Has NPR lost America’s trust?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that, at least to date, NPR has refused to cover the Cass Report out of Europe. The NYT and the Atlantic did. What are they so afraid of?

I think we all know…

yup

[Anonymous]

And, they have suspended him.

https://www.wxxinews.org/2024-04-16/npr-suspends-veteran-editor-as-it-grapples-with-his-public-criticism

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And, they have suspended him.

https://www.wxxinews.org/2024-04-16/npr-suspends-veteran-editor-as-it-grapples-with-his-public-criticism

He knowingly violated some company policies, so a suspension should not come as a surprise to him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And, they have suspended him.

https://www.wxxinews.org/2024-04-16/npr-suspends-veteran-editor-as-it-grapples-with-his-public-criticism

He’s a senior editor and was wildly ignorant about major events.
I was really interested in what he had to say and definitely see the bias and shading of NPR’s reporting.
But he said some amazingly ….. just bizarre statements. Detached from truth and reality.
AND HE IS A SENIOR EDITOR.

[Anonymous]

I think they should have let this blow by, stop being a story. Suspending him looks bad, imo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think they should have let this blow by, stop being a story. Suspending him looks bad, imo.

They didn't really have much choice. Per the article, he violated company policy. Letting him slide opens the door for other employees to do the same thing.

[Anonymous]

An example about why I listen to NPR that much anymore. Heard a story today about a black man who got a kidney transplant after rules for ranking need changed. Previous guidelines assess AA patients differently from other races, which placed them at a disadvantage. Could have been a great story about an important issue, but no background or details provided about why/how AA were assessed differently or why/how the change came about. The whole segment was focused on a personal story and was light on facts and details. Could have been a really interesting story,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An example about why I listen to NPR that much anymore. Heard a story today about a black man who got a kidney transplant after rules for ranking need changed. Previous guidelines assess AA patients differently from other races, which placed them at a disadvantage. Could have been a great story about an important issue, but no background or details provided about why/how AA were assessed differently or why/how the change came about. The whole segment was focused on a personal story and was light on facts and details. Could have been a really interesting story,

That’s the format for some of the programs. Nothing new.

[Anonymous]

The new CEO is definitely, unquestionably, a hostile left wing progressive. Extremely so. What can you possibly expect going forward? Nothing, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And, they have suspended him.

https://www.wxxinews.org/2024-04-16/npr-suspends-veteran-editor-as-it-grapples-with-his-public-criticism

He knowingly violated some company policies, so a suspension should not come as a surprise to him.

Oh please

[Anonymous]

NPR is digging their own grave at this point. I admire Berliner for speaking out, and many longtime listeners know exactly what he’s talking about. If NPR chooses to ignore this, then they do so at their peril. The fact is we have so many content choices, between podcasts and satellite radio and audio books.

Nothing lasts forever - see Twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NPR=National Propaganda Radio

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An example about why I listen to NPR that much anymore. Heard a story today about a black man who got a kidney transplant after rules for ranking need changed. Previous guidelines assess AA patients differently from other races, which placed them at a disadvantage. Could have been a great story about an important issue, but no background or details provided about why/how AA were assessed differently or why/how the change came about. The whole segment was focused on a personal story and was light on facts and details. Could have been a really interesting story,

You misunderstood the story. Previous tests/guidelines were done the SAME way as everyone else, but it has came to be understood that black people process the things differently and the tests results numbers do not show the extent of the damage and urgency of transplant.

That is why now their results are read and interpreted with this in mind.

But yeah, there was no explanation about the science behind it, of why this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they should have let this blow by, stop being a story. Suspending him looks bad, imo.

They didn't really have much choice. Per the article, he violated company policy. Letting him slide opens the door for other employees to do the same thing.

Can't have anyone letting taxpayers know that NPR has a bias in their reporting. Gotta pretend otherwise.

[Anonymous]

HEre is a link about the kidney function test

https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/publications-and-special-projects/penn-medicine-magazine/winter-2021/filtering-bias-out-of-kidney-testing#:~:text=How%20does%20race%20affect%20a,despite%20having%20similar%20kidney%20function.

Would have been really easy for NPR to contact somebody from PENN to discuss in more details