Should we "defund" NPR?

[OceanAnnie]

Are the words "feelings" and "opinions" interchangeable?

Juan Williams defended Muslims during the segment. He spoke about his feelings, which is what got him fired.

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

really, thats just insane.

Hardly. There are many people who find Fox News reprehensible and not worth the air time it has.

Your opinion clearly varies from mine. Neither is more valid than the other.

 

[sbell111]

Firing him was completely appropriate. If I had gone on Fox News and said teh same thing, I would expect my employer to take the same action against me as my making these statements would reflect poorly upon them.

The fact that they have specific policies regarding this issue that he chose to ignore just makes the process simpler.

 

[sbell111]

So should public schools go the way of the dodo bird as well? How about parks and farms? I guess if entities can't support themselves, then they should just go away.

Careful, that was just another of Dawn's attempts to drag politics in. Don't fall for it.

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

I work under much the same employment clause. My opinions in a public setting (a credible public setting) can be seen as a reflection upon my employer. Therefore, I am held accountable for NOT saying or doing anything that may negatively affect the employer's position or perceived position in the community.

An NPR newscaster (of any title) has no less responsibility.

 

[DawnCt1]

Not only should he have been fired (and no, funding should not be impacted by this decision) Fox News should be sanctioned for their role in this mess.

It is NOT acceptable for someone who has a role in the public trust to violate that trust in a public forum. If he's afraid of women in dark clothes and headscarves then he should simply keep his opinion to himself.

Really? Only certain feelings and opinions are acceptable? Who will run the "Ministry of Truth"? Your suggestion sounds very Orwellian to me. Scary!

So should public schools go the way of the dodo bird as well? How about parks and farms? I guess if entities can't support themselves, then they should just go away.

Do you really put NPR in the same category as public services? I certainly don't and I don't think that the opinions expressed DAILY on public radio reflect the opinions of most Americans. I think it was become an elite entity that is out of touch with those who have to pay a portion of the bill. They conduct fund raising. Let them fund the additional 2% or cut their costs by 2% to do that.

You've stated you don't listen to NPR, so by default your information is second hand. Be careful who you "quote." The opportunity for being wrong increases exponentially without personal experience.

You mean I can't believe my lying ears?

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

I mean your opinion would be more credible if you had actual experience with that which you criticize.

No one listens much to a movie critic who hasn't been to the show.

 

[DawnCt1]

Hardly. There are many people who find Fox News reprehensible and not worth the air time it has.

Your opinion clearly varies from mine. Neither is more valid than the other.

Except, Fox New is NOT publicly funded and pays their own way. I should also point out to you that most Americans who get their news from cable tv get it from Fox.

 

[wtccheermom]

Because they have tolerated outrageous opinions from the other side of the spectrum; one commentator suggesting that the world would be a better place with the disappearance of Christians via the "rapture". NPR received 40,000 complaints over that comment. juan Williams? 60 complaints.
Secondly they waived their right to fire him based on punditry because they have tolerated his appearance as a commentator and the appearance of others on other networks all along.

Funny how NPR did not nothing when it was done to another religion. It is almost amusing the lengths our country will go to know to make sure Muslims aren't offended. It is almost like we are scared of them and what reaction they may have when they do feel offended.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I guess, all things aren't considered after all.

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

Really? Only certain feelings and opinions are acceptable? Who will run the "Ministry of Truth"? Your suggestion sounds very Orwellian to me. Scary!

Nothing to be frightened of at all. More along the lines of, if you can't say something nice, then keep your mouth shut.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Nothing to be frightened of at all. More along the lines of, if you can't say something nice, then keep your mouth shut.

But who's to say what is nice and what isn't? Because I've heard some not so nice things from NPR, and no one else was fired.

Again, all things are not considered.

 

[DawnCt1]

Nothing to be frightened of at all. More along the lines of, if you can't say something nice, then keep your mouth shut.

