They don’t live in a vacuum. OF COURSE they have a political bias. It’s just much more subtle than Fox News.
The most glaring example I’ve ever personally witnessed of NPR’s liberal media bias was Terri Gross’ interview of Lynne Cheney. I love Terri Gross but it was obvious from the get-go that she had an axe to grind with Cheney. I was shocked at Gross’ lack of professionalism. She invited Cheney on to her show to purportedly discuss Cheney’s book on American history, and ended up grilling her over her husband’s politics. I invite you to listen to it at “Fresh Air” if you don’t believe it’s possible for a journalist/host to be as overtly slanted as the Sean Hannity’s of the world.
That being said, Diane Rheem does a stand-out job of being as close to a perfect unbiased host as they come. She can be inquisitive without being offensive, and doesn’t let either side get away with sloppy arguments.
Oh, so she was mean to Lynne, and asked her hard questions.
Did Gross tell glaring and obvious lies about Lynne Cheney? No?
Did Gross work closely with a particular party on a political campaign, and then try to get “her” person elected by using the power of her media position? No?
You mean the liberal media that’s owned by gigantic companies that are run by CEOs who firmly subscribe to the Republican way of doing business? THAT liberal media? Or is there some other non-network news media you’re talking about? I mean, as long as we’re talking apple/apples and not printed media. I can see where MSNBC falls into somewhat of the same mold as FOX, except that they actually make sense when they talk. PBS, unlike other news broadcasts, actually takes the time to do in-depth reporting and interviews, which I’m sure, in your mind, makes them liberals of the worst kind. :rolleyes:
Yes, much more subtle…Some would say almost invisible…
But trusty Fox news informs us that it’s there, and gosh darn it, who are you going to believe? A news organization who is ‘subtle’ about their bias or one that we all openly admit is clearly bias?
I’m going with the clearly bias one. After all, they have to tell the truth, right?
Hey, I’m only exposed to it when the TVs in the snack lobby have it turned on, but don’t let that stop you from your generalizations.
Fox AND Pacifica will almost immediately ping my “LOL WUT” meter. CNN and NPR will rarely do so when they are covering actual news* (then again I don’t watch CNN too much.) MSNBC will sometimes provide a jarring contrast to more objective media (enough that I have to take a step back and explain the outrageousness of the segment on the network rather than have any confidence that the ludicrous situation is indeed as described), but not as much as the first two networks.
*As opposed to pop culture. NPR will cover both popular and obscure arts with the same detached reverence which is not always warranted, while CNN makes no bones about plastering half the links on its website to fluff pieces about some popular arts figure, crowding out more newsworthy stuff.
The treason they have so many fund drives on public radio and Tv is because they are VIEWER funded. They huge bulk of their finances comes from viewers.
My Fox fix? Like, what if we were suddenly deprived of Fox News? I suppose that might depend on circumstances. Like, if they immediatly shut down all operations because of Glenn Beck’s conviction on charges of rape and murder (
In 2010 NPR was funded over 50 percent from programming fees. The rest came from grants, contributions and sponsorship fees. A total of 2 percent was from grants by the Depts. of Education and Commerce.
Please point out the taxpayer funding for me PUNDIT LISA.