4 ms·

When one agrees with content they are much more likely to say it sounds non-partisan, middle ground, common sense, etc. The issues with NPR reporting stem from

• hobs 3y ago
  The GP isn't praising them for their middle ground reporting. The truth often doesn't have a middle ground.
  • mrkstu 3y ago
    They’ve been actively burying true news that doesn’t fit their narrative- that isn’t even reporting, it’s advancing an agenda.
  • Alupis 3y ago
    > The truth often doesn't have a middle ground. There is rarely, if ever, such a thing as objective truth when it comes to politics. There are always multiple perspectives. Make no mistake here - NPR has an agenda to push and they are masterfully skilled in doing so; evidenced by the people who still believe it's a non-partisan "just the truth" journalism outfit.
  • nickff 3y ago
    The “lab leak hypothesis” is one instance where NPR seems to have buried the most plausible explanation; there are many other similar examples.
    • subharmonicon 3y ago
      Buried in what way? Googling “npr lab leak hypothesis” yields dozens of stories published on NPR sites reporting on that theory, primarily quoting WHO and US government reports. I wouldn’t call that burying. You might not like what their sources say and may think there are sources they ignored, but calling that burying without pointing out those omissions doesn’t seem reasonable. [edit: add a question mark]
      • Alupis 3y ago
        Ah yes, the Good O' Memory Hole. Every story that shows in search results is something that dismisses the Lab Leak theory as being farcical and pushed by a Right-Wing Anti-China agenda. Yet... it was and still is the single most plausible theory - and today there's a lot of evidence to indicate it is more likely true than not. So yes, NPR did suppress the lab leak hypothesis, very successfully. There are many today that still hold it to be some sort of racist conjecture. As the parent mentioned - there's many other examples if we review the past few years major stories, including the Hunter Biden Laptop fiasco that, according to NPR and others seeking to suppress the story, was "certified Russian disinformation", etc.
        • feoren 3y ago
          > the Hunter Biden Laptop fiasco While I agree NPR was too quick to reject and smear the lab-leak hypothesis, it doesn't help your case to include the Hunter Biden Laptop hysteria that was fabricated whole-cloth and never had an ounce of substance to it.
          • Alupis 3y ago
            > the Hunter Biden Laptop hysteria that was fabricated whole-cloth and never had an ounce of substance to it. None of what you have said is even close to any resemblance of any sort of truth. I hope you will dig past the partisan reporting to educate yourself further on this particular political cover up.
    • mindslight 3y ago
      Is it the job of responsible news media to report on hypotheses, as opposed to substantiating things with facts? The lab leak hypothesis was initially pushed in the mainstream as pure speculation in support of the do nothing President deflecting blame onto anyone else rather than accepting the responsibility of leadership. That echoes to this day. There is indeed a huge intellectual travesty around the topic, as well as most other matters about Covid, and blame for that is shared between both teams of partisans.
      • Alupis 3y ago
        > Is it the job of responsible news media to report on hypotheses, as opposed to things able to be substantiated with facts? > do nothing President trying to deflect blame onto anyone else rather than accepting the responsibility of leadership This is some very interesting high-level spin you have going on here.
        • mindslight 3y ago
          What else would you call reflexively blaming China rather than acknowledging there is a problem? Even if China deliberately created and spread Covid, we still needed domestic leadership, not "it's just like the flu". I was still giving Trump the benefit of the doubt figuring he was going to come around to addressing reality by at least June, but nope. He essentially had been handed a shoe-in second term on a silver platter for being a crisis time President, but threw it away for what we can only guess.
          • Alupis 3y ago
            We can debate policy and what-not until we're both blue in the face. What facts there are clearly demonstrate the Trump Administration started the development and roll-out for mass vaccination. All of the shutdowns and other well-meaning-but-misguided "flatten the curve" plans became politically virtuous. In hindsight, almost all of these efforts were for not, and many caused more harm than good. Within all that noise - China most likely did have a lab leak from a lab that the US Government already knew was severely lacking safety precautions. Trump saying that out loud caused a knee-jerk reaction from his opponents and suddenly China was made to look like a victim of racism, etc. NPR and similar ran with that narrative and buried the most probable cause because it made Trump look like an incompetent racist moron - which is good for their agenda. Today, here we are, debating NPR propaganda like it was reality. So, I'd say it worked quite well...
  • jimbokun 3y ago
    Berliner pointed out multiple stories they got wrong due to their political biases.
  • cpursley 3y ago
    > The truth often doesn't have a middle ground. This is the line of thinking that leads to gulags and gas chambers.
  • wwweston 3y ago
    This. There is a reason why I included the phrase "sometimes annoyingly so" and didn't particularly praise it. It's... fine, more or less, both helped and hobbled by its efforts at journalistic triangulation while doing its job of touching on some points of currency and providing mental snack material. And the fact that I listen to it or find it interesting is not an endorsement much less an absence of criticism. I'm listening to Christian radio networks as well (share similar dial segments, it's interesting to find out what's going on there, get a different take on the news, hear what's going 'round in terms of sermons and CCM these days, what's that you say, a Christian values investment fund, sounds not grifty at all, I am intrigued), college radio, freakin' Pacifica.
• wwweston 3y ago
  Who said I agreed with whatever I'm hearing from NPR? Not me. See the phrase "sometimes annoyingly so", the general lack of any particular praise. NPR is... fine, more or less, both helped and hobbled by its efforts at journalistic triangulation while basically doing its job of touching on some points of currency and providing mental snack material. I roll my eyes and keep listening at some things, I make a note to check out others, I switch stations in boredom or anger in other cases. My mention of it here or my tuning into it isn't an endorsement any more than my time listening to Christian radio networks in similar dial segments, or college radio, or freakin' Pacifica. The point of my observation isn't an absolute assessment of its value. It's a relative one compared to "the old days" -- that it hasn't changed much at all. Arguably it should have changed more given extraordinary times and figures. People are giving their vague experiences here, I'm sharing mine. And this Berliner guy is apparently airing the reasons why he really needs an editorial board or shouldn't be with an organization that actually has the journalistic integrity he's posturing about. Why do I say this? His summary of the Mueller report alone in his op-ed is justification for the idea that the world would be better off in every last way with nothing of value lost if he'd never been involved with the field.