He was an antivax conspiracy theorist who was convinced there was no Trump/Russia connection.
Damn reality with its left wing bias again!
Reality =
- antivax conspiracy is correct
- there’s no Trump/Russia connection
?
Woah, a poster from a parallel universe, how cool! Where did our timelines diverge?
I probably seriously misunderstood what happened here. My bad, sorry.
there’s no Trump/Russia connection
Well shit now that you said it, I’m 100% fully convinced!
NPR definitely has shifted left over the years. Reading his release, he had me with the first part. Then he goes and jumps the rails to Madeupville, Crazytown.
They haven’t shifted anywhere. Being “left” these days means not being an insurrectionist… it’s the conservatives who’ve moved further right; and in any case, NPR as a whole is very accurate on their reporting.
It’s that mentality that further perpetuates extremes.
I’m not at all accusing them of compromised reporting. They’re well known for being factual, and one of my long-term favorite sources. Once they commit to a piece, they usually leave me with no questions. They just tend to spend more time focusing on the left than the right.
In case you haven’t noticed, most of what the right spends their time talking about is made up bullshit. Sticking to the facts only will naturally exclude most right-wing topics because they’re not based in reality.
I’m sorry to say that isn’t true. You just have to sift through a lot more trash to find the truth. Read reports of the same event from multiple sources. There are bad actors in the Democratic Party as there are good actors in the Republican Party. Seeing the world as polarizing as media presents it will only further perpetuate our political divide.
With that being said, I’d agree it’s quite rare that I read about a good act by a republican politician these days.
You do read about all the positive things Republicans are doing. Look at abortion, the lack of regulations, voters being purged, voting maps being unconstitutional, supreme Court justices taking bribes… It’s just most people don’t see this as positive. Whether these things are done by Republicans or Democrats a centered news outlet would not report this in a positive light. Freedoms are being taken away and progress is being halted. These are facts not opinions.
What is right leaning that is factual that NPR isn’t reporting on?
Vaccines? Trump in League with Russia? Claims of voter fraud being bullshit? Claiming immigrants are evil?
There are bad actors in the Democratic Party as there are good actors in the Republican Party.
Can you name one good actor in the Republican party? “Good” as in “not obviously blatantly evil”, so they can’t (for example) be against abortion or supporting Trump.
What the hell do you mean by “focusing on the left?” What would it mean to “focus on the right?”
I listened to NPR the other day. They read off research by The Heritage Foundation with no analysis at all and then thanked them at the end.
NPR aims to be middle of the road but doesn’t mind that it’s in the ditch.
NPR is Fox News for Democrats. They stay center right and follow lockstep with DNC policy.
Reality has a leftist bias. You think they have gone left only because a lot of very stupid and insecure people have shifted harshly to the right.
LOL, they have?
I’d say they lean left. So do most accredited media bias websites.
They got right of center-left. This is the same as AP news which is a bulletin that includes moderate and conservative journalists. That site puts basically exclusively local news stations that primarily cover human interest and feel good stories in dead center. Getting just short of least bias in that site is as close to centrist as you can get while still hosting political thought. Not trashing the site, btw. It’s really the best way to quickly check the validity of an article from a source you’re unfamiliar with.
If you make the argument that this is honestly true bias, you’re forfeiting the idea that right wing thought has any credibility. You’re accepting the idea that “reality has left wing bias”.
Do you have proof of this? I tried searching but I only get articles related to this incident.
I read the guys release before he quit. I don’t have the link at the moment.
Interesting that he says:
Back in 2011, although NPR’s audience tilted a bit to the left, it still bore a resemblance to America at large. Twenty-six percent of listeners described themselves as conservative, 23 percent as middle of the road, and 37 percent as liberal.
By 2023, the picture was completely different: only 11 percent described themselves as very or somewhat conservative, 21 percent as middle of the road, and 67 percent of listeners said they were very or somewhat liberal. We weren’t just losing conservatives; we were also losing moderates and traditional liberals.
And then blames this on NPR. The GOP has been labeling NPR and other legitimate news sources as “fake news” and corrupt for years now. They are constantly pushing their constituents to only get their news from the right-wing bubble where they can control the message.
It’s no wonder that conservatives aren’t listening to NPR. But that is not NPR’s fault nor should NPR change their reporting as a result. Their job is to report fair and unbiased news. If a group of the population doesn’t want fair and unbaised news, they shouldn’t start spewing bullshit just to appease these people.
They guy refers to liberals as a “very small segment of the US population”. So at least he isn’t shy about exposing his extreme bias, and in turn invalidating pretty much all of his own words.
If only he was right, or knew what liberal means
What’s the over/under on the timeline for transition to right-wing “I used to be a liberal” grifter? Do we count when he invites people people to subscribe to his new “actual freedom of speech no cancel culture here” Substack even if there’s no posts?
Juan Williams also went to Fox once NPR fired him. I expect this idiot to end up at Newsmax.
He was really just just Juan of the first of what later became many more.
The only complaint I have about NPR is that they went heavily with a pro-Israel posture after the October events. It took them months to catch up to reality and stop it.
Some of their recent coverage about Reddit was pretty insulting. When the IPO was going live they tried to explain the people who Reddit burned over the years who weren’t buying into the IPO as “acting like children” needing to “grow up”. It was the most one-sided coverage I have ever heard from them - even with all this left-leaning talk.
I actually recall reacting viscerally to that reporting.
I mean, if by “liberal bias” they mean “they want NPR to continue” I guess it’s technically true, the same way that “Public Broadcasting should continue” also counts as “liberal bias”
I’m like 90% sure I remember Mr. Rogers testifying before Congress to keep PBS a thing, which was met with vitriol by right-wingers
You’re mixing two events:
- Rogers went in front of the Senate and managed to convince an angry senator to support the creation of PBS. He was probably all of 25 years old when he did this and the senator went from hard and angry to soft and open-minded.
- Fox News at some point over Lockdown called him an evil man for suggesting that people deserve to be treated well.
No, the first part and the second part were definitely separate, because regarding the 2nd one chumbos like ol Benny “my wife is a doctor” went on a crusade defending Mr Rogers because Rogers mentions that boys and girls are different
deleted by creator
I wonder if he is a crypto-magat.
He’s gonna stay plastered.
NPR: “This segment of ‘Corporations are Bad’ was brought to by a generous grant from our friends at Progressive Auto Insurance. Want to save money? Try Progressive! Millions of Americans are using our patented TrackYou driver tracking appliance that adjusts your rates based on your driving. So switch now! Give them money! Spend!”
Seems pretty left wing to me.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Uri Berliner, a senior editor at NPR who penned an op-ed last week accusing the broadcaster of liberal bias, has resigned from the company.
“But I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR I cite in my Free Press essay.”
In his essay, Berliner writes NPR had strayed too far left politically and was increasingly only presenting “the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population.”
The episode has provided fodder for Republicans and conservative critics of the network, who have long alleged bias against them at the public broadcaster.
Some conservative activists have highlighted social media posts from Katherine Maher, NPR’s CEO, before she took over at the company this year espousing progressive ideas.
In a statement to The Hill on Tuesday in regard to Berliner’s reported suspension, NPR said it “does not comment on individual personnel matters, including discipline.”
The original article contains 272 words, the summary contains 159 words. Saved 42%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
It is inevitable for a state funded organization to become aligned with the party that is willing to give them more money.
“Resigned”
