NPR: liberal bias or just realistic, thorough and informed

[Miss P]

I'll check out Democracy Now.  I get my news off the internet, when I'm in one of my follow the news phases.  Or if I'm driving and sick of music, then it's NPR time!

Today was one of the few times ever that I got sick of the news.  The 14th time they asked whether the ceasefire would hold, it was time for a different station.

However, I realized today that when NPR is in "pure news" mode, they are so objective and balanced it almost hurts.  They report nothing but what happened and what the people involved have to say.  Other sources tend to go into speculation mode rather than asking the ceasefire-hold question for the 14th time.

I'm so glad someone else understands.  It really is painful.  "Now let's turn to the Deputy Secretary of State for the Middle East to learn more about whether the ceasefire will old... and now let's turn to some Israeli soldiers to ask them about their feelings on the withdrawal... and now let's turn to the Lebanese interior minister to discuss the return of thousands to southern towns and villages... and now let's turn to the UN guy to find out whether that ceasefire is still holding..."

[Miss P]

Today was one of the few times ever that I got sick of the news.  The 14th time they asked whether the ceasefire would hold, it was time for a different station.

However, I realized today that when NPR is in "pure news" mode, they are so objective and balanced it almost hurts.  They report nothing but what happened and what the people involved have to say.  Other sources tend to go into speculation mode rather than asking the ceasefire-hold question for the 14th time.

I'm so glad someone else understands.  It really is painful.  "Now let's turn to the Deputy Secretary of State for the Middle East to learn more about whether the ceasefire will old... and now let's turn to some Israeli soldiers to ask them about their feelings on the withdrawal... and now let's turn to the Lebanese interior minister to discuss the return of thousands to southern towns and villages... and now let's turn to the UN guy to find out whether that ceasefire is still holding..."

You're getting your news from the wrong source.  Wolf Blitzer today, nothing but some guy in Bangkok getting arrested for killing some little girl in Boulder 10 years ago.

Hey, yeah, how did they find the guy anyway?  And do we really think he killed JonBenet?  There was so not enough coverage on NPR.

[obamacon]

I listen to hours of NPR every day, and can say with very little doubt that different programs have different levels of bias. This American Life, Living on Earth, and Fresh Air, for example, are each tilted to the left (the first two being the easiest to observe) but tend to spin things subtly. In fact, you probably wouldn’t have any idea such was the case on a first time listening. Wait Wait… don’t tell me, however, is the easiest place to observe NPR bias in action. The contestants, the audience, the announcer, the panelists, the guest, everybody (except perhaps Carl Kassell) makes no secret of how they feel and, while I still love the show, I can’t help but think how much funnier it would be if Sagal and the panelists (not to mention the fickle audience who make a point of being as nasty as possible whenever it suits their ideological fancy) were occasionally evenhanded in their criticism.

As for Morning Edition and ATC, I think they both vary but are often times surprisingly able to find the coverage that fairly and accurately represents all interested parties. Their best stories are often the ones they would easily be able to fudge, but somehow present with more accuracy than I would expect from any news source.

Regardless, after years of listening to NPR, my problems are less with their occasional biases, which I automatically filter out, and more with the inadequacy of radio in general to convey accurate information in the ways other sources do.

[Miss P]

I listen to hours of NPR every day, and can say with very little doubt that different programs have different levels of bias. This American Life, Living on Earth, and Fresh Air, for example, are each tilted to the left (the first two being the easiest to observe) but tend to spin things subtly. In fact, you probably wouldn’t have any idea such was the case on a first time listening. Wait Wait… don’t tell me, however, is the easiest place to observe NPR bias in action. The contestants, the audience, the announcer, the panelists, the guest, everybody (except perhaps Carl Kassell) makes no secret of how they feel and, while I still love the show, I can’t help but think how much funnier it would be if Sagal and the panelists (not to mention the fickle audience who make a point of being as nasty as possible whenever it suits their ideological fancy) were occasionally evenhanded in their criticism.

As for Morning Edition and ATC, I think they both vary but are often times surprisingly able to find the coverage that fairly and accurately represents all interested parties. Their best stories are often the ones they would easily be able to fudge, but somehow present with more accuracy than I would expect from any news source.

Regardless, after years of listening to NPR, my problems are less with their occasional biases, which I automatically filter out, and more with the inadequacy of radio in general to convey accurate information in the ways other sources do.

I roughly agree with you, BB, down to the details (see, for example, my comment about Wait, Wait... earlier in this thread), but of course, of the shows you listed, only Morning Edition and ATC are really news programs (maybe Living on Earth, but that's pretty focused and sketchy).  I would argue that other news programs, like Marketplace and the World (Lisa Mullins), are pretty straight, too.  And in the talk shows, from Speaking of Faith to News & Notes to Diane Rehm to the shows you named, you get a pretty varied set of views.

[obamacon]

Hey, yeah, how did they find the guy anyway?  And do we really think he killed JonBenet?

BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) -- An American suspect arrested in Bangkok has admitted to killing 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey, the head of Thailand immigration police said Thursday, a surprise breakthrough in a lurid, decade-old murder mystery that had cast a cloud of suspicion over her parents.

John Mark Karr, 41, admitted to the killing after he was arrested at his downtown Bangkok apartment Wednesday night, Lt. Gen. Suwat Tumrongsiskul told The Associated Press.

Suwat said Karr arrived in Bangkok on June 6 from Malaysia to look for a teaching job. It was not clear whether he got a teaching position, the police officer said.

Karr's visa has been revoked as an "undesirable person" given the accusations against him, and U.S. authorities were expected to take him to the United States in the next few days, Suwat said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/THAILAND_JONBENET_RAMSEY?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-08-17-02-18-37

[obamacon]

I roughly agree with you, BB, down to the details

Infinity reasonability is difficult to squabble with.

but of course, of the shows you listed, only Morning Edition and ATC are really news programs

Have we limited ourselves to talking only about hard news?

[Miss P]

Hey, yeah, how did they find the guy anyway?  And do we really think he killed JonBenet?

BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) -- An American suspect arrested in Bangkok has admitted to killing 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey, the head of Thailand immigration police said Thursday, a surprise breakthrough in a lurid, decade-old murder mystery that had cast a cloud of suspicion over her parents.

John Mark Karr, 41, admitted to the killing after he was arrested at his downtown Bangkok apartment Wednesday night, Lt. Gen. Suwat Tumrongsiskul told The Associated Press.

Suwat said Karr arrived in Bangkok on June 6 from Malaysia to look for a teaching job. It was not clear whether he got a teaching position, the police officer said.

Karr's visa has been revoked as an "undesirable person" given the accusations against him, and U.S. authorities were expected to take him to the United States in the next few days, Suwat said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/THAILAND_JONBENET_RAMSEY?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-08-17-02-18-37

Fascinating!  Thanks, bb.

I also forgot to mention about Wait, Wait... before that having PJ O'Rourke and Charlie Pierce mitigates against the liberal bias somewhat.

[obamacon]

I also forgot to mention about Wait, Wait... before that having PJ O'Rourke and Charlie Pierce mitigates against the liberal bias somewhat.

If there's one thing that puts NPR and Wait Wait... in the worst light, it's the audiences they allow on. They are at once obscenely disrespectful and militant in their beliefs and actions, and it speaks very poorly for the city of Chicago and dedicated NPR listens in general.

[Miss P]

I also forgot to mention about Wait, Wait... before that having PJ O'Rourke and Charlie Pierce mitigates against the liberal bias somewhat.

If there's one thing that puts NPR and Wait Wait... in the worst light, it's the audiences they allow on. They are at once obscenely disrespectful and militant in their beliefs and actions, and it speaks very poorly for the city of Chicago and dedicated NPR listens in general.

Oh, I think this is silly, especially the part when you extend your condemnation to all of Chicago and NPR listeners.  It's not as if they're in someone's place of worship or something -- it's a game show!

[obamacon]

Oh, I think this is silly, especially the part when you extend your condemnation to all of Chicago and NPR listeners.  It's not as if they're in someone's place of worship or something -- it's a game show!

It is a game show and one that, for the most part, only the most serious and committed NPR listeners attend. Notice I didn't say more than that it makes both Chicagoans and dedicated NPR listeners look bad, not that it is necessarily true of all (or even most) of them.