NPR Fires Liberal News Analyst For Non-PC Nervousness

[jhbball]

Why can't people listen to the other black male people on NPR? Oh.. wait.. Where's the NAACP? The Tea Party is racist? There are more blacks in the Tea Party than at NPR.

Grow up.

 

[Craig234]

He did what a journalist should do, for NPR to fire him for that reduces the credibility of NPR as an unbiased source. Which disturbs me because for 30 years I've relied on their integrity.

So, a journalist 'should' violate his station's guidelines, and ignore warnings for violations for years?

NPR's integrity is not only fine, it was tested here and passed, had they not taken action it would have been compromised.

But how about your integrity? Where in any of your comments is any acknowledgment of his history of the Fox employment and the breaking of the NPR rules? I didn't see a word.

Just an inaccurate straw man - that I assume you mean in good faith, but you have had to ignore the issues being explained to you again, and again, and again to ignore them.

Where is your sense of appreciation for all the rest NPR has done for you for 30 years?

I'm not asking you to ignore a wrong as a tradeoff for what they have done - but you are being irresponsible in rushing to the wrong condemnation, and they deserve more.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Grow up.

Well.. lets see.. how many black male's currently have their own show on NPR? You don't have to count very high.. there was 1.. now there are? Thats right.. ZERO..

Imagine if this were Fox News.. But I guess racism is OK when its liberal white's doing it.

 

[theeedude]

Well.. lets see.. how many black male's currently have their own show on NPR? You don't have to count very high.. there was 1.. now there are? Thats right.. ZERO..

Imagine if this were Fox News.. But I guess racism is OK when its liberal white's doing it.

How many black men have their own show on Fox News?

 

[werepossum]

Guess who wrote this?

Ooh ooh! Abraham Lincoln?

 

[Fear No Evil]

How many black men have their own show on Fox News?

No idea. But I'm guessing its at least as many as NPR currently has.. probably more.

 

[Fern]

So, a journalist 'should' violate his station's guidelines, and ignore warnings for violations for years?

NPR's integrity is not only fine, it was tested here and passed, had they not taken action it would have been compromised.
-snip-

You previously posted NPR's rules.

Juan, as a contractor, wasn't violating any of them. Why do you keep saying the opposite (and ignoring the issue of their other "journalists" who are "employees" and violatng the rules yet go unpunished)?

Fern

 

[Craig234]

You previously posted NPR's rules.

Juan, as a contractor, wasn't violating any of them...

Fern

Yes, he was. You apparently misinterpreted them.

 

[Craig234]

How many black men have their own show on Fox News?

Clarence Thomas could. And another if Fox created a porn spinoff.

 

[Tom]

So, a journalist 'should' violate his station's guidelines, and ignore warnings for violations for years?

NPR's integrity is not only fine, it was tested here and passed, had they not taken action it would have been compromised.

But how about your integrity? Where in any of your comments is any acknowledgment of his history of the Fox employment and the breaking of the NPR rules? I didn't see a word.

Just an inaccurate straw man - that I assume you mean in good faith, but you have had to ignore the issues being explained to you again, and again, and again to ignore them.

Where is your sense of appreciation for all the rest NPR has done for you for 30 years?

I'm not asking you to ignore a wrong as a tradeoff for what they have done - but you are being irresponsible in rushing to the wrong condemnation, and they deserve more.

OK, I wasted a good deal of time looking in this thread for the "rules" Williams violated, as you see it. In the most relevant post I could find, you make the judgement that his appearing on O'Reily violates their rules because you decided that O'Reilly's show is just punditry. Which is not a fact but just an opinion. Someone who wanted to, could argue that describing O'Reilly and/or Fox news as "punditry" is also punditry.

Whatever your opinion about William's rule breaking, which I don't agree he broke any rules, that isn't NPR's stated reason for his firing.

I love NPR, I don't want it to be diminished by management making mistakes. Williams actual comments weren't offensive to anyone, and were factual, not opinion; so I have to assume NPR management is either incompetent, or biased. Neither makes me happy.

 

[Moonbeam]

Here we have an excellent example of the fact the typical "intellectually elite" liberal is either grossly dishonest or simply ignorant: Mr. Williams was absolutely not fired for telling "the truth about Muslims" as this moron claims. He was fired for telling the truth about his own personal feelings in the context of how even those feelings may exist, they should *not* be codified into law at the expense of the rights of that entire group of people, or for that group of people to be painted with a broad brush because of the acts of the few, as evidenced by his own words: "We don't want, in America, people to have their rights violated, to be attacked on the street because they hear rhetoric from Bill O'Reilly and they act crazy."

Silly liberals.

Remember then that I am not a liberal because I wrote the NPR management and told them to fire the firer and that no money from me would be coming that way until they do. When you f up and fire somebody and create a firestorm of protest, it says you're incompetent for the job and dangerous to the network.

 

[Craig234]

OK, I wasted a good deal of time looking in this thread for the "rules" Williams violated, as you see it. In the most relevant post I could find, you make the judgement that his appearing on O'Reily violates their rules because you decided that O'Reilly's show is just punditry. Which is not a fact but just an opinion. Someone who wanted to, could argue that describing O'Reilly and/or Fox news as "punditry" is also punditry.

Whatever your opinion about William's rule breaking, which I don't agree he broke any rules, that isn't NPR's stated reason for his firing.

I love NPR, I don't want it to be diminished by management making mistakes. Williams actual comments weren't offensive to anyone, and were factual, not opinion; so I have to assume NPR management is either incompetent, or biased. Neither makes me happy.

First, here is NPR's own statement on the reasons:

This was a decision of principle, made to protect NPR’s integrity and values as a news organization. Juan Williams’ comments on Fox News last Monday were the latest in a series of deeply troubling incidents over several years. In each of those instances, he was contacted and the incident was discussed with him. He was explicitly and repeatedly asked to respect NPR's standards and to avoid expressing strong personal opinions on controversial subjects in public settings, as that is inconsistent with his role as an NPR news analyst. After this latest incident, we felt compelled to act. I acknowledge that reasonable people can disagree about timing: whether NPR should have ended its relationship with Juan Williams earlier, on the occasion of other incidents; or whether this final episode warranted immediate termination of his contract.

This was a 'series of incidents over years'. I see nothing of that in your post.

Your statements on it being a matter of opinion whether O'Reilly's show is a 'punditry' or a 'fact-based' show as described in the NPR rules is ludicrous.

Much less your calling it 'punditry' to point out the obvious.

You can be ridiculous with opinion. If you do so, we have nothing to talk about. You can have the opinion that Williams wasn't even on the show, it was an imposter, or faked. You can have the opinion that Williams was hypnotized to do this and can't be blamed. You can have all kinds of ridiculous 'opinions'. If you're reasonable, you won't.

Here's the article I posted before, from a previous incident that summarizes the rules:

Isn't Juan Williams violating NPR's code of ethics?

February 13, 2009 11:28 am ET by Eric Boehlert

As CF highlighted yesterday, NPR management has finally taken steps to stem the damage that NPR's Juan Williams routinely does with his appearances on Fox News. NPR's ombudsman Alicia Shepard wrote:

n the end, NPR must decide -- as it apparently already has -- whether giving its listeners the benefit of Williams' voice is worth the cost of annoying some listeners for his work on Fox. As a result of this latest flap, NPR's Vice President of News, Ellen Weiss, has asked Williams to ask that Fox remove his NPR identification whenever he is on O'Reilly.

Frankly, that's not enough and here's why. As I noted back in 2007, when Williams again embarrassed NPR via his conduct on Fox News, and specifically, on an appearance he made on The O'Reilly Factor:

Real damage is being done to NPR by having its name, via Williams, associated with Fox News' most opinionated talker. In fact, Williams' recent appearance on The O'Reilly Factor almost certainly violated NPR's employee standards, which prohibit staffers from appearing on programs that "encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis" and are "harmful to the reputation of NPR."

To add fuller context, the NPR code of ethics clearly states:

9. NPR journalists must get permission from the Vice President for their Division or their designee to appear on TV or other media. It is not necessary to get permission in each instance when the employee is a regular participant on an approved show. Permission for such appearances may be revoked if NPR determines such appearances are harmful to the reputation of NPR or the NPR participant.

10. In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based forums, NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist. They should not participate in shows electronic forums, or blogs that encourage punditry and speculation rather than rather than fact-based analysis.

Yet here it is in 2009 and NPR finds itself answering angry listener emails because Williams said something stupid on The O'Reilly Factor; something I cannot imagine Williams would ever say on an NPR program. Isn't Williams clearly violating NPR's own standards by appearing on that program; a program that quite obviously encourages "punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis" and more importantly is "harmful to the reputation of NPR"? (If the show is not harmful to NPR's reputation than why don't more NPR staffers appear on it?)

