|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 10, 2024 10:04:13 GMT -5
That is an assumption on your part, yes? No, in an interview I saw with someone who works/ worked at NPR (My assumption is that it was Uri Berliner) who said that there was no one who votes Republican or of that political bent at NPR. I guess my assumption would be that he's telling the truth. Unless he did a poll, and everyone willingly told the truth, how would he know that to be the truth. I have no doubt that NPR skews toward a liberal point of view in general, but its audience probably skews toward a white, educated, upper middle class, and female perspective, especially since shows like the car repair guys and the folksy, trivia and story telling guy stopped airing (probably because those guys died of old age).
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 12:34:18 GMT -5
No, in an interview I saw with someone who works/ worked at NPR (My assumption is that it was Uri Berliner) who said that there was no one who votes Republican or of that political bent at NPR. I guess my assumption would be that he's telling the truth. I have no doubt that NPR skews toward a liberal point of view in general, but its audience probably skews toward a white, educated, upper middle class, and female perspective, I truly have no problem with that. I think a problem arises when the people at NPR think they're calling it straight down the middle and don't recognize that there is a bias in their POV. Also, now you have a bit of a chicken or the egg conundrum. Is NPR skewing their stories because of their audience likes it that way, or is their audience attracted their style of news casting because it's skewed? We all know the path FOX took, it was deliberately manufactured. I just wonder if NPR got to where they are deliberately or did it happen organically.
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Apr 10, 2024 12:35:54 GMT -5
I have no doubt that NPR skews toward a liberal point of view in general, but its audience probably skews toward a white, educated, upper middle class, and female perspective, I truly have no problem with that. I think a problem arises when the people at NPR think they're calling it straight down the middle and don't recognize that there is a bias in their POV. Also, now you have a bit of a chicken or the egg conundrum. Is NPR skewing their stories because of their audience likes it that way, or is their audience attracted their style of news casting because it's skewed? We all know the path FOX took, it was deliberately manufactured. I just wonder if NPR got to where they are deliberately or did it happen organically. what has NPR reported that isn't factual?
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 12:51:28 GMT -5
I truly have no problem with that. I think a problem arises when the people at NPR think they're calling it straight down the middle and don't recognize that there is a bias in their POV. Also, now you have a bit of a chicken or the egg conundrum. Is NPR skewing their stories because of their audience likes it that way, or is their audience attracted their style of news casting because it's skewed? We all know the path FOX took, it was deliberately manufactured. I just wonder if NPR got to where they are deliberately or did it happen organically. what has NPR reported that isn't factual? Couldn't tell you, I don't take in NPR as a regular news source. You would have to read Uri Berliner's essay and see if you find any validity in it. Just because a "fact" is reported doesn't mean it's the complete truth. Three people are running for election and 40% vote for Candidate A, 30% vote for Candidate B, and 30% vote for Candidate C. While it's a "fact" that more people voted for A compared to B, and A compared to C; it's also a "fact" that majority of people didn't want Candidate A. All of that can be reported on (or not) in and manner of ways and the complete picture not given.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 10, 2024 13:03:03 GMT -5
I have no doubt that NPR skews toward a liberal point of view in general, but its audience probably skews toward a white, educated, upper middle class, and female perspective, I truly have no problem with that. I think a problem arises when the people at NPR think they're calling it straight down the middle and don't recognize that there is a bias in their POV. Also, now you have a bit of a chicken or the egg conundrum. Is NPR skewing their stories because of their audience likes it that way, or is their audience attracted their style of news casting because it's skewed? We all know the path FOX took, it was deliberately manufactured. I just wonder if NPR got to where they are deliberately or did it happen organically. I guess I disagree with the idea that their POV is necessarily biased. Is a naturally nice person, or a naturally mean person, expressing their character, or are they biased? I think NPR has a basic approach that is both inherent, and geared toward their audience.
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Apr 10, 2024 13:03:59 GMT -5
what has NPR reported that isn't factual? Couldn't tell you, I don't take in NPR as a regular news source. You would have to read Uri Berliner's essay and see if you find any validity in it. Just because a "fact" is reported doesn't mean it's the complete truth. Three people are running for election and 40% vote for Candidate A, 30% vote for Candidate B, and 30% vote for Candidate C. While it's a "fact" that more people voted for A compared to B, and A compared to C; it's also a "fact" that majority of people didn't want Candidate A. All of that can be reported on (or not) in and manner of ways and the complete picture not given. all you explained is your complete ignorance of percentages.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 13:12:39 GMT -5
I truly have no problem with that. I think a problem arises when the people at NPR think they're calling it straight down the middle and don't recognize that there is a bias in their POV. Also, now you have a bit of a chicken or the egg conundrum. Is NPR skewing their stories because of their audience likes it that way, or is their audience attracted their style of news casting because it's skewed? We all know the path FOX took, it was deliberately manufactured. I just wonder if NPR got to where they are deliberately or did it happen organically. I guess I disagree with the idea that their POV is necessarily biased. Is a naturally nice person, or a naturally mean person, expressing their character, or are they biased? I think NPR has a basic approach that is both inherent, and geared toward their audience. But as a news organization shouldn’t some what they put out be truthful, even if their audience doesn’t like it? (And maybe they actually do that and I’m unaware 🤷🏾♂️) I’m sure NPR has more than enough features that their audience is into.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 13:13:46 GMT -5
Couldn't tell you, I don't take in NPR as a regular news source. You would have to read Uri Berliner's essay and see if you find any validity in it. Just because a "fact" is reported doesn't mean it's the complete truth. Three people are running for election and 40% vote for Candidate A, 30% vote for Candidate B, and 30% vote for Candidate C. While it's a "fact" that more people voted for A compared to B, and A compared to C; it's also a "fact" that majority of people didn't want Candidate A. All of that can be reported on (or not) in and manner of ways and the complete picture not given. all you explained is your complete ignorance of percentages. What part of that was incorrect?
