-18
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] psvrh@lemmy.ca 43 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

So let me get this straight, NPR lost America's trust?

America was radicalized by a Australian billionaire and his oil-industry buddies feeding straight up lies to a captive audience, and this is NPR's fault?

Dude, one media company had to pay almost a billion dollars in damages for their election fraud narrative, and that company wasn't NPR.

And yet somehow, this is NPR's fault?

This is some grade-A fascist apologist bullshit, up there with the New York Times whitewashing fascism in Ohio diners and commenting on how nicely Neo Nazis are dressing these days.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago

That’s bullshit, though.

NPR is very factual with a left-center bias.

They get dinged for supporting Israel and because member stations curate their own content. Texas public radio is very different from Houston public radio which is different from Minnesota public radio and LAist serving southern cali.

Secondly, most conservatives left NPR in general because of their largely factual reporting. Further, at least MPR, they don’t shy away from reporting on republicans or admitting the rare good things they’ve done.

Conservatives responded in one of a few ways:

  • becoming less conservative (my dad for example is now an independent.)
  • not listening to NPR and instead going to fox or OAN or Epoch….
  • listening to those others mentioned and then making angry, terroristic phone calls.

It’s really not NPRs fault this happened- they told the truth as fairly and accurately as they could. And as to her accusation of favoring democrats for political interviews… do you really thing Trump or whoever is going to give an interview to somebody who says things like “but that’s not true.” To your face, when you just spouted some election-fraud lies? Or “do you have any proof?” When you double and triple down on the lie?

Nope. Because that guy looked like an idiot. (I forget who the interview was. Maybe it was one of trumps lawyers or some random pubie.)

[-] riskable@programming.dev 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Being very factual is what makes it liberal news. It's so slanted, in fact I don't think a single liberal would deny that this is exactly why they tune in! The savages are literally just listening to what they want to hear!

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 months ago

The universe has a well known liberal bias - it shouldn't be allowed to influence our fair and balanced media coverage.

[-] ApostleO@startrek.website 20 points 7 months ago

Persistent rumors that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia over the election became the catnip that drove reporting. [...]

But when the Mueller report found no credible evidence of collusion [...]

Aaaaand I stopped reading.

The Mueller Report absolutely found credible evidence of collusion, despite heavy-handled interference by Trump, Barr, and the rest of the GOP. It unfortunately failed to result in any prosecution (in no small part due to Barr), and failed to pressure Republicans to vote to remove Trump when he was impeached.

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 months ago

That is exactly where I bowed out. I have my own criticisms of NPR (as a contributor for decades), but this guys opinion is trash.

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I find NPR a little annoying for its nonchalant and cutesy way of presenting horrifying news stories. It’s like “Donald Trump tries to commit a coup” and Tamara Keith is like “on today’s show Domenico and I talk about what Trump’s strategy is here for his 2024 run and how this will impact house republicans.”

Or, the US economy is in shambles and Planet Money is like “today we’ll talk about that time the Dutch economy was in shambles in 1770 and what a tulip salesman did to save it. Maybe there will be something we can learn about today’s problems, ahyuck.”

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

What’s your home station, if I may ask?

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I just listen to the podcasts

[-] Eccitaze@yiffit.net 15 points 7 months ago

Notable is NPR's rebuttal to this essay: NPR responds after editor says it has 'lost America's trust'

In particular, this portion stands out:

"As a person of color who has often worked in newsrooms with little to no people who look like me, the efforts NPR has made to diversify its workforce and its sources are unique and appropriate given the news industry's long-standing lack of diversity," Alfonso says. "These efforts should be celebrated and not denigrated as Uri has done."

After this story was first published, Berliner contested Alfonso's characterization, saying his criticism of NPR is about the lack of diversity of viewpoints, not its diversity itself.

"I never criticized NPR's priority of achieving a more diverse workforce in terms of race, ethnicity and sexual orientation. I have not 'denigrated' NPR's newsroom diversity goals," Berliner said. "That's wrong."

Nah, he just talked about how "Race and identity became paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace" and how a bunch of employee groups based on identity started up, and then directly linked that to the "absence of viewpoint diversity." Totally different. 🙄

I'm really tired of this weasel wordplay that constantly happens, where someone talks about X and then uses that to lead into a point about how this bad thing happened, and when called out, backs off and says "I never blamed X on this bad thing happening." Fuck off with that shit, we all know what you said and we can fucking read, you just don't want to admit it because you know that saying it makes you look racist as all hell.

[-] Carrolade@lemmy.world 14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yea, I bet it really was hard to be a conservative at NPR. Unfortunately, between DEI, Hunter's Laptop, Lab-gate, etc, it's pretty easy to see that this fellow has simply taken modern conservative talking points all at face-value. That is not necessarily a good idea.

edit: Side question: Has anyone else ever noticed a correlation between font size and journalistic integrity, or is it just me?

[-] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I can't get past the 6th or 7th paragraph. It resets the page.

this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
-18 points (34.5% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2278 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS