# How can NPR be liberal??? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 25, 2005, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635 "2005-11-25T00:40:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2005, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/41 "2005-11-26T21:13:22Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > Was that bias? He did cut the man off, and directly challanged an assertion. On the other hand, the chairman was being as deceptive as he possibly could without lying outright. I would consider it part of the reporter’s job to call an official on something like that. I would hope that I would think that even if I were sympathetic to the chairman. Oh, hell no, that’s not evidence of bias! If the reporter let similar deceit from Democrats pass, that would be evidence of bias; and if the reporter ever lets such deceit pass, that’s evidence of shoddy reporting. But there’s no way in hell that it’s biased for a reporter to give the audience the relevant facts. News reporters ought not have the job of providing a means for politicians to spew forth their spin unchallenged: their job is to give the public the information necessary to understand, not the spin necessary to be swayed. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![jocularjason](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b2d939/32.png) [@jocularjason](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jocularjason)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/42 "2005-11-27T07:04:13Z")
A.M radio caveman shows like RUSH LIMBAUGH and the SAVAGE REPORT constantly repeat the messege that all media is biased toward the left–and is therefore not to be listened to. I’m sure many people beckon that call. Anyone who turns on their radio and actually listens to calm and informative debate about the issues on NPR might be labled leftist in view of the ultra-conservative paradigm. This might explain why the callers on shows like Diane Rehm seem largely liberal. The right just isn’t listening. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/43 "2005-11-27T14:00:31Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > In order to show bias in word choice, I think, you’d need to show that they consistently choose one set of words in one type of story and another set in another type of story. For example, if their stories on underage smoking usually refer to “minors,” whereas their stories on underage sex usually refer to “girls [or boys]” or “teens,” then you’ve got strong evidence of bias. How about their word choice for underage sex stories? Would that count? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/44 "2005-11-27T14:32:44Z")
> [@furt](#): > > The fact that military enlistment rates are down is discussed, with no reference to the fact that reenlistment rates for soldiers who have been deployed are up. I am utterly sorry to do this to you, furt, but it’s too on-target to pass up. I know the above is a hypothetical to you but this exact point I heard made on an NPR show just this past week. I hope you can forgive me. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/45 "2005-11-27T17:10:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > How about their word choice for underage sex stories? Would that count? If I understand, you’re asking whether I would admit that NPR is showing bias if they use one set of words for discussing the subjects of a story on females under the age of 18 who obtain abortions, but another set of words for discussing the subjects of a story on females under the age of 18 who have sex. Is this correct? If so, then, **everything else relevant being equal** , yes, I’d consider that a sign of bias. I know that the bolded words are practically an invitation to move the goalposts, and I apologize for that, but not knowing the details of the stories in question, I don’t want to prejudge them. If, as one example, the abortion story concerns the emotional effects of abortion on a single pregnant girl (I’ve decided to drop the “female under the age of 18” because it’s annoying me), and the sex story concerns a legislative proposal in some state senate, then that could account for a discrepancy in the terms used. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/46 "2005-11-27T17:29:17Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > I think a lot of conservatives think that the only way to avoid bias is to self-censor; to actively subtract any “liberal” viewpoint from the presentation of a story. I think what most of them would say is that the way to deal with bias is to just be upfront about it. IMO, I’d prefer if all news outlets were reqired to run editorials. I can’t stand O’reilly and Hannity, but at least because of them there’s much less room for confusion about where FOX is coming from, whereas something like CBS news grates because of the pretense of impartiality. > [@JC](#): > > I am utterly sorry to do this to you, furt, but it’s too on-target to pass up. I know the above is a hypothetical to you but this exact point I heard made on an NPR show just this past week. I hope you can forgive me. Don’t be sorry. In this case, at least, I’m glad to be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/47 "2005-11-27T19:50:47Z")
What you call a pretense to impartiality, friend **Furt** , is simple professionalism (on a relative scale). That is something I find little of in Fox’s _commentary_, not as much as I’d like in their _news_, but which NPR and, to broaden the field and compare TV to TV instead of TV to radio, the PBS evening news has in spades. I suppose if we were to parse every sentence of every story we could find some dot that can be connected to some other random dot which can be connected to some other random dot to spell out the words “Liberal Bias,” but that strikes me as an awful lot of work. It’s a little like analyzing Walter Cronkite’s eyebrows to conclude he thought LBJ and Nixon were feeding the country hogwash about Vietnam. That was an unnecessary exercise because Uncle Walter flat out said so on a number of occasions. To draw conclusions because one story calls underage women “girls,” while another calls them “teenage girls,” and another calls them “underage women” just smells of special pleading. Life is too complicated to spend time looking for subliminal messages in a choice from half a dozen synonyms if all you really want is a rational to disregard the story. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/48 "2005-11-27T21:35:35Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > You want to hear liberal, listen to Pacifica Radio. NPR news reportage is genuinely balanced. It has no bias to left or right. Their opinion commentary does give voice to liberal views, among others. Maybe it’s the opinion segments that get the accusation. As though there’s something wrong with that. They also have moderate and conservative opinions aired. On the whole, NPR is the most moderate of all media these days. If you’ve ever listened to conservatives at all, you’ll know that their definition of “Liberal” is “Not as conservative as I am.” ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/49 "2005-11-27T21:39:37Z")
> [@furt](#): > > I’ll just let this bit of broadminded genius stand by itself. Your sarcasm is misplaced. I have seen this kind of stuff from conservatives too often for it to be anything but a real attitude among conservatives to believe it to be anything but reality that they see anything not conservative as liberal. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/50 "2005-11-27T22:19:37Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > If I understand, you’re asking whether I would admit that NPR is showing bias if they use one set of words for discussing the subjects of a story on females under the age of 18 who obtain abortions, but another set of words for discussing the subjects of a story on females under the age of 18 who have sex. Is this correct? > > If so, then, **everything else relevant being equal** , yes, I’d consider that a sign of bias. > > I know that the bolded words are practically an invitation to move the goalposts, and I apologize for that, but not knowing the details of the stories in question, I don’t want to prejudge them. If, as one example, the abortion story concerns the emotional effects of abortion on a single pregnant girl (I’ve decided to drop the “female under the age of 18” because it’s annoying me), and the sex story concerns a legislative proposal in some state senate, then that could account for a discrepancy in the terms used. > > Daniel So if the abortion story concerned a legislative proposal - parental notification - and the sex story concerned a legislative proposal - age of consent - you’d agree that bias was exhibited by the different word choice? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/51 "2005-11-27T22:38:26Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Your sarcasm is misplaced. I have seen this kind of stuff from conservatives too often for it to be anything but a real attitude among conservatives to believe it to be anything but reality that they see anything not conservative as liberal. Let me rephrase that bit of authentic American political gibberish: I have seen this kind of stuff from conservatives so often that I have to believe it is a real attitude among conservatives generally. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/52 "2005-11-27T22:46:04Z")
I’d agree that NPR is fairly balanced, or at least they make an effort to be, which is all anyone can hope for, really. I’ve never heard any really political whitewashing of either side happening any of their news shows, and I’d say they’re certainaly more balanced than the Daily Show (IMHO). Granted, my feelings may have been influenced by the calm and professional manner in which they present themselves, as opposed to the hysteria I’ve heard on O’Reilly, Limbaugh, ect. NPR’s right-wing speakers and correspondents don’t seem to be looking for a fight the way many of the conservative radio personalities do, and I’d say that’s a fair indication of balance. Or perhaps it’s all just [in your head](http://www.unknownnews.net/2000-1.html). ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/53 "2005-11-27T23:02:51Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So if the abortion story concerned a legislative proposal - parental notification - and the sex story concerned a legislative proposal - age of consent - you’d agree that bias was exhibited by the different word choice? If I’m reading his post correctly, I think that it has more to do with the subject of the story. Story #1 is about the emotional effects of an abortion on a single pregnant girl.(female under age 18) Story #2 is about legislation. The difference in terminology would come from the differing aims of the story. The legislative story would have to be more bare bones and factual. The choice in wording could come from the text of the bill which would likely use more technical terms than emotive. The pregnant minor story would be aimed at being more sympathetic. Referring to the pregnant girl as a female under age 18 would be needlessly technical. I think this sort of thing is the reason why using word choice to determine bias is so difficult. There are so many reasons to choose one word over the next that narrowing it down to one is difficult if not impossible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/54 "2005-11-27T23:35:08Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > If I’m reading his post correctly, I think that it has more to do with the subject of the story. You’re not reading his post correctly. There is no story about effects of abortion on a single teenage girl. There’s a story about the legislative and judicial actions surrounding an abortion parental notification bill, not focusing on any single person. And there’s a story on age of consent, again not focusing on any particular single individual. The first story uses “girl” and “teen” instead of “minor” to refer to the affected individuals, even though (obviously) the parental notification bill would affect only minor females. The second story uses “minor” to refer to females affected by the age of consent law. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2005, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/55 "2005-11-27T23:39:41Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > \*\*If, as one example, the abortion story concerns the emotional effects of abortion on a single pregnant girl \*\* (I’ve decided to drop the “female under the age of 18” because it’s annoying me), and the sex story concerns a legislative proposal in some state senate, then that could account for a discrepancy in the terms used. The bolded section is how I came to my conclusion of what LHOD meant by his post. Maybe you and he are talking about two different things. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2005, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/56 "2005-11-28T00:52:20Z")
Or, maybe, the news is not necessarily created by a Borg collective that so zealously seeks to enforce a standard vocubulary across hundreds of affiliate created content, but rather individual reporters that use different terms, often biased by how emotionally attached they are to a story or their sources or whatever. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2005, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/57 "2005-11-28T01:20:57Z")
> [@Spavined Gelding](#): > > What you call a pretense to impartiality, friend **Furt** , is simple professionalism (on a relative scale). One man’s professionalism is another man’s institutional arrogance, it seems. ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2005, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/58 "2005-11-28T01:45:51Z")
> [@furt](#): > > One man’s professionalism is another man’s institutional arrogance, it seems. Would you care to explain your comment, friend? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2005, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/59 "2005-11-28T01:58:38Z")
> [@Spavined Gelding](#): > > …Life is too complicated to spend time looking for subliminal messages in a choice from half a dozen synonyms if all you really want is a rational to disregard the story. Typical Iowan post-modernist irony. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2005, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635/60 "2005-11-28T02:20:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You’re not reading his post correctly. Actually, he is. I was offering one example of a reason why I would not see institutional bias. Another reason, as mentioned in my original post on this subject, would be that two different reporters used two different sets of words. As I said in that post, > [@me](#): > > In order to show bias in word choice, I think, you’d need to show that they **consistently** choose one set of words in one type of story and another set in another type of story. (bolding added). > [@Bricker](#): > > The first story uses “girl” and “teen” instead of “minor” to refer to the affected individuals, even though (obviously) the parental notification bill would affect only minor females. > > The second story uses “minor” to refer to females affected by the age of consent law. If you’re looking at two different stories, you may be noticing a coincidence. Consistency in word choice differences is necessary before I’m going to suspect anything. A news source might refer to the deaths of American soldiers in a war as deaths, whereas the deaths of foreign soldiers are referred to as kills (or as “securing the area”). That would be evidence of bias if it happens across several reporters across several stories. If the difference only occurred between two stories, it might be coincidence. I recognize that this is a high standard. I am intentionally setting the standard high. Daniel [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-npr-be-liberal/332635.md?page=4)