Video that led to the resignation of the head of NPR - what do you think

[Barry]

Here's the video with the NPR Execs that was filmed without permission, under false pretenses, and it has been edited.

What do you think? I agree with him that NPR may be better off without government funding. I generally agree with what he says, but the last point is a bit damning. If, like Jaun Williams, if NPR has a particular point of view, and is not "fair and balanced" are they credible? OTOH, is there such a thing as "fair and balanced" at all? Does each point of view deserve uncritical coverage, no matter how extreme and Xenophobic?


Project Veritas Investigates: NPR from Project Veritas on Vimeo.

[Barry]

P.S. I consider this journalistic terrorism.

[barista]

Just curious about what you think about the guy who posed as one of the Koch Bros and spoke to and recorded Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Would you put these two incidents in the same category?

[Barry]

Just curious about what you think about the guy who posed as one of the Koch Bros and spoke to and recorded Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Would you put these two incidents in the same category?

You got me. Indeed they are similar. I have mixed feeling about the Left employing the same nefarious tactics as the Right. It's about time we fought back, but I'd be more comfortable with a clean fight.

This also brings up the question of the "right to privacy" and to be able to separate actions/words intended to be private as opposed to those "released" to the public. It's a distinction that I try to up hold within this public forum. It's also antithetical with true transparency and integrity.

Note that the "right to privacy" is a very right-oriented concept (primacy of individual liberty), being sovereign over your "self", that has been used by the left (primacy of the community) to further certain "left" "rights" such as reproductive rights.


B

[podfish]

... I have mixed feeling about the Left employing the same nefarious tactics as the Right. It's about time we fought back, but I'd be more comfortable with a clean fight.... Note that the "right to privacy" is a very right-oriented concept

yeah, I was confused by the "terrorism" comment too. I'm not sure who's all that frightened.

As far as violations of privacy are concerned, I agree that respect for privacy is a value more strongly associated with those who find the political right better in tune with their predilections, but privacy is also a concept best associated with one's personal life. Neither of the two "stings" were serious violations in my mind; neither person should have expected that he'd receive the discretion you expect when you're alone with friends. One's a governor talking to a master of the universe, and the other's soliciting a business relationship with representatives of what's presumably a sketchy organization. Those dealings have public ramifications and therefore the public does have legitimate, rather than prurient, interest.

There seem to be to clear categories of illegitimate violations of privacy: first, where it's solely intended to violate another's dignity, and secondly, where it's used to achieve advantage in a business transaction. High-school locker-room videos on you-tube fit the first category; and facebook data mining seems to me to be fitting the second.

[ItsaNewDawn]

thanks for the infos..awhile back i heard on npr, their advertisers included monsanto and such so i got bummed at that anad stopped listening. then i realized are they doing things like accepting those dollars to just stay on-air?
maybe theres not enough regular people ;) supporting channels like this.. hmm
or maybe another one needs to start up??!! ;)

Here's the video with the NPR Execs that was filmed without permission, under false pretenses, and it has been edited.

What do you think? I agree with him that NPR may be better off without government funding. I generally agree with what he says, but the last point is a bit damning. If, like Jaun Williams, if NPR has a particular point of view, and is not "fair and balanced" are they credible? OTOH, is there such a thing as "fair and balanced" at all? Does each point of view deserve uncritical coverage, no matter how extreme and Xenophobic?


Project Veritas Investigates: NPR from Project Veritas on Vimeo.

[Dynamique]

Indeed they do have to resort to taking ads from corporations in order to stay on the air. There is another reason why corporations "sponsor" or purchase advertising on NPR and PBS programming: it keeps them from doing investigative journalism on these corporations because they cannot risk offending them. In short, these sponsorships and advertising act as muzzles -- and quite effectively, too!

What NPR needs to do is come up with a new business model, like charging a modest subscription or per-download fee for their online content and running Google AdWords on their web site. The landscape is changing, and they need to do the same.

thanks for the infos..awhile back i heard on npr, their advertisers included monsanto and such so i got bummed at that anad stopped listening. then i realized are they doing things like accepting those dollars to just stay on-air?
maybe theres not enough regular people ;) supporting channels like this.. hmm
or maybe another one needs to start up??!! ;)