Why is Mara Liasson's screed on NPR

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

not followed up with a disclosure of some kind?

[izquierdista]

1. They changed their name

NPR now equals National 'Publican Radio. The pledge drives couldn't bring in enough money, so they rolled over and whored themselves out.

[peacetalksforall]

2. Led by Jesse Helms and Dan Burton. NPR let itself be pummeled to a conservative death when it

comes to news and opinion. They don't even try to be neutral any more.

I don't know how some programs survived.

For some, the news slant, guests, and opinions are too subtle - the right wing propaganda that comes from Mara, Cokie, Juan and hosts like Cohen go right over the heads of many people.

I considered them quite neutral before the right wing made them their own. In fact, I was proud of them. Now I try to avoid all the news that involves commentary so that I don't get upset. If I don't watch Fox Cnn the NBCs - why should I listen to their people when they visit radio?

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

3. And that is the centeral problem

if you don't watch Faux, or are an active online news collector, how would you know that Mara, Cokie, Juan and others are RW shills?

[peacetalksforall]

4. I watched all of them religiously for decades. I was glued to the tv in the

90's when I studied who was who and what all the organizations were that their guest experts came from. I was a student of propaganda and I can still quote some of the propaganda that was used in the character assassinations of the Clintons, including what came from Arianna Huffington. In fat, she seemed to be a leader for one angle of hounding that went on for months in three stages. Then I watched religiously for six years of this new century and I learned tons more - all involving death and destruction and national tragedy of deception. I never listened to Limbaugh or Hannity or other right wing radio guys. If you watch carefully long enough it becomes more and more transparent. You can even get to know what their theme will be by the think tank or foundation they represent. They are utterly predictable. I also listened to NPR in the old days because they gave quality time and were much more professional. I was led to the conclusion that the propaganda arm pertaining to tv and radio was exquisitely orchestrated from the WH or their outside helpers. They were masterful at spreading the fear background to everything - they set perfect stages.

I once admired Cokie Roberts. I was a fool.

I drew countless diagrams of the connectedness of the players which really helped me remember.

I even counted appearances from certain think tanks and read whatever I could find about them.

And I watched all the military experts who I thought demeaned themselves. But it helped to see the heirarchy of rule that had descended on us.

I watched C-Span hearings and WJ sessions on NPR Funding. I saw Helms and Burton in action on the screen.

I don't have tv except for a non-cable/satellite little seven inch thing with bad sound and awful picture. I listen to Bill Moyers. I watch youtube bits that DUers recommend, but probably most of Maddow.

When you reach a certain point, it is all transparent and predictable.

Since Beck and Myka(sp?) are new in the last two years, I know less, but I pick up enought on DU to know that corporate tv doesn't get better except Olberman has lasted and they added Maddow and Schultz for now - on just ONE of the seven.

The last year or more of watching tv, I loved the angle of freshness from link and fstv.

I hope this helps answer your question. I felt there had to be a better way of being a good citizen and for me it was to learn what was going on and how it is done to us by pretty people who can joke around a little. We still know NOTHING about the tri-laterals and the secret societies and the real workings of the federal reserve, world bank, imf, usury - because they don't want us to know and the big corporate honchos are in charge of feeding the dumbed down citizenship and they have succeeded for all those people who only watch tv and listen to right wing radio which now includes NPR, but NPR is much more classy.

It's time to thank all DU and DUers and some other sites who have provided alerts and insights and first hand knowledge. One alert to watch something on c-span or other places is worth a lot of knowledge.

We go from one to the next breaking happening, but they are usually all connected. When I started figuring out ultimate and supporting agendas with the help of others the pictures come together.

The threats of Republicans to take away funding for NPR and PBS and the concessions that were made probably saved the good stuff that survives. Neutrality is better because most people don't know that NPR and PBS morphed.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

7. it does... I just wonder why, just because

someone is a long-time NPR voice, they seem not to need any back-announcing on their outside connections

I find that odd

[demokatgurrl]

30. Absolutely right

and I cannot STAND Maria Liasson, or even worse, Kooky Roberts.
Self-promoting Republican shills.

[Tesha]

5. What did Lyin'scum have to say today?

NPR = Nothing but Propaganda for Republicans.

[progressoid]

6. Huh? What'd I miss?

:shrug:

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

8. Just her daily crap

nothing new

[Buzz Clik]

9. Time for the Wednesday "I hate NPR" thread.

[Raskolnik]

10. How awful to be exposed to ideas that you don't agree with. n/t

[Buzz Clik]

11. It must be very uncomfortable to hear balance reporting. Thinking can be painful.

[Ikonoklast]

12. So you defend Fox news apparatchiks as 'balance reporting'.

Interesting.

If NPR represents themselves as an unbiased news source, yet uses right-wing think tankers and Fox news people and doesn't reveal their background, that's 'balance'?

[Raskolnik]

13. So you only want reporting that causes you to nod along in agreement?

And while Mara Liasson isn't exactly Noam Chomsky, it is just laughable to call her "right-wing."

[Ikonoklast]

14. No.

It would be proper to at least make a simple declaration as to who pays these people to say what they say.

As you and I well know, a great many 'news people' are paid by the foundations, think tanks, and even private sources to say their piece on the airwaves, to get out the propaganda of their paymasters.

Most people listening have no clue as to who flacks for AEP, The Heritage Foundation, Koch Industries, etc., unless they purposely dig for that information. NPR should be up-front with these connections.

Cokie Roberts is probably the one that grates on me the worst, as she is a deeply entrenched establishment insider that defends the right and subtlety attacks the left at every turn. She is the classic Beltway insider and defender of the old guard.

And Mara cashes a Fox paycheck. The way it usually works is, you take the money, you do as you're told.

[Raskolnik]

15. So every reporter that reports for more than one organiztion should sign off

with a list of every news organization to which they contribute? That seems kind of silly. Do you think that every time Liasson reports for Fox news, she should be required to disclose that she also receives a paycheck from National Public Radio?

[Buzz Clik]

16. It clearly doesn't register that Mara Liasson represents the left at Fox News.

[DireStrike]

19. That in itself is a sign that she is at best a tepid left winger

The token liberals on fox are anything but.

[Raskolnik]

23. So what if she's "at best a tepid left winger." I don't want my news to come from cheerleaders

and cheerleaders only.

[DireStrike]

24. Me neither. That's why I like rachel and not keith or ed.

But mara? Yeah, no chance she'll "Cheer" for anything left-wing. You got me there.

[Raskolnik]

26. Well there's a good example. Does Rachel Maddow begin and end every show on MSNBC with

disclosures about every organization for which she has provided commentary in the past?

[DireStrike]

28. No but I'd happily agree to have her do it if everyone else did as well.

[Raskolnik]

29. Why does she have to wait until everyone else does it?

If its necessary, then why do you not hold her to the same standard? Is it because she generally gives presents the news in a way with which you agree?

[Ikonoklast]

18. Yes.

In all fairness, yes.

Fox routinely states that she is from NPR, and a contributor there.

[Raskolnik]

21. Question: why are you watching her on Fox?

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

31. However, NPR never does

so who is fair?

[DireStrike]

20. Personally I would like to see that.

Maybe they could work up some sort of chevron-logo system where you can at-a-glance tell where their commentators work.

Of course, none of the news organizations will because they don't want you to be aware of that information, aside from the fact that it's clunky and distracts from the pretty faces.

[Raskolnik]

22. For certain conflicts of interest, I believe that disclosures are necessary.

Like if George Will is going to critique a presidential speech, it would be quite nice if he disclosed that he *wrote* large parts of that presidential speech. But I'm not sure I agree that a complete c.v. is necessary for every report by every reporter.

[Joe Bacon]

17. NPR = Nothing but Propaganda for Republicans!

They sold out to the GOP. That's why I stopped giving money to those lying press whores.

[Buzz Clik]

25. LOL! That's the first time I heard that...

... today.

If NPR are lying whores, I assume that you get your news only from leftwing sites. You must have quite a balanced view of the world.

[Doremus]

27. It's not so much that they sold out but that they were conscripted by the RW.

They were attacked from within, assimilated and became yet another arm of the repuke propaganda machine.