|
|
|
Post by hbmb10k on Apr 10, 2024 13:18:10 GMT -5
I truly have no problem with that. I think a problem arises when the people at NPR think they're calling it straight down the middle and don't recognize that there is a bias in their POV. Also, now you have a bit of a chicken or the egg conundrum. Is NPR skewing their stories because of their audience likes it that way, or is their audience attracted their style of news casting because it's skewed? We all know the path FOX took, it was deliberately manufactured. I just wonder if NPR got to where they are deliberately or did it happen organically. what has NPR reported that isn't factual? NPR claimed the Hunter Biden laptop story and been "discredited" by US intelligence. As always, when a liberal or conservative news outlet tell lies and get caught, the "mistake" they made just happened to make their opponents look bad.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 10, 2024 13:23:09 GMT -5
I guess I disagree with the idea that their POV is necessarily biased. Is a naturally nice person, or a naturally mean person, expressing their character, or are they biased? I think NPR has a basic approach that is both inherent, and geared toward their audience. But as a news organization shouldn’t some what they put out be truthful, even if their audience doesn’t like it? (And maybe they actually do that and I’m unaware 🤷🏾♂️) I’m sure NPR has more than enough features that their audience is into. I don't typically listen to NPR as a news source. The only show I am really familiar with is the interview podcast Fresh Air with Terry Gross and occasionally Tiny Desk Concerts (and the old car repair show and Wait, Wait don't Tell Me). But I think a discussion about truthfulness, bias and POV is a little more complex than what you're suggesting so far.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 10, 2024 13:27:24 GMT -5
what has NPR reported that isn't factual? NPR claimed the Hunter Biden laptop story and been "discredited" by US intelligence. As always, when a liberal or conservative news outlet tell lies and get caught, the "mistake" they made just happened to make their opponents look bad. That claim was made in a book review, not in a news program: A book review of Hunter Biden’s memoir “Beautiful Things” initially dismissed the documents first reported in October by The Post. “The laptop story was discredited by US intelligence and independent investigations by news organizations,” the book review by Ron Elving, senior editor of the publicly funded media organization, initially claimed. The correction on the Thursday article now says, “A previous version of this story said US intelligence had discredited the laptop story. US intelligence officials have not made a statement to that effect.” nypost.com/2021/04/02/npr-issues-correction-after-claiming-hunter-biden-laptop-story-was-discredited-by-intelligence/
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Apr 10, 2024 13:35:07 GMT -5
I guess I disagree with the idea that their POV is necessarily biased. Is a naturally nice person, or a naturally mean person, expressing their character, or are they biased? I think NPR has a basic approach that is both inherent, and geared toward their audience. But as a news organization shouldn’t some what they put out be truthful, even if their audience doesn’t like it? (And maybe they actually do that and I’m unaware 🤷🏾♂️) I’m sure NPR has more than enough features that their audience is into. From listening to both, NPR is far more truthful than Fox. In my experience, NPR is pretty straightforward and fair, but they tend to have FM stations in large, dense media markets, which tend to be more liberal, have more diversity and more immigrants and their stories skew towards that base. I think the young people drawn to work at NPR tend to come from those populations, and then the stories of interest for those populations predominate. FoxNews news historically has also been pretty fair, but it also caters to its base and selects which stories that they tell based on the interest of that base. The EIB (which I believe is now owned by IHeartRadio?) was on lots of AM radio stations that covered large rural areas with a very conservative and largely white listenership. My perception is that they skewed hard-right 2 to 3 decades before NPR became more unbalanced, and that it cultivated personality shows that ginned up hate and fear and told a very biased one-sided story very early on (talking about Rush Limbaugh in the 1980's). While FoxNews news was relatively traditional, its opinion shows began to mirror EIB pretty early on, and now are almost unwatchable, they are such complete partisan propaganda. TL;DR I think NPR has evolved to tell stories that are of interest to a more liberal viewer in dense FM markets, but are pretty fair in their presentation of those stories, while FoxNews news also skews the stories it will and won't report on while the FoxNews opinion shows have evolved to appeal to the EIB rural white audience and have become pure propaganda and many are largely unwatchable.
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Apr 10, 2024 13:39:04 GMT -5
all you explained is your complete ignorance of percentages. What part of that was incorrect? If 40% went to Candidate A it doesn't have to be reported that Candidate A didn't receive a majority of the votes.
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on Apr 10, 2024 13:40:28 GMT -5
what has NPR reported that isn't factual? NPR claimed the Hunter Biden laptop story and been "discredited" by US intelligence. As always, when a liberal or conservative news outlet tell lies and get caught, the "mistake" they made just happened to make their opponents look bad. and what part of Hunter Biden's laptop was news worthy?
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Apr 10, 2024 13:40:28 GMT -5
But as a news organization shouldn’t some what they put out be truthful, even if their audience doesn’t like it? (And maybe they actually do that and I’m unaware 🤷🏾♂️) I’m sure NPR has more than enough features that their audience is into. I don't typically listen to NPR as a news source. The only show I am really familiar with is the interview podcast Fresh Air with Terry Gross and occasionally Tiny Desk Concerts (and the old car repair show and Wait, Wait don't Tell Me). But I think a discussion about truthfulness, bias and POV is a little more complex than what you're suggesting so far. Fair enough.
|
|