# Is NPR biased? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 22, 2005, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339 "2005-06-22T11:45:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/61 "2005-06-29T20:59:34Z")
Boy, Jethro, them strawmens shore burn goood. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/62 "2005-06-29T21:02:53Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Boy, Jethro, them strawmens shore burn goood. Sorry, **acsenray** , didn’t mean you. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/63 "2005-06-29T21:03:25Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Boy, Jethro, them strawmens shore burn goood. Sorry, did I strawmenate? I didn’t mean to put any words in mouths. I meant to _ask whether_ **jfortun** was saying the Brookings Institution is liberal in the way that the Heritage Foundation is conservative or the Cato Institute is libertarian. If the answer is “yes,” then I disagree. It’s not an accurate description. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/64 "2005-06-29T21:06:13Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Sorry, did I strawmenate? I read it as being mine. Then again, it may have been **Evil Captor** ’s statement about Ikea. Hard to tell without quotes. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/65 "2005-06-29T21:17:54Z")
If the Foo shits, **Scott**. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/66 "2005-06-29T21:20:03Z")
:rolleyes: Yeah, that’s what I thought. tell me,do you want to state what holes you see in my arguement/statement, or do you just want to insult me? ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/67 "2005-06-29T21:22:31Z")
I’m not insulting you, **Scott**. But it’s easy to present hypotheticals as though they constitute evidence. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/76d3ee/32.png) [@handsomeone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeone)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/68 "2005-06-30T22:42:59Z")
I did a quick search and found the following article: [http://www.urbin.net/EWW/polyticks/nra-npr.html](http://www.urbin.net/EWW/polyticks/nra-npr.html) According to the article, Nina Totenberg stated the following: > [@](#): > > There may be a lively debate about whether the Constitution confers on individuals the right to bear arms, but that debate is not going on in America’s courts, its law schools, or its scholarly legal journals. Indeed, even the National Rifle Association could not recommend for this broadcast a single constitutional law professor who would defend the Second Amendment as conferring on individuals the right to bear arms According to the article, Ms. Totenberg was flat out wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/69 "2005-06-30T22:46:31Z")
> [@handsomeone](#): > > According to the article, Ms. Totenberg was flat out wrong. What does the claim of her being right or wrong have to do ewith bias? ---
**Author:** ![handsomeone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/76d3ee/32.png) [@handsomeone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeone)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/70 "2005-06-30T23:10:12Z")
If a news source is flat out wrong, and the error favors the liberal position, it is evidence of liberal bias. Granted that one data point does not conslusively establish anything, but there it is. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/71 "2005-06-30T23:15:59Z")
If it is indeed incorrect, (And I am not saying it is, for I seem to recall NRA supporters lying before.), it is not evidence of bias, but evidence of sloppy reporting. If they get the dates wrong, or give the wrong name to a democratic candidate, is that evidence of anti-democratic bias? ---
**Author:** ![handsomeone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/76d3ee/32.png) [@handsomeone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeone)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2005, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/72 "2005-06-30T23:30:40Z")
Possibly. It would depend on the context. It turns on whether the error makes one side of an issue look better. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/73 "2005-07-01T02:12:16Z")
[CPB Bias Inquiry “Nutty”, says Dorgan](http://www.broadcastingcable.com/CA622584.html) > [@](#): > > A controversial analysis of bias in public broadcasting was “a little nutty” and a “complete waste” of $14,000 in taxpayer funds, said Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan Thursday after reviewing 50 pages of raw data he obtained from the study commissioned by Corporation for Public Broadcasting Chairman Kenneth Tomlinson. > > “It appears to have been cobbled together by an armchair analyst with little or no professional preparation,” Dorgan said at a press conference last week. > [@](#): > > The typo-riddled reports prepared by Republican operative Fred Mann included a note labeled “From the desk of Fred Mann,” and another was faxed to CPB from a Hallmark store in Indianapolis…Dorgan derided the criteria used to rate opinions as “utter nonsense.” He noted that Republican Senator Chuck Hegel was rated as “liberal” for opposing the Iraq war during an appearance on Smiley’s show. We’ll see if this story (and pending investigation of the report) has any traction… ---
**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:** [July 1, 2005, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/74 "2005-07-01T12:35:40Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > [CPB Bias Inquiry “Nutty”, says Dorgan](http://www.broadcastingcable.com/CA622584.html)We’ll see if this story (and pending investigation of the report) has any traction… The real key to the report is the part where Mann was asked to identify particular stories as “pro-Administration” or “anti-Administration.” An honest search for bias would only look for stuff oriented along a liberal/conservative left/right axis. When you assess stories on the basis of whether they’re favorable or unfavorable to the administration, you’re doing political dirty work. ---
**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:** [July 1, 2005, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/75 "2005-07-01T12:48:21Z")
A snippet I heard on a report about the succession of the Supreme Court gave me an insight on what the real problem with bias at NPR probably is. Nina Totenberg pointed out that Justice John Paul Stephens, considered a moderate conservative when he was appointed by President Gerald Ford (a Republican, you will note) is now considered the MOST LIBERAL member of the Supreme Court because it has shifted so far to the right in the intervening decades. I submit to you that a similar process has occurred wrt to NPR. The country has shifted far to the right, and in trying to maintain balance and objectivity to its stories, it has gotten a rep for being liberal. The people who are right-wing see NPR’s stance as liberal. They are only trying to keep things balanced, to not be influenced by a culture that has shifted so far to the right that Attilla the Hun looks mainstream now. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/76 "2005-07-01T13:11:28Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > It’s bias is smart, therefore liberal. I listen to it every day, since the rest of radio is even worse. The froofiness and yuppiness of NPR does get on my nerves after awhile. “All Thing Considered” and their theme/incidental music. How is it possible for such a short sequence of notes to sound **THAT** fucking pompous? Anyways, chalk me up as another one who agress with **DoctorJ**. The position of the percieved center has been moved - therefore everything seems left-slanted to those trying hard enough to see it that way. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/77 "2005-07-01T13:30:10Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > The real key to the report is the part where Mann was asked to identify particular stories as “pro-Administration” or “anti-Administration.” An honest search for bias would only look for stuff oriented along a liberal/conservative left/right axis. When you assess stories on the basis of whether they’re favorable or unfavorable to the administration, you’re doing political dirty work. Having heard yesterday’s story, the study is batshit-insane. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) was classified as a “liberal” guest. Anyone who doesn’t describe the Iraqi adventure as going swimmingly is classified as anti-administration. Basically, anyone who had anything negative to say about Iraq was anti-administration. Think about that for a second. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/78 "2005-07-01T14:43:38Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > A snippet I heard on a report about the succession of the Supreme Court gave me an insight on what the real problem with bias at NPR probably is. Nina Totenberg pointed out that Justice John Paul Stephens, considered a moderate conservative when he was appointed by President Gerald Ford (a Republican, you will note) is now considered the MOST LIBERAL member of the Supreme Court because it has shifted so far to the right in the intervening decades. > > I submit to you that a similar process has occurred wrt to NPR. The country has shifted far to the right, and in trying to maintain balance and objectivity to its stories, it has gotten a rep for being liberal. The people who are right-wing see NPR’s stance as liberal. They are only trying to keep things balanced, to not be influenced by a culture that has shifted so far to the right that Attilla the Hun looks mainstream now. So, Evil Captor, are you saying that you admit that NPR is left of center? If so, I’d agree. You’re reasoning might even be correct. So maybe now we should/could move on to “Should NPR be left of center?” Or, given that is a public station, “does it have the responsibility to be, if not middle of the road, exploring both left and right extremes evenly?” ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/79 "2005-07-01T14:49:57Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > So, Evil Captor, are you saying that you admit that NPR is left of center? If so, I’d agree. You’re reasoning might even be correct. So maybe now we should/could move on to “Should NPR be left of center?” Or, given that is a public station, “does it have the responsibility to be, if not middle of the road, exploring both left and right extremes evenly?” How far to take it? If you go a little left and a little right does that obligate you to go far-left and far-right? Is Dean far left? Is O’Reilly far right? If you’re going to go into the who/what/where/why for the Dems and Reps are you obligated to do it for the Greens? The Libertarians? The Communists? The Fascists? The Neo-Nazis? “Fair and Balanced” is a load of shit. It is a very clever phrase pounded long and hard into people’s brains to make them think that to be a good person you have to give Evolution and Intelligent Design equal time. Why don’t we have David Duke giving speeches to counterpoint all the speeches on MLK day? Why not? After all, you want to be **Fair and Balanced** , don’t you? Or are you afraid of something? And you’d better make damned sure that they get equal air time on all the same networks or you’re jut not **Fair and Balanced**. The very idea is bullshit. It just shows how skillfully it was marketed that people are actually starting to believe that’s how the world should be. Joe, wishing we could get an “Echo Effect” tag. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2005, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339/80 "2005-07-01T14:52:00Z")
> [@handsomeone](#): > > Possibly. It would depend on the context. It turns on whether the error makes one side of an issue look better. I think the thing at least as important as context is pattern. If the mistakes tend to always be made where the smae side is put in poor light, I’d say that is eveidence of pattern. For me, I’ve felt NPR bias ovcer the years more in terms of the stories they cover. I’ve heard them give voice many times to rather extreme left positions, which I have no problem with. But I’ve rarely, if ever heard them seriously explore a position on the other end of the spectrum. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-npr-biased/309339.md?page=5)