Or put another way, how is Williams not violating the code of ethics by appearing on The O'Reilly Factor? And yes, I read the part where Shepard noted Williams is no longer on-staff and that he's paid by NPR to be an independent contractor:

Last spring, NPR's management put him on contract with the title "news analyst" largely to give him more latitude about what he says.

She later added:

[NPR managers] are in a bind because Williams is no longer a staff employee but an independent contractor. As a contract news analyst, NPR doesn't exercise control over what Williams says outside of NPR.

But here's how NPR's code of ethics defines who is covered by its rules:

This code covers all NPR journalists - which for the purposes of this code includes all persons functioning in the News, Programming and Online Divisions as reporters, hosts, newscasters, writers, editors, directors, photographers and producers of news, music or other NPR programming. It also covers all senior News, Programming and Online content managers. It does not cover administrative or technical staff from News, Programming or Online. The code also applies to material provided to NPR by independent producers, member station contributors and/or reporters and freelance reporters, writers, news contributors or photographers.

And what if a non-staff contributor violates the code of ethics? NPR has the option of simply stop using that person in the future:

Because contributors in this category are not NPR employees, the remedy for dealing with a conflict of interest or other violation of the principles of this code is rejection of the offered material.

According to the NPR standards, written to "to protect the credibility of NPR's programming by ensuring high standards of honesty, integrity, impartiality and staff conduct," there are three relevant guidelines that, in this situation, seem to apply to Williams:

1. Don't appear on programs that promote punditry.

2. Don't appear on programs that are harmful to NPR's reputation.

3. Don't say things on non-NPR programs that the journalist would not say on NPR.

It seems that NPR either needs to rewrite its standards, or it needs to take more forceful action regarding Williams' appearances on The O'Reilly Factor.

 

[BoberFett]

LOL. Craig.

 

[Corn]

LOL. Craig.

Indeed.

 

[Tom]

"This was a 'series of incidents over years'. I see nothing of that in your post."

You see nothing in my post because it's an empty statement. So far I have not seen a single quote of Williams saying or doing anything wrong, from you or from NPR.

I haven't seen any evidence of Williams expressing an opinion that is any less journalistic than say, describing an earthquake as a tragedy.

I don't think NPR's boss is being honest; I believe they just don't like O'Reilly and Fox news so they decided to smear the reputation of Williams because he said "Muslim" on O'Reilly's show in an attempt to attack Fox News.

 

[Tom]

"Your statements on it being a matter of opinion whether O'Reilly's show is a 'punditry' or a 'fact-based' show as described in the NPR rules is ludicrous."

no it really isn't. calling it punditry is derogatory. I don't believe it's useful to insult people I disagree with.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
This was a 'series of incidents over years'. I see nothing of that in your post.

All made irrelevent by switching him to an independant contractor thereby making all those rules inapplicable. This was done by NPR for the stated purpose of allowing him more latitude to be on Fox etc.

Your statements on it being a matter of opinion whether O'Reilly's show is a 'punditry' or a 'fact-based' show as described in the NPR rules is ludicrous.

That whole line is irrelevent anyway. Read the dang rules YOU posted.

[NPR managers] are in a bind because Williams is no longer a staff employee but an independent contractor. As a contract news analyst, NPR doesn't exercise control over what Williams says outside of NPR.

Read it: They have NO control over what Juan says outside of NPR. I.e., no control over what he says on Fox.

The code also applies to material provided to NPR by independent producers, member station contributors and/or reporters and freelance reporters, writers, news contributors or photographers.

Since Juan is (or was) an independant contratcor, NPR only had rules covering the material Juan submitted to NPR.

Their only remedy for contractors is:

Because contributors in this category are not NPR employees, the remedy for dealing with a conflict of interest or other violation of the principles of this code is rejection of the offered material.

So, because Juan was moved to independant contrator status, NPR rules DO NOT cover what he says outside of NPR. The NPR rules ONLY cover the material Juan submitted to them, they can only reject material if rules are broken.

Based on the NPR rules Craig234 has posted, it's easy to see Juan CANNOT be justly fired for anything he says on Fox because the rules DO NOT cover that.

Fern

 

[werepossum]

"This was a 'series of incidents over years'. I see nothing of that in your post."

You see nothing in my post because it's an empty statement. So far I have not seen a single quote of Williams saying or doing anything wrong, from you or from NPR.

I haven't seen any evidence of Williams expressing an opinion that is any less journalistic than say, describing an earthquake as a tragedy.

I don't think NPR's boss is being honest; I believe they just don't like O'Reilly and Fox news so they decided to smear the reputation of Williams because he said "Muslim" on O'Reilly's show in an attempt to attack Fox News.

There is a series of incidents meaning Williams appearing on FoxNews, that's the underlying problem. He's even being attacked for being a longtime friend of O'Reilly's.

That idea that people ethically cannot or should not be friends with those with whom they fundamentally disagree is very sad and very, very wrong. It is those very people who cause us to examine our underlying beliefs rather than merely regurgitating them.

 

[Moonbeam]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoberFett
LOL. Craig.

Indeed.

Basically you two just snipe. Craig will often 'say' more in one post then you two do in a year.

Of course, if you actually said anything, folk would be laughing their asses off at you.

 

[Craig234]

All made irrelevent by switching him to an independant contractor thereby making all those rules inapplicable. This was done by NPR for the stated purpose of allowing him more latitude to be on Fox etc.

More latitude is not unlimited latitude. The rules have been explained repeatedly that he was violating as a contractor, as the management statement explained.

Your argument is basically 'the rules don't mean what they say, and the NPR management who says they're the reason are clueless what their rules say'.

Read it: They have NO control over what Juan says outside of NPR. I.e., no control over what he says on Fox.

No, but they do have control over whether to use him as a contractor based on violating the journalism ethics rules they have, that include contractors.

He was explicitly and repeatedly asked to respect NPR's standards and to avoid expressing strong personal opinions on controversial subjects in public settings, as that is inconsistent with his role as an NPR news analyst.

They asked him to limit his speech outside of NPR - contrary to your misinterpretation of the rules and contradicting it - as an *NPR news analyst*.

Based on the NPR rules Craig234 has posted, it's easy to see Juan CANNOT be justly fired for anything he says on Fox because the rules DO NOT cover that.

Fern

No, the rules clearly show anyone producing content for them is expected to follow their rules, or they can not use that person for content.

As they clearly explained they did, to protect the NPR name for journalistic integrity.

They didn't 'fire him', as he's not an employee, they said they will not be putting him on air as a contractor for them - not using his material.

 

[Fern]

Craig234, continuing to demonstrate he can't read, or understand, the rules he keeps posting.

Really, this statement by the NPR Omnibudman is all that need be noted:

[NPR managers] are in a bind because Williams is no longer a staff employee but an independent contractor. As a contract news analyst, NPR doesn't exercise control over what Williams says outside of NPR.

Yet Craig234 continues to argue the opposite. So, in an effort to defend NPR, Craig234 is willing to argue that they don't know their rules as well as he does.

Fern

 

[Moonbeam]

If there is any justification for Juan's firing surely the damage he did to NPR that would justify it pales in comparison to the damage caused by Lara or whatever her name is. She has the party of death breathing down NPR's neck, a psycho population of Right wing nuts upset, and liberals of many kinds fuming. F her. She needs to be removed as a sacrifice. She needs to fall on her sword. NPR is worth an f of a lot more than she is. Blood for blood, it's the American way, or used to be. She screwed up hugely compared to anything Williams did which doesn't look to be very much.

 

[Fern]

Moonie,

You talkin about Mara Liasson?

She's always seemed more cautious in remarks when appearing on Fox (I think I know why now).

I'd be surprised if the NPR people had a problem with her.

(BTW: I ignored you sig and took serious this time.)

Fern

 

[werepossum]

Moonie,

You talkin about Mara Liasson?

She's always seemed more cautious in remarks when appearing on Fox (I think I know why now).

I'd be surprised if the NPR people had a problem with her.

(BTW: I ignored you sig and took serious this time.)

Fern

Mara is one of the most thoughtful and reasonable commentators out there. But then, so is Juan.

 

[Moonbeam]

Moonie,

You talkin about Mara Liasson?

She's always seemed more cautious in remarks when appearing on Fox (I think I know why now).

I'd be surprised if the NPR people had a problem with her.

(BTW: I ignored you sig and took serious this time.)

Fern

No somebody like Lara Schiffer or some such that did the firing. Don't remember the name exactly but could look it up if I weren't so lazy.