this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
143 points (95.0% liked)

politics

19026 readers
4316 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.
  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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Pronell 147 points 5 months ago (17 children)

He was an antivax conspiracy theorist who was convinced there was no Trump/Russia connection.

[–] Diplomjodler3 80 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Damn reality with its left wing bias again!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] impudentmortal 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Do you have proof of this? I tried searching but I only get articles related to this incident.

[–] Pronell 5 points 5 months ago

I read the guys release before he quit. I don't have the link at the moment.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] [email protected] 105 points 5 months ago (20 children)

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.

[–] III 39 points 5 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

If only he was right, or knew what liberal means

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

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?

[–] Pronell 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Juan Williams also went to Fox once NPR fired him. I expect this idiot to end up at Newsmax.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

He was really just just Juan of the first of what later became many more.

[–] stoly 27 points 5 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] III 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] stoly 4 points 5 months ago

I actually recall reacting viscerally to that reporting.

[–] VonCesaw 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] stoly 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You're mixing two events:

  1. 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.
  2. Fox News at some point over Lockdown called him an evil man for suggesting that people deserve to be treated well.
[–] VonCesaw 5 points 5 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

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!

[–] CharlesDarwin 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if he is a crypto-magat.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 2 points 5 months ago

He’s gonna stay plastered.

[–] homesweethomeMrL 2 points 5 months ago

“Resigned”

load more comments
view more: next ›