# NPR's ultra-liberal bias **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 21, 2010, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903 "2010-10-21T17:26:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/81 "2010-10-22T16:21:55Z")
Oddly enough, I am listening to Boston NPR right now and the Emily Rooney show is discussing NPR’s extreme liberal bias and the implications of it. The guests are being pretty candid in their criticism of NPR in that regard. I guess it is a credit to NPR that they are willing put something on like that about themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/82 "2010-10-22T16:37:23Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > Oddly enough, I am listening to Boston NPR right now and the Emily Rooney show is discussing NPR’s extreme liberal bias and the implications of it. The guests are being pretty candid in their criticism of NPR in that regard. I guess it is a credit to NPR that they are willing put something on like that about themselves. I’m not surprised in the least that NPR would buy into the right -wing frame on any issue, even NPR itself. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/83 "2010-10-22T16:37:30Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > That lefties think it slants right and righties think it slants left is enough for me to be satisfied that it’s as non-partisan as it’s possible to be these days. By that qualification, even Obama is non-partisan. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/84 "2010-10-22T16:48:04Z")
See, this is why I get all my news from The Onion. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/85 "2010-10-22T17:11:48Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > NPR’s own ombudsmen have admitted there has been liberal bias at NPR - [Cite.](http://www.mediaresearch.org/BozellColumns/newscolumn/2003/col20031021.asp) If you would prefer (as I certainly do) to read the ombudsman’s own full comments rather than a spin job by Brent Bozell, the link is [here](http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman/2003/031015.html). Shodan was kind enough to provide a seemingly damning excerpt: [QUOTE=Shodan] “Unfortunately, the [O’Reilly] interview only served to confirm the belief, held by some, in NPR’s liberal media bias…by coming across as a pro-Franken partisan rather than a neutral and curious journalist, Gross did almost nothing that might have allowed the interview to develop.” [/quote] Neither **Shodan** nor Bozell saw fit to include the following sentence: > [@Jeffrey A. Dvorkin](#): > > **Although O’Reilly frequently resorts to bluster and bullying on his own show, he seemed unable to take her tough questions. He became angrier as the interview went along**. But by coming across as a pro-Franken partisan rather than a neutral and curious journalist, Gross did almost nothing that might have allowed the interview to develop. The ombudsman’s comments are critical, but not quite the slam-dunk evidence of liberal bias that \*\*Shodan \*\*and Bozell attempt to portray. Dvorkin sums up with the following: > [@Jeffrey A. Dvorkin](#): > > It left the impression that there was something not quite right about the reasons behind this program: Bill O’Reilly often loves to use NPR as his own personal political piñata; and NPR keeps helping him by inviting him to appear. In other words: you know the guy’s a windbag who’s not interested in a good-faith discussion, and NPR cheapens the discourse by giving him a venue for his grandstanding. And of course, it goes without saying that _Bill O’fucking Reilly_ suddenly playing the delicate flower that wilts in the very presence of pointed questioning—from an intimidating pitbull the likes of _Terry Gross_, no less— is simply too rich to be believed. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/86 "2010-10-22T17:12:42Z")
> [@MentalGuy](#): > > Throw in some factual questions like “Was Iraq responsible for 9/11?” or “Is an Islamic group trying to build a mosque at Ground Zero?” and I’m sure the results would be much different. The problem with that second question is that it isn’t a clean yes/no question. It depends on how you define “mosque” (there will be a prayer area in the cultural center) and how you define “ground zero” (the actual WTC premises? the debris area? a radius of X yards?). I can see well-informed people answering the question they think you’re asking rather than the question you think you’re asking. > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Given the proclivity of Republicans and right wingers to lie through editing, I would really like to see a bit more context around this. :rolleyes:Both sides want it to sound like it’s only the other side that lies through editing. It’s common practice for conservative and liberal alike. You’ve never watched a Michael Moore “documentary”? ---
**Author:** ![Turble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8dc957/32.png) [@Turble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Turble)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/87 "2010-10-22T17:20:43Z")
In every city I’ve lived in the NPR station is so far left I have set it on the farthest right button on the car radio to try to achieve some balance. ---
