear on NPR is not in-depth news. And they seem to have a lot of it. I think they often do well with their in-depth news, and other times they have too many pieces on obscure fiction authors and the like. Maybe it's just the time of day I'm hearing them that they play a lot of it.

The delivery is often quite sedate, like they're on valium, which doesn't help.

I don't think they should yank it from their network. That's what the tuner knob on the radio is for.

As for your reference to FOX, I prefer the BBC and CBC.

I agree with you. When doing stories on books, movies and TV shows, the NPR mindset seems to be: If we like it, you like it (or should like it).

I don't listen to public radio off the air. I listen to podcasts and selectively pull stories off the run-downs for ME and ATC to listen when I feel like it. I've had a Tivo for 15 years and I've been spoiled, so I listen to what I want when I want to. I usually end up pulling maybe half the stories off each show - but sometimes as few as one or two. I listed to CBC's World Report and World at Six for news and then pull what interests me off NPR. When I get bored or annoyed, I hit skip. I don't consider the CBC unbiased either but they were telling the truth about the Viet Nam War when the corporate US media were still cheer leading for LBJ and the military, so I haven't forgotten that. The CBC's As It Happens I consider the best interview show anywhere - yes, better than Fresh Air or Larry King on Mutual in his prime.
 

Here is the one to watch, right now. The handling of the story about waiting lists at VA hospitals. Here I would suggest that journalists of all stripes, print, broadcast and other, are not demonstrating their game. I would no suggest that the waiting list problem is not real. But where is the talk, where the reporting on WHY is there a wait in the first place? Where is the story describing the typical doctor you would see at a VA Hospital. Is he/she full-time or part-time. Is there an internal scandal on how doctors are scheduled? Is there an internal scandal on how those doctors are paid?


The talk about the VA scandal isn't focused on the doctors because the doctors are not the problem. It's the bureaucrats. The doctors by all accounts are hard working and honest. There is a waiting list because the pencil pushers are eating up the money to hire more doctors and nurses. I've spent several hours over the past week or so on this and every call I get is the same. It's the SYSTEM that's broken, not the care that the people receive from the medical professionals.

It's certainly worth asking those questions, but I can tell you right now that the doctors aren't the problem and shouldn't be bearing the brunt of talk radio's scrutiny. That scrutiny is in the right place as it is.

The way Talk Radio is handling the ACA or Obamacare should be an embarrassment to the broadcasting industry.

I'd be interested in hearing what you think the deficiencies are.
 
I sometimes turn on "Morning Edition" so the radio will be on for "Car Talk". I've heard Republicans interviewed and while I wasn't paying close attention, the person seemed to be respected.

And if I leave the radio on after "Car Talk", I might hear another program. I remember one show being devoted to religion and a lot of time was devoted to Billy Graham. Sounds conservative to me, though some of the non-Christian religions also got time.
 
The function of the press is very high. It is almost holy. It ought to serve as a forum for the people, through which the people may know freely what is going on. To misstate or suppress the news is a breach of trust. - Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

Frankly, there are more open and complete stories from abroad much of the time.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom