Juan Williams Fired from NPR - Political Correctness or Good Reason?

[Críostóir]

They're not very far away, Croistoir. Already, the anti-Muslim talk is beginning to make even me uncomfortable.

(Keep in mind that I have a low opinion of Islam as a religion, because it victimizes its own people.)

If we get into the Islam thing here, we'll never get out, so I'll just say that yeah, that's notable.

But since they (or was it Ann Coulter?) already called for people like me to be beaten with baseball bats, I'm not surprised to see them moving on to the next target-group in their divisive game.

 

[Kulindahr]

No, because they really are demons. You don't have to demonize the demonic.

I should think that once you know that Faux News sued for the right to deliberately lie on the air and won...well, it doesn't take an astrophysicist to recognize that they are not a legitimate news source.

They're very much like our police forces, who the Supreme Court says can lie to anyone they feel like in any way they feel like in the course of an investigation.

Can someone tell me how that doesn't foster not merely an appearance, but an atmosphere of corruption?

The same question for Fox.

 

[Kulindahr]

It's the childish name that the angry folks on the far-left call Fox News. It makes their blood boil that the left-wing propaganda network, MSNBC, is no where near as successful.

Since they went to court and won their case for it being okay to lie, they deserve not just that name but many others. Up until they did that, I objected to the names used for ridicule, but no longer.

So it's a name assigned by the Lie-ocrats to characterize the Lie-icans who run it.

 

[chance1]

Only in that it pits left against right.

This whole ordeal, and I'll admit and say NPR's handling of it, only fueled the right-wing commentators by giving them what they view is more proof of how much "liberals" our "destroying our country."

The irony is its the "conservatives" who are working around the clock to drown out any voices of dissent in our print, and national airwaves here.

But that's just my humble opinion.

I disagree

what matters is what independents think

they're the election deciders - at least for now

independents - people who think in a less partisan way by default - see Ms. Schiller as being a hypocrite - see a black liberal getting hosed - they see repubs and dems alike supporting HIM - and see a connection between Ms. Schiller's actions and incumbent dems

so ms. schiller's timing could not have been better for the repubs/tea party etc.

cuz she represents to indies the current dem establishment

 

[Sausy]

Since they went to court and won their case for it being okay to lie, they deserve not just that name but many others. Up until they did that, I objected to the names used for ridicule, but no longer.

So it's a name assigned by the Lie-ocrats to characterize the Lie-icans who run it.

Read about the case,much more complex than the progressives who have taken this and ran with it as they generally do.It was a local FOX affiliate involved,NOT Fox News and the details of the entire finding is far murkier than saying that a court said "Lie Away"in its decision,a lot of complicated nuances that was far narrower than the left portrays.But the left tends to belie its self righteous ,self serving belief in complexity,nuance and enlightened thinking when it that the world is grey and not black or white where their ideological certainty is affected.They are as sure of themselves as those on the right are sure in opposing them.FAUX News vs.MSNBC-DNC(owned by crony capitalists extraodinaire,GE) if you will.FOX is demonic?I'm not a fan of some of the stuff on it but I try to listen and see what is going on.....you deal with FOX and whatever isn't progressive enough in your mind EXACTLY how the really far out ones in the Tea Party and the religious right have painted anything remotely they attack as liberal.

I know the active left here won't give a damn what I think....don't really care what you think either,trying to reach those who may not post but try to think a little more out of the box,try interesting different perspectives.I'm not right wing in any sense,but I'm ecstatic I'm not a progressive either.

 

[Kulindahr]

Read about the case,much more complex than the progressives who have taken this and ran with it as they generally do.It was a local FOX affiliate involved,NOT Fox News and the details of the entire finding is far murkier than saying that a court said "Lie Away"in its decision,a lot of complicated nuances that was far narrower than the left portrays.

Consider me duly reminded -- I should have remembered that.

I'm going to chalk it up to the stress of being effectively homeless, having a friend hauled off to jail for a crime against someone he's never met, and trying to figure out how the heck to raise the money to pay off the debt on my project which is carried on my VISA card.

 

[Centexfarmer]

My gut is that Juan Williams appearing on Fox News somewhat regularly ............ made him not so popular at NPR

And that where he made his statement or "feeling" about Muslims and flying public rather than the statements themselves is the real problem for NPR management or Ms. Schiller

What I find particularly appalling is that they held Williams to different standards than other NPR representatives - one Nina Totenberg once remarked that Jesse Helms getting AIDS would be a good thing (paraphrasing)

so the basis for firing Williams was not truthful

Yeah, I honestly got that too.

So essentially what this boils down to is the Editorial Board of NPR airing some dirty laundry.

I'm pissed at NPR for the same reason that I'm pissed at Democrats in General.

They're inexplicable ability to provide fodder to their enemies.

Williams?

He's now crying all the way to the bank thanks to Fox News and his new $2 Million Dollar contract.

Poor thang.

The so called "left" needs to get with the program!

 

[Kulindahr]

The so called "left" needs to get with the program!

Before they get 'left' behind?

 

[fasteddy]

I think the time is way overdue to cut off all taxpayer funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and all its various entities. This episode only provided further ammunition for that action. With all the various parts of the information highway available today there is no need for a taxpayer funded news outlet. If their programming is valuable and viable the listening and viewing audience will pay for it through contributions or buy the commercial products that are advertised thus providing revenue.

What I always found ironic is that for many years the CPB and NPR produced content that was of interest to a small but well off community who could afford to pay for it but for the most part was shunned by the mass audiences.

Now take for example Connecticut Public TV. They decided to compete in the public arena and bid on the broadcast rights for UCONN Womens Basketball. The income from that wise decision funds much of their operation overall and provides a broadcast product that Connnecticut residents are interested in. That model has been picked up by other local Public TV operations also. Viewership for UCONN Womens Basketball exceeds that for the mens program and has resulted in a big contribution to the sports program at UCONN as has relieved pressure for sports funding at the school. A win win for all involved.

But overall, the broadcast products from taxpayer funded media fall below the financial viabilty line and hold little interest for the people who have no choice about paying for the content.

 

[chance1]

You WOULD think that, because it would mean complete domination of the airwaves from the right wing. Total control!

Fasteddy who do you think you're fooling?

why is their domination from the right wing?

because in a free market system they broadcast programs and people like it and advertisers buy it?

know what that's called? capitalism please don't tell me that's a bad thing

air america entered the market - why did they fail? because the programming was not deemed worthy by listeners or advertisers - the former being the key for the latter

as for the TV landscape, the left dominates with all but Fox News leaning or being over the edge left so not sure what you're referring to

 

[chance1]

Both points depend upon who's doing the perceiving, Chance.

American-style capitalism produces as many victims as it does winners. A simple look at South America, or even many parts of the US, reveals this to be the truth.

As for the TV landscape, you suffer from an immersed viewpoint, Chance. The only US network that could be truly seen as "leftist" is MSNBC. The rest, including CNN, are pro-American in ways that are blind to Americans, but quite obvious to Europeans. (Why don't you ask the European JUBbers?)

For unbiased truth, I bypass the US media completely, and usually go to BBC.

There is no need to subsidize news gathering or political viewpoints, esp when they're so slanted - it's absurd really

as for capitalism, it is inherently a good system - that promotes individual growth and opportunity - as with anything it is not perfect. But sign me up - i'm in

Being an avid news junkie - I enjoy it - and watch a lot - I must disagree with your POV - and I am not "immersed" - I watch/listen to all - and know the difference between a fair review of subject matter and one that is obviously slanted

While MSNBC is the most obvious - they are the anti Fox - on steroids really- with every single late fringe/prime time host doing liberal speeches and rants and rarely engaging in real dialogue with anyone who might disagree, all others except Fox are democratic/liberal leaning - just check out the individuals who produce the news, report the news, etc.

I think CNN is the most centered - although listening to Eliot Spitzer (not for long because his ratings are awful) bloviate and filibuster ........ one has the sense that they yearn for the "good old days" when they routinely were a mouthpiece for dems

the networks are less impactful then they used to be - abc, cbs, nbc - but they still have 100+ million homes in distribution and the fact that the evening news telecasts are produced by and presented by anti republicans is bad - "news" is no longer that and is more opinion

i'm doing a spitzer right now ....... bloviating

cya

 

[Kulindahr]

You WOULD think that, because it would mean complete domination of the airwaves from the right wing. Total control!

Not necessarily -- in fact, I doubt it. Even libertarians I know would pledge to support NPR for the mere reason that it's a different viewpoint. I don't think they'd have any trouble at all filling the gap just with contributions, if the cuts came in stages.

Both points depend upon who's doing the perceiving, Chance.

American-style capitalism produces as many victims as it does winners. A simple look at South America, or even many parts of the US, reveals this to be the truth.

As for the TV landscape, you suffer from an immersed viewpoint, Chance. The only US network that could be truly seen as "leftist" is MSNBC. The rest, including CNN, are pro-American in ways that are blind to Americans, but quite obvious to Europeans. (Why don't you ask the European JUBbers?)

For unbiased truth, I bypass the US media completely, and usually go to BBC.

What you're thinking of is what I'd call "feudal crony capitalism", where megacorporations get to stake out sections of the economy as theirs, aided by politicians who get their rewards.

As for BBC -- yeah. There, news is still about news, not about ratings.

 

[Kulindahr]

as for capitalism, it is inherently a good system - that promotes individual growth and opportunity - as with anything it is not perfect. But sign me up - i'm in

Free-market capitalism, yes -- but it needs a citizenry that is suspicious of large corporations and prefers to buy local. Otherwise, it will drift into economic feudalism.

 

[NedNickerson]

Jesse Jackson did make a remark some time ago when he was a more relevant political force that he did have situations where he was uncomfortable seeing African-American youths around late at night when he was walking the street alone.Not FOX's fault,it wasn't around then.

Juan Williams didn't say anything that most people haven't felt at one time or another. For instance, if I see a Muslim woman in a burka at my local supermarket, I might look at her twice just because her manner of dress is a bit unusual compared to other women in the store, but I doubt I would think anything more about it. But if at some point in the future (hopefully not), a woman in a burka decides to blow herself up at the local WalMart, from then on, I think if I saw a woman in a burka, that would make me wary of standing close to her in the bread aisle.

Here's the quote by Jesse Jackson, made back in 1993:

“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see someone white and feel relieved.”

I wonder if he ever had to apologize for that statement?

 

[MoltenRock III]

Dumpster diving for old, dead, threads are we?

The Zombie Troll:

 

[Kulindahr]

^It's not as if there were currently a rich selection.