No Laugh Track for New NPR CEO: We're 'Barred' From Bias, We're the Fairness and Accuracy Network
New NPR President Gary Knell made an appearance on their afternoon talk show Talk of the Nation on Friday (his first day) to give the appearance of transparency and responsiveness and to build morale after scandals such as the Juan Williams firing and the deeply embarrassing Muslim Brotherhood sting video, which led to several firings.
Knell just strained credulity beyond the breaking point by claiming NPR is not an advocacy organization, but a network of "fairness and accuracy and honesty," and it's "probably barred by our charter." It's correct that the founding Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 called for objectivity and balance in "all programming of a controversial nature," but NPR has followed that legal language about as seriously as Bill Clinton has upheld his marital vows. One might say this is a promising rhetorical start -- until you listen daily to the product right now.
Talk Of The Nation host Neal Conan, the typical soft-spoken bearded liberal, inquired of the new boss:
NEAL CONAN: Your background is not in journalism, but I have to ask you a journalistic question which arises from that call. A lot of listeners would like NPR to take advocacy positions on things like nuclear winter or global climate change or other issues. Does a news organization threaten its journalistic reputation if it takes up advocacy?
KNELL: Well, I don't think we should be, as an organization, taking up advocacy. And, in fact, I think it's probably barred by our charter, so -- and the law, I think, which founded NPR. So it's really about fairness and accuracy and honesty in reporting so that our audience can make up their own minds and decide which issues they want to advocate on. That's really the role of public radio.
This question came after the caller Peter from Berkeley, and his panic over the present global emergency: "If I were president of NPR, I would aggressively promote more public awareness of the real and present danger of nuclear winter, per Alan Robock's shocking and informative comment in Nature magazine last May that new climate models show that it would be far, far, far fewer actual explosions that could trigger this, and the public has an emergency right and need to know." He wanted a global partnership and "proactive citizen participation" with "Radio Russia, Radio India, Radio China, and Radio Africa" to avoid the global danger.
A caller named Kelly complained NPR wasn't letting its employees "wholly participate" in politics, as in NPR's edict that employees not attend Jon Stewart's liberal "Rally for Sanity." Again, Knell said he wanted to avoid the perception of bias:
KELLY: Hi. I was curious about your outlook on the restrictions for employees of - on political activism, because, as a schoolteacher, I felt like some of the rules that I encountered within the system seemed to tell me that, while I was teaching students to be good, civic-minded people, I was limited myself outside of my job to wholly participate in my own community. And I feel like that's somewhat what NPR is doing to their employees by not allowing them to fully participate in the system in which they're reporting on.
KNELL: Well, it's a really good question. And, look, it's - I guess I approach this - we are, in addition to our music and cultural programming, primarily a news organization. And I think the important thing here is that our audience does not feel that we are promoting a political agenda. So these questions come in whether there is going to be an impression of a political agenda if reporters, journalists or producers are also advocating political positions.
And I think part of joining a news organization is the need, I think, to present a fair and balanced view and not have that sacrificed in some way, where people can perceive bias.
Now, that's the goal, and I think, you know, there's a lot of gray areas that fit in that I can't prejudge. But that's really what you want, I think, to protect, which is about the integrity of the news organization, so that we are presenting information to the American people and they can make up their own minds about which way they want to go on an issue.
Kelly followed up with the closet NPR allowed to a question about NPR's turbulent recent past. (The question was so gentle and nebulous that a skeptic might wonder if the caller was carefully pre-screened):
KELLY: What do you think about the judgments that were made prior to you coming onto NPR?
KNELL: Well, yeah. I can't really comment on those because I wasn't here and I don't really know the facts completely. [Yeah, right, this was not discussed in the interview process for a new CEO!] And, frankly, it's time, I think, for NPR to turn the page and move forward, and we'll take them as they come, as they will come. And we'll hopefully make the right calls.
When asked about conservative opposition to taxpayer funding -- by the NPR host, not by a conservative caller of any kind -- Knell predictably pledged to vacuum up every tax dollar they can suck out of our wallets:
CONAN: The Senate, controlled by Democrats, put funding for public broadcasting - not just radio, but TV - back into the budget this year after it was cut by the House of Representatives. It eventually survived. But one of the presidential candidates, Mitt Romney, says PBS, NEH and NEA are wonderful things that we can no longer afford. The - Newt Gingrich, the other current frontrunner, has said - well, he tried to cut public broadcasting back in '94 as speaker of the House. So do you feel that this is something that can be counted on in the future? Are you planning for a future that does not include federal funding?
KNELL: Well, look, I think you've got to look at all these things, and even the private funding is susceptible to headwinds in terms of economic pressures on people, on companies, on foundations and other things. So public funding is no different, and it's not - I'm not going to count on anything. I think we can't take anything for granted, Neal. I think we've got to push forward and make the best case we possibly can and, you know, really push for the best and put our best foot forward. That's all we can do, and work like heck to try to secure that funding.
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
I've listened to NPR as
Submitted by rbosque on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 2:52pm.
I've listened to NPR as recently as last week. What this guy is saying is complete B.S. Absolute B.S.
And they start off with a LIE.
Submitted by Slyrr on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 3:03pm.
Heck, they've already started off this 'new era' by LYING about what they are. We've heard this bunk from them before. 'Oh we're impartial - we're unbiased - we're fair.' Baloney.
