General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNPR's Diane Rehm show co-opted by our Corporate Owners to promote free trade (NAFTA)
If you were unfortunate enough to catch it, NPR had Diane Rehm's show on this morning as per usual - but hosted by someone else since Diane was out.
The entire first half of this morning's program was devoted to cheerleading for free trade. They had several guests on touting the "wonderfulness" of NAFTA and free trade. I mean they went gangbusters with the cheerleading. Most of the guests were Hispanic. Not to disparage Hispanics at all but the information presented was strictly one-sided.
The host said that she was aware they had a LOT of callers calling in to express their disagreement with the panel's assertions that NAFTA was fantabulous. One of them was, the host mentioned, from the Piedmont area of NC and that caller vehemently disagreed that NAFTA was of any benefit to that area of the country jobs or economy-wise, for instance. The host DID NOT allow that caller to speak on the air.
Though the host mentioned that they were aware of the many callers who contacted the show to disagree with the shameless cheerleading for free trade they were doing on the program, she did not let EVEN ONE of them speak on the air. She openly acknowledged that the show was "pro_NAFTA" and refused to allow ANY OTHER than PRO-NAFTA viewpoints.
So, our corprat owners are out en force to push the propaganda that free trade is wonderful and beneficial. Of course that would include the upcoming TPP we're all about get f*cked in the a$$ with.
This show was the most shameless - BLATANT corprat propaganda I've heard in a while.
Watch out Americans, the corprats are pushing their media propaganda mouthpieces HARD to do their cheerleading.
Disgusting. I felt like I needed a bath after listening to that shitspray.
Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)I guess I shouldn't be appalled. But I was.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Orrex
(63,172 posts)Alas, I'm not surprised that this happened. They've been softballing Corporate & GOP interests for a long time.
When was the last time you heard a hard-hitting expose on their sponsers Walmart, Microsoft or McDonalds?
KoKo
(84,711 posts)I used to love her show, years ago. But, then it seemed to change.
I guess it was NPR's management change during the last Bush years had a conservative replacement or may it was Obama's first term...but both PBS and NPR are far different now than the were over a decade ago.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)It felt like a corporate convention. "Facts" were presented with a narrative that was clearly intended to sway the audience. Conclusions were drawn from these facts that the TPP would be a good thing. How in God's name they could possibly hold such an opinion since it is being conducted amidst such secrecy is beyond me.
There was very little dissenting opinion.
Triana
(22,666 posts)...I know it's not just my perception that it was basically a commercial for 'free trade' - it was just an hour-long promotion for it.
sendero
(28,552 posts)..... used to host the fairest and most balanced talk show I've heard anywhere. Whether you were liberal or conservative, if you made an assertion you'd better be ready to back it up with facts, she would absolutely hold your feet to the fire.
Of course, that was then. Who knows what is going on now, NPR has been on a steady glide path to hell since the late 90s.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)Her show and Derrick McGinty's on WAMU in the '90s were the best shows.
I was a loyal supporter of WAMU back then, but I started noticing a change in the late '90s and stopped listening altogether during the Florida recount fiasco in 2000. The rah-rah coverage All Things Considered and Morning Edition gave Bush turned my stomach and caused me to turn the dial.
The only other time I got annoyed with WAMU before that was whenever Steve Roberts (Cokie's husband) would guest host Diane's show while she was away. If it wasn't his self-satisfied ruminations on his oh-so charmed life, it was his pushing the inside-the-beltway worldview that made my blood boil.
sendero
(28,552 posts).... him and Cokie deserve each other they are both fucking morons. His smug schtick was so blatant I never understood why Rehm would use him for anything. Again, possibly not her decision as to who subs for her, I have no way of knowing.
City Lights
(25,171 posts)I tuned out years ago and haven't looked back.
olddots
(10,237 posts)Unfortunately there is no hope for media that has to play in the profit toilet of material " Kulcha "
we are undergoing system burnout and knowbody is adressing the issues because everything is based on convenience at the expence of a future .
BadgerKid
(4,549 posts)It's the second segment I've heard. You've echoed what I wasn't sure I was hearing.
On a previous show hosted by Ms. Rehm herself, there was a guest who was indicating that, historically, it's left other countries uneasy trying to negotiate treaties with the US because the agreed-upon deal wasn't necessarily a done deal because the US still needed the approval of Congress. He suggested there was little point to airing the potential deal terms until the treaty went to debate in Congress.
Triana
(22,666 posts)This is BLATANT propaganda - put out by NPR's corprat owners. This shouldn't be legal. But since the corporations ARE our gov't, it is.
merrily
(45,251 posts)is so pesky for the Executive Branch. However, even though Congress is Republican right now, the entire House is answerable to voters every two years and Senators every six years. A second term President and a Secretary of State are answerable to voters never (unless the Secretary wants to run for President later, in which case, Katie bar the door.)