Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

NP, no it can’t. PBS stations don’t run advertising and what they air has education value and not commercial value. Many stations can survive via fund raising but in remote areas the money isn’t there.

The CEO of pbs lives in a mansion outside Roundhill.

Long overdue to let them stand on their own

There are a lot of rural communities like rural Kansas where public broadcasting is the only way they have to get local news, weather, high school sports, agricultural updates and so on. Smoky Hills PBS serves 1.2 Kansans over 71 counties. They are going to be gutted, losing half of their budget.

Seems Trump gives even less of a shit about rural "flyover country" than the democrats do.

Well then they should have been more responsible and reported the news such as high school sports and weather and ag reports; and avoided progressive nonsense.

I’m a former NPR listener who was shocked by how biased it had become in recent years. Can you imagine if a public radio had dared report with a conservative lens?

They 100% deserve this.

As has been pointed out many times, reality has a liberal bias. Sorry about your feelings.

I imagine that a liberal's brain is full of 20 slogans that appear in their minds when agitated, like a Magic 8 Ball. "Every accusation is a confession/projection!" "History will judge you!" "Reality has a liberal bias!"

It's like there's a hamster in a wheel powering their brains, searching for the right slogan or accusation to throw out. Pathetic.

I’m sorry, can you show me on doll where the educated people hurt your feelings, snowflake?

They hurt me right here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is absurdly biased politically.

It never should have received public funding. Trump is merely correcting a longstanding wrong.

Help me understand this sentiment. Their news is not overwhelmingly biased. They have an in depth conversation about the news, interviewing people, and opinions on solutions are given toward the end. NPR is statist, as in they believe the state can solve many problems, but the opinion is not crammed down your throat like it is with cable news.

It’s so bizarre to me that people can’t understand these important differences.

You're not objective. There are organizations that rate media on bias and NPR is consistently considered leftist. At some point in the mid-2010s I had to stop listening to them because the bias was so intense. I switched to CNN.

NPR is in the middle, not even skews left. More center than CNN.

https://guides.library.harvard.edu/newsleans/thechart#s-lg-box-32139330

Gaslighting. They said the Hunter Biden laptop was a non-story. They can do that without my money.

Oh oh oh the LAPTOP, the LAPTOP!!!!

Y'all hooted and hollered about vast multinational, multimillion dollar bribery and corruption schemes and how there was child porn and all kinds of other crazy shit on that laptop.

But all that came out of it was that he had a drug problem and lied on his 4473 when he bought a gun. So yea, it pretty much did end up a non- story.

If the contents of the laptop were so inconsequential, as you opine, why did 51 intelligent agents, the DNC, and the MSM, as well as Hillary, Obama, and Biden insist that the laptop was Russian disinformation? That conspiracy which three the 2020 election to Biden is.far more important than what was originally wasn't on the laptop. Who does such a broad and deep political conspiracy over nothing?

They didn't say the laptop itself was disinformation.

They said timing, the framing, the release and aspects of the narrative were the disinformation, along with the social media distortion and amplification of the story.

The timing was perfect "October Surprise" material, just weeks before the election.

The release was highly suspect, with unusual sourcing via Rudy Giuliani who had just met with a known Russian agent, Andriy Derkach prior. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

The framing and narrative was extremely similar to past Russian tactics, mixing real info (the existence of the actual laptop) with fake info (allegations of a massive bribery and corruption scheme, of child porn and other things). The Russians did the same with the Macron leaks. https://www.economist.com/united-states/2020/10/31/the-story-of-hunter-biden-and-the-diminishing-returns-to-disinformation

And then it was heavily amplified on social media by foreign actors. https://www.newsweek.com/hunter-biden-laptop-jim-jordan-facebook-disinformation-twitter-1767369

These are important factors, and if you keep saying "The 51 officials LIED" you are willfully ignoring that reality and are, yourself peddling a dishonest narrative, just as how the right wing ignores the fact that Russia DID meddle in our 2016 (and subsequent elections) via disinfo campaigns and that it does not have to mean they hacked into voting machines and changed votes. Every time I keep hearing the right wing bleat on about that I have to wonder if they are just brazenly dishonest and disingenuous, or just genuinely too stupid to understand nuance. Which is it in your case, PP? Are you smart enough to understand nuance? If so then stop the disingenuous and dishonest narratives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

Yet there is no credible analysis anywhere other than terminally online right wing kooks that says NPR and PBS have anything even remotely like a severe "leftist" bias. In fact, this thread has shown multiple analyses that show PBS and NPR to be fair and balanced. Just because they don't wank DJT's schlong 24x7 the way YOUR media does, doesn't mean they have a leftist bias.