I'll believe it once they open up their books for a complete audit. But they won't. Because I'll wager that disaster earlier this year wasn't the first time NPR has been trying to get terrorists, murderers and thugs to give them money by saying 'we hate Republicans too'.
Polemic or Satire? You decide.
Submitted by locomotivebreath1901 on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 3:40pm.
"New NPR CEO: We're 'Barred' From Bias."
Absolutely. And FOX News doesn't lean right.
I believe NPR to be unbiased. I mean, just because it's subsidized by tax dollars, got increased funding from Obama this year, and received a $1.8 million donation from Geo. Soros, who wouldn't believe NPR is not biased??
I wonder if the new CEO donates exclusively to democrats just like the interim CEO did?
Not that it matters...
I wonder if the new NPR President
Submitted by zenman1661 on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 5:33pm.
has seen the numerous examples on this website disputing his unbiased claim, Then again, I doubt it would make any difference with him.
NPR
Submitted by NewLife56 on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 5:25pm.
Is it just me or does anyone else notice his nose growing?
Paging Juan
Submitted by han_solo on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 6:06pm.
Hey NPR! Tell it to Juan WIlliams.
NPR Fair and Balanced, What A Laugh
Submitted by Avitar on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 8:39pm.
NPR was founded in the sixties to take the country further to the left because there are limits beyond which the MSM can't go without angering advertisers to the point that they stop advertising. The mission of the NPR was to drag the country even further to the left than Woodrow Wilson and the new deal had been able to drag the country.
That they were never able to find much of an audience which has limited NPR's influence. This despite having control of many subjects for over forty years
This laugh explains why they are still a joke.
if
Submitted by grammajane on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 9:03pm.
npr is fair and balanced, I am mother teresa.
Why?
Submitted by Alpha Tango on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 9:38pm.
Why do those at NPR speak such nonsense? Their overt bias isn't going to change for any reason. It is an inherently evil organization, thus it has to offer only evil ideas as those who practice liberalism.
Most liberals do know the difference between good and evil. They just choose evil. I guess it is more fun for them. Liberals' so-called 'values' are actually a lack of values. It appears to me that NPR does not allow any ethical behavior among its employees so it could never be fair, balanced, accurate or honest.
Apparently, a requirement for
Submitted by celator on Sat, 12/03/2011 - 10:44pm.
Apparently, a requirement for being CEO of NPR is to be able to tell a whooper with a big cheesy smile.
Joe Isuzu works for npr now?
Submitted by Free Thinker on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 12:01am.
Joe Isuzu works for npr now?
Fair and accurate?
Submitted by ohio granny on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 10:09am.
NPR is required? to be fair and accurate. What planet is this guy living on? What is his definition of fair and accurate?
Fair and accurate? not so much.
I guess it was my imagination
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 10:30am.
I guess it was my imagination that NPR fought tooth and nail against W's appointees who tried to bring an iota of conservative reporting to NPR and voted to oust those conservatives from their boards. I doubt that NPR could name ten conservatives on the board of directors or officers but we could find ninety nine percent lib/progs there.
"KNELL: Well, I don't think
Submitted by buddyc on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 11:57am.
"KNELL: Well, I don't think we should be, as an organization, taking up advocacy. And, in fact, I think it's probably barred by our charter, so -- and the law, I think, which founded NPR. So it's really about fairness and accuracy and honesty in reporting so that our audience can make up their own minds and decide which issues they want to advocate on. That's really the role of public radio."
= 1984 Newspeak for "of course we will advocate progressive positions, are your crazy?"
The only way that NPR could meet this "barred from bias" status
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 12:43pm.
is to be shut down which really makes a lot of sense. Why are we paying to hear partisan CRAP?
Wonder if...
Submitted by StarAZ on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 2:03pm.
Wonder if this guy knows that non-liberals listen to the other side more than vice-versa...I listen to NPR about 15 mins a day and even in that little time hear cherry-picking of quotes, spin from anchors, and every form of namby-pandering to Obama. I really love the tearjerking stories about what it's like to not have money--here and in Third World countries..."her mud walls are crumbling," "we can't use his name or the cartels will murder him." You have to hear on the radio what this is like? Come to AZ!
NPR takes "Name that Party Game" to new heights!!
Submitted by sherlock1 on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 2:23pm.
CEO Gary "Deaf" Knell should have listened to NPR news Saturday morning as they reported that the Democrats' Senate Payroll Tax bill failed because "no Republicans voted for it", and then added critical balance by mentioning that the Republicans' bill also failed... because "not all the Republicans voted for it".
You can't satirize NPR news: it auto-satirizes itself first!
Sherlock
Submitted by Model850 on Sun, 12/04/2011 - 4:26pm.
Yeah, I heard that. I yelled at the radio and then thought about sending an email but realized that they wouldn't care and it certainly never would be selected for airing as part of their listener feedback segments.
Glad someone else picked up on the hypocrisy.
Fair and Balanced?
Submitted by tomaspain on Mon, 12/05/2011 - 7:35am.
I'm a conservative that listens to NPR quite a bit. It is always nice to start off the day with a good laugh.
NPR impartial
Submitted by david5300 on Mon, 12/05/2011 - 4:10pm.
IN YOUR DREAMS.
You are seriously in denile if you believe that.
To paraphrase a line in a Tom Clancy movie" you sound like you are using your own product " ( drugs )
Barred by the NPR Charter
Submitted by aposematic on Mon, 12/05/2011 - 5:37pm.
Apparently the NPR Charter doesn't bar its employees from lying...