Wow! Only "nice opinions" will be tolerated. I have always considered NPR a perfect soporific. Fortunately I prefer to remain awake.

 

[MissFitt]

The WSJ prints a variety of opinions. Meghyn Kelly, Fox News, an attorney who more than familiarized herself with the law, and quoted that law was quite eloquent in pointing it out.
Why have they not terminated the employment of others who have expressed opinions, often in a much more abrasive, offensive way?

Excuse me but the WSJ editorial page is a noted right-leaning entity. I wouldn't use Kelly as an example of an attorney well-versed in the intracacies of employment law as it related the the case at hand. Especially, since she is employed by Fox News. Again, not too biased....

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

Except, Fox New is NOT publicly funded and pays their own way. I should also point out to you that most Americans who get their news from cable tv get it from Fox.

And your point on funding? There are any number of "things" my tax dollars are used for that disappoint me, or that I flat out do not agree with. Doesn't stop the use of those dollars. It's the give and take in society that keeps things on an even keel.

Stats don't necessarily support your statement either. You are aware that there is a very concerted (and quite successful) movement to have Fox News taken off the air, yes? It's not the choice of many people who are looking for information.

 

[DawnCt1]

And your point on funding? There are any number of "things" my tax dollars are used for that disappoint me, or that I flat out do not agree with. Doesn't stop the use of those dollars. It's the give and take in society that keeps things on an even keel.

Stats don't necessarily support your statement either. You are aware that there is a very concerted (and quite successful) movement to have Fox News taken off the air, yes? It's not the choice of many people who are looking for information.

And THAT would be okay with you? Lets hope that no one succeeds in taking anyone off the air, and that would include MSNBC that most people DO NOT watch.

 

[brerrabbit]

How is it political? This is about a private entity, firing someone else because he appeared on another private entity. NPR receives some public funds however. Should we fund this? We certainly talk about school funding, how is this different?

I have no love for NPR however it would seem that this is where the arguement falls apart. If in fact they are a private entity then within the employment laws of the state he is officially employed in NPR might have had every right to fire him. I work for a "private entity", a company that is owned by stockholders and employes me at will. There are clear guidelines as to what I can and cannot do when it comes to appearing in the media. I violate those rules or even do something that is not directly addressed in the rules then I can be let go. That's the world of a "private entity". If however the entity receives federal funding and has a different set of rules for dismissals then they are not a "private entity". So the more relevant question in this whole mess would be, what level of direct and consistant funding dictates an organization as a private or public entity?

I know from a first hand experience that speaking out on a subject can in fact jepordize your job.

 

[LiberalPrincess]

Do you really put NPR in the same category as public services? I certainly don't and I don't think that the opinions expressed DAILY on public radio reflect the opinions of most Americans. I think it was become an elite entity that is out of touch with those who have to pay a portion of the bill. They conduct fund raising. Let them fund the additional 2% or cut their costs by 2% to do that.

Yes, I think NPR is a public service and no I don't think one of the requirements of a public service is that it has to reflect the opinions of all Americans. And I am baffled why anyone would think so. That would be complete government control and that would be bizarre. Do I (or many Americans) agree with all decisions of the military, everything Congress says and decrees or how all schools conduct classes? Of course not, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be funded.

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

And THAT would be okay with you? Lets hope that no one succeeds in taking anyone off the air, and that would include MSNBC that most people DO NOT watch.

Sure it would be ok with me! Just like pulling funding for NPR is ok with you!

 

[OceanAnnie]

Yes, I think NPR is a public service and no I don't think one of the requirements of a public service is that it has to reflect the opinions of all Americans. And I am baffled why anyone would think so. That would be complete government control and that would be bizarre. Do I (or many Americans) agree with all decisions of the military, everything Congress says and decrees or how all schools conduct classes? Of course not, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be funded.

I think NPR should be more mainstream if everyone's tax dollars fund it. It's like the opposite of FOX news only with public funding. How would you like FOX news to be funded by your tax dollars?