**Author:** ![Walmarticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Walmarticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walmarticus)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/88 "2010-10-22T17:33:26Z")
I appreciate everyone’s efforts to explain this crap, but this thread only adds to the mystery. Many people who dismiss Fox don’t do so because they’re first-hand witnesses to Fox being biased. They do so because some other source compiled a case against them. It could be the Daily Show, MSNBC, or whatever. It’s possible that Fox’ bias is so transparent that anyone who watches for any amount of time just _knows_, but I doubt it. I think it’s subtle enough that, working independently, you’d have to dedicate more effort than most people are willing to, in order to come up with the convictions people seem to have. The same is true with NPR, I’m sure. You’d have to devote more effort to identify the bias than most people are willing to. There must be some other source for the convictions anti-NPR people have. NPR is totally off the radar of the likes of Beck and Limbaugh. Some crap like the Juan Williams thing goes down and it’s like NPR liberalism was a given all along. It’s the same way with everyone else in the world. NPR is off the radar, something happens (like, I mention NPR) and their liberalism is a given. Is this a case of a mental shortcut in a totally random direction? > [@Shagnasty](#): > > Oddly enough, I am listening to Boston NPR right now and the Emily Rooney show is discussing NPR’s extreme liberal bias and the implications of it. The guests are being pretty candid in their criticism of NPR in that regard. I guess it is a credit to NPR that they are willing put something on like that about themselves. You and Emily Rooney need to stop messing with my brain. Like gravity and the color of the sky, I figured I’m pretty well in touch with things that are considered common sense. When people say this, it’s like they’re talking about the yellow sky like it’s totally normal. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/89 "2010-10-22T17:34:33Z")
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:86, topic:557903”] :rolleyes:Both sides want it to sound like it’s only the other side that lies through editing. It’s common practice for conservative and liberal alike. You’ve never watched a Michael Moore “documentary”? [/QUOTE] You can move through life pretending that everything is exactly equal, but anyone who stops to think about it for a second should question whether something like that is possible. I think that imagining perfect symmetry is delusional. In any event, if you want to resort to the world of entertainment, I’m sure there would be a very unbalanced list. I was thinking more of “news” stories like James O’Keefe’s ACORN videos and the thing with Shirley Sherrod. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/90 "2010-10-22T17:47:55Z")
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:86, topic:557903”] :rolleyes:Both sides want it to sound like it’s only the other side that lies through editing. It’s common practice for conservative and liberal alike. You’ve never watched a Michael Moore “documentary”? [/QUOTE] Are you claiming that there is an equality in intent and/or result when it comes to both sides? ---
**Author:** ![Dcypher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@Dcypher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dcypher)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/91 "2010-10-22T17:59:47Z")
I have been at times in my life pretty far right Republican. I find no evidence of huge bias on the part of NPR. Firing Juan Williams was probably not as much an example of PC thinking as fear. Anymore, if anyone associated with a broadcaster says something that can be reasonably critiqued, the broadcaster takes big hits. He was fired more because NPR didn’t want to be involved in a scandal than because he said something offensive. What in the world is offensive to anyone if I say I worry if I see muslims? I am admitting a fault on MY part. I am not suggesting that the reason for my fear is justified, but merely admitting that I have what might be an irrational fear. What is offensive about that? Juan Williams, in my opinion, while across the spectrum somewhat from my own beliefs, is pretty moderate and an example of a thoughtful and respectful moderate. I wish all of the networks had people as balanced as he. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/92 "2010-10-22T18:10:50Z")
> [@Turble](#): > > In every city I’ve lived in the NPR station is so far left I have set it on the farthest right button on the car radio to try to achieve some balance. That part is true. Around here NPR is at 88.5 on the FM dial - you can’t spin the thing much further left than that. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/93 "2010-10-22T18:14:04Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > And the history of civilizations is capitalism on the way up, socialism on the way down… Cite please. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/94 "2010-10-22T18:15:43Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > How did environmentalism become liberal, anyway? It seems to me that the first Environmental President was a Republican (although of course environmentalism in T. Roosevelt’s day doesn’t quite resemble environmentalism in 2010). It became liberal when environmentalism became anathema to conservatives. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/95 "2010-10-22T18:22:17Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > For example, it’s common to read that ‘virtually all’ economists agree with the need for fiscal stimulus. It’s simply not true. Fiscal stimulus has been hotly debated by economists since day one. The Cato Institute ran a full-page ad in the NY Times containing the names of 400 economists who disagreed with the stimulus, including the majority of American economists who have won Nobel prizes. The CATO institute used to be reputable, I can’t believe that there are that many reputable economists who didn’t think that a keynesian response to the recession was a good idea. They might have disagreed witht he stimulus in teh same way that liberals disagree withhealth care reform (as passed) btu paul Krugman disagreed with tehs timulus package as well, he thought it was too small. But before i get ahead of myself: Cite please. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/96 "2010-10-22T18:27:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, yes, **Der** , but we must not forget that you and I lean slightly left of center. I don’t thnk Der Trihs can see center fropm where he’s standing (we need folks like that but lets not pretend he’s mainstream). ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/97 "2010-10-22T18:43:09Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > I do detect a slight liberal bias to NPR (although I agree with Bricker that they are probably the most balanced) and, indeed, to network news and CNN. That is as opposed to the raging conservative bias you get on Fox. But ultra-liberal? No. The problem with calling FOX News and MSNBC as ragingly biased either way, is that the majority of their programming is editorial news shows and not just news reporting. Editorial shows are intended to be biased…they are editorializing. A lot of NPR is editorial as well. We have very little fact based news reporting in the media any more. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/98 "2010-10-22T18:52:32Z")
> [@Walmarticus](#): > > I appreciate everyone’s efforts to explain this crap, but this thread only adds to the mystery. > > Many people who dismiss Fox don’t do so because they’re first-hand witnesses to Fox being biased. They do so because some other source compiled a case against them. It could be the Daily Show, MSNBC, or whatever. It’s possible that Fox’ bias is so transparent that anyone who watches for any amount of time just _knows_, but I doubt it. I think it’s subtle enough that, working independently, you’d have to dedicate more effort than most people are willing to, in order to come up with the convictions people seem to have. > > The same is true with NPR, I’m sure. You’d have to devote more effort to identify the bias than most people are willing to. There must be some other source for the convictions anti-NPR people have. NPR is totally off the radar of the likes of Beck and Limbaugh. Some crap like the Juan Williams thing goes down and it’s like NPR liberalism was a given all along. > > It’s the same way with everyone else in the world. NPR is off the radar, something happens (like, I mention NPR) and their liberalism is a given. Is this a case of a mental shortcut in a totally random direction? > > You and Emily Rooney need to stop messing with my brain. Like gravity and the color of the sky, I figured I’m pretty well in touch with things that are considered common sense. When people say this, it’s like they’re talking about the yellow sky like it’s totally normal. I agree, its hard to see glaring partisanship on the news programs. Most of the aprtisanship you see is on their news “shows” liek Glenn beck and Fox and friends. They are not really that partisan when they cover sports, weather and traffic. I don’t listen to NPR because I prefer CSPAN but do they have shows like Glenn beck and Fox and Friends? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/99 "2010-10-22T19:12:48Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I don’t listen to NPR because I prefer CSPAN but do they have shows like Glenn beck and Fox and Friends? Just wanted to mention that on CSPAN the lunatic political entertainment seems to be covered by Washington Journal. Racists, anti-Semites, religious nutjobs, anti-religious nutjobs, goldbugs, Objectivists, Paulites, Communists, rabid partisans of any stripe, and the occasional prank caller will all show up most mornings. Frankly they make the callers of any sponsored political talk show look reasonable by comparison. ---
**Author:** ![zamboniracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903/100 "2010-10-22T19:23:03Z")
> [@](#): > > Yes. In 1995, Nina Totenberg made some very obnoxious and downright hateful remarks about Jesse Helms and his grandchildren deserving to get AIDS. Remember, this was in 1995 when AIDS was pretty much a death sentence. > And she kept her job, no problem. > > Here’s the clip from Youtube, hardly a hotbed of conservatism: > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7msrF...layer\_embedded](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7msrF...layer_embedded) > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > What’s weird is that this particular clip seems to have exploded among right wingers, but all I can seem to find is the exact same clip, which ends kind of abruptly. I can’t find any transcript either. > > Given the proclivity of Republicans and right wingers to lie through editing, I would really like to see a bit more context around this. Near as I can tell, Totenberg’s comments were in response to Helm’s actions at the time opposing federal funding of AIDS research. [http://www.aegis.com/news/ap/1995/AP950702.html](http://www.aegis.com/news/ap/1995/AP950702.html) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nprs-ultra-liberal-bias/557903.md?page=6)