This is exactly the hubris that got the funding cancelled.

For now, losers. They aren't going anywhere in my area

Meanwhile your deep red poor state will suffer the most. I know you arent supporting educational programs.

But that is the way of Trump. The reds suffer the worst, but they still love him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

Yet there is no credible analysis anywhere other than terminally online right wing kooks that says NPR and PBS have anything even remotely like a severe "leftist" bias. In fact, this thread has shown multiple analyses that show PBS and NPR to be fair and balanced. Just because they don't wank DJT's schlong 24x7 the way YOUR media does, doesn't mean they have a leftist bias.

This is exactly the hubris that got the funding cancelled.

Hubris???? What are you even talking about?

It is not even a lot of money. Trumpers are doing it as part of an ideology war. This too shall pass.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

NP, no it can’t. PBS stations don’t run advertising and what they air has education value and not commercial value. Many stations can survive via fund raising but in remote areas the money isn’t there.

The CEO of pbs lives in a mansion outside Roundhill.

Long overdue to let them stand on their own

There are a lot of rural communities like rural Kansas where public broadcasting is the only way they have to get local news, weather, high school sports, agricultural updates and so on. Smoky Hills PBS serves 1.2 Kansans over 71 counties. They are going to be gutted, losing half of their budget.

Seems Trump gives even less of a shit about rural "flyover country" than the democrats do.

Well then they should have been more responsible and reported the news such as high school sports and weather and ag reports; and avoided progressive nonsense.

I’m a former NPR listener who was shocked by how biased it had become in recent years. Can you imagine if a public radio had dared report with a conservative lens?

They 100% deserve this.

As has been pointed out many times, reality has a liberal bias. Sorry about your feelings.

I imagine that a liberal's brain is full of 20 slogans that appear in their minds when agitated, like a Magic 8 Ball. "Every accusation is a confession/projection!" "History will judge you!" "Reality has a liberal bias!"

It's like there's a hamster in a wheel powering their brains, searching for the right slogan or accusation to throw out. Pathetic.

I’m sorry, can you show me on doll where the educated people hurt your feelings, snowflake?

You say this on every thread. It's a 20 or 30 year old joke that everyone has heard and is no longer clever. Get some new material.

Yes, just like Clinton's emails.

No one brings up Clinton's emails in these threads. In fact, no one talks about her emails apart from Hillary, because she sells "But Her Emails" merch.

But you did it for years!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is absurdly biased politically.

It never should have received public funding. Trump is merely correcting a longstanding wrong.

Help me understand this sentiment. Their news is not overwhelmingly biased. They have an in depth conversation about the news, interviewing people, and opinions on solutions are given toward the end. NPR is statist, as in they believe the state can solve many problems, but the opinion is not crammed down your throat like it is with cable news.

It’s so bizarre to me that people can’t understand these important differences.

You're not objective. There are organizations that rate media on bias and NPR is consistently considered leftist. At some point in the mid-2010s I had to stop listening to them because the bias was so intense. I switched to CNN.

NPR is in the middle, not even skews left. More center than CNN.

https://guides.library.harvard.edu/newsleans/thechart#s-lg-box-32139330

Gaslighting. They said the Hunter Biden laptop was a non-story. They can do that without my money.

Oh oh oh the LAPTOP, the LAPTOP!!!!

Y'all hooted and hollered about vast multinational, multimillion dollar bribery and corruption schemes and how there was child porn and all kinds of other crazy shit on that laptop.

But all that came out of it was that he had a drug problem and lied on his 4473 when he bought a gun. So yea, it pretty much did end up a non- story.

If the contents of the laptop were so inconsequential, as you opine, why did 51 intelligent agents, the DNC, and the MSM, as well as Hillary, Obama, and Biden insist that the laptop was Russian disinformation? That conspiracy which three the 2020 election to Biden is.far more important than what was originally wasn't on the laptop. Who does such a broad and deep political conspiracy over nothing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

Yet there is no credible analysis anywhere other than terminally online right wing kooks that says NPR and PBS have anything even remotely like a severe "leftist" bias. In fact, this thread has shown multiple analyses that show PBS and NPR to be fair and balanced. Just because they don't wank DJT's schlong 24x7 the way YOUR media does, doesn't mean they have a leftist bias.

This is exactly the hubris that got the funding cancelled.

Anonymous wrote:All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

Yet there is no credible analysis anywhere other than terminally online right wing kooks that says NPR and PBS have anything even remotely like a severe "leftist" bias. In fact, this thread has shown multiple analyses that show PBS and NPR to be fair and balanced. Just because they don't wank DJT's schlong 24x7 the way YOUR media does, doesn't mean they have a leftist bias.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is absurdly biased politically.

It never should have received public funding. Trump is merely correcting a longstanding wrong.

Help me understand this sentiment. Their news is not overwhelmingly biased. They have an in depth conversation about the news, interviewing people, and opinions on solutions are given toward the end. NPR is statist, as in they believe the state can solve many problems, but the opinion is not crammed down your throat like it is with cable news.

It’s so bizarre to me that people can’t understand these important differences.

You're not objective. There are organizations that rate media on bias and NPR is consistently considered leftist. At some point in the mid-2010s I had to stop listening to them because the bias was so intense. I switched to CNN.

NPR is in the middle, not even skews left. More center than CNN.

https://guides.library.harvard.edu/newsleans/thechart#s-lg-box-32139330

Gaslighting. They said the Hunter Biden laptop was a non-story. They can do that without my money.

Oh oh oh the LAPTOP, the LAPTOP!!!!

Y'all hooted and hollered about vast multinational, multimillion dollar bribery and corruption schemes and how there was child porn and all kinds of other crazy shit on that laptop.

But all that came out of it was that he had a drug problem and lied on his 4473 when he bought a gun. So yea, it pretty much did end up a non-story.

Anonymous wrote:All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

Right, because they think they are the arbiters of truth. How can you be biased when you decide what truth is?

Anonymous wrote:All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

This. The greedy, overpaid, idle white people sucking on the taxpayer's teat at NPR and PBS can kick rocks.

All Katherine Maher had to do to save the funding was to humble herself and testify honestly to Congress. Admit that NPR and PBS had a leftist bias that was driving listeners away and not fully serving the needs of the American people. And then explain what steps she.woukd take to provide a more balanced product.

But like all highly privileged white wealthy know it all progressives, she double and tripled down. It was her own hubris that killed the funding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

NP, no it can’t. PBS stations don’t run advertising and what they air has education value and not commercial value. Many stations can survive via fund raising but in remote areas the money isn’t there.

The CEO of pbs lives in a mansion outside Roundhill.

Long overdue to let them stand on their own

There are a lot of rural communities like rural Kansas where public broadcasting is the only way they have to get local news, weather, high school sports, agricultural updates and so on. Smoky Hills PBS serves 1.2 Kansans over 71 counties. They are going to be gutted, losing half of their budget.

Seems Trump gives even less of a shit about rural "flyover country" than the democrats do.

Well then they should have been more responsible and reported the news such as high school sports and weather and ag reports; and avoided progressive nonsense.

I’m a former NPR listener who was shocked by how biased it had become in recent years. Can you imagine if a public radio had dared report with a conservative lens?

They 100% deserve this.

As has been pointed out many times, reality has a liberal bias. Sorry about your feelings.

I imagine that a liberal's brain is full of 20 slogans that appear in their minds when agitated, like a Magic 8 Ball. "Every accusation is a confession/projection!" "History will judge you!" "Reality has a liberal bias!"

It's like there's a hamster in a wheel powering their brains, searching for the right slogan or accusation to throw out. Pathetic.

I’m sorry, can you show me on doll where the educated people hurt your feelings, snowflake?

You say this on every thread. It's a 20 or 30 year old joke that everyone has heard and is no longer clever. Get some new material.

Yes, just like Clinton's emails.

No one brings up Clinton's emails in these threads. In fact, no one talks about her emails apart from Hillary, because she sells "But Her Emails" merch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR is absurdly biased politically.

It never should have received public funding. Trump is merely correcting a longstanding wrong.

Help me understand this sentiment. Their news is not overwhelmingly biased. They have an in depth conversation about the news, interviewing people, and opinions on solutions are given toward the end. NPR is statist, as in they believe the state can solve many problems, but the opinion is not crammed down your throat like it is with cable news.

It’s so bizarre to me that people can’t understand these important differences.

You're not objective. There are organizations that rate media on bias and NPR is consistently considered leftist. At some point in the mid-2010s I had to stop listening to them because the bias was so intense. I switched to CNN.

NPR is in the middle, not even skews left. More center than CNN.

https://guides.library.harvard.edu/newsleans/thechart#s-lg-box-32139330

Gaslighting. They said the Hunter Biden laptop was a non-story. They can do that without my money.