Juan Williams Fired From NPR

[punked]

Maybe on NPR but this is a guest spot elsewhere, he was asked, he answered, did you watch clip posted.

I think NPR will regret this, they are allready losing subscribers.

Yah and the Civil Liberties Union lost 1/3rd of their contributers when they fought for the right of free speech for Nazi's but they never regretted it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Maybe on NPR but this is a guest spot elsewhere, he was asked, he answered, did you watch clip posted.

I think NPR will regret this, they are allready losing subscribers.

Nope...not even on NPR, which often has segments with such exchanges between talking heads.

[scribblet]

Thought you all might like this one

Really, should anyone be surprised by National Public Radio’s firing of analyst Juan Williams? Liberals and leftists are far and away the most intolerant people in public debate. As my friend and fellow National Post columnist, David Frum, likes to say, liberals are all in favour of free speech and a diversity of opinion until they encounter views that differ from their own. Then they are shocked to find people who actually disagree with them and their first reaction is to try to silence their critics

.

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/22/lorne-gunter-liberals-defend-sanctity-of-free-speech-for-liberals-only/#ixzz137BoKKZF

[Shady]

Thought you all might like this one

.

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/22/lorne-gunter-liberals-defend-sanctity-of-free-speech-for-liberals-only/#ixzz137BoKKZF

Great link. I liked this part the best...

Mark Twain once said “There is nothing so weak as a virtue untested.” When it comes to free speech, most liberals find it an easy virtue to trumpet – until it is put to the test. Then they most often fold like a cheap shirt.

[bush_cheney2004]

Thought you all might like this one

Kinda works that way for global warming climate change too!

[GostHacked]

That's not true. On Fox, as well as NPR, he's specifically there as commentator/analyist. Get your facts straight.

You are quick to trot out 'facts', and yet have yet to apologize for your blunders in other threads, when proven you are wrong.

Once again you need to get your facts straight. He agreed partly with Bill, but partly disagreed.

The fact is this a sideshow. But I understand the appeal this 'story' has for you.

And if you're looking for an individual or group who's having "none of that", it's NPR. They continue to purge any dissenting views and opinions. American tax dollars at work!

It's not just NPR.

[bloodyminded]

The linked article is pretty poor. It's not up to snuff for a professional newspaper.

He rails aghainst "lib-lefties" (without ever atempting to define what he means); offers one good decent example (the

NPR story in question); and then pads it with a bunch of fluff; including a personal anecdote, and a quote by Twain which was not written about "lib-lefties" in the first place.

He engages in these sweeping generalization about how "lib-lefties" (all of us? Some of us? Who?) don't support free speech unless it aligns with our views.

I think you guys can do better than this. The left-hatred makes you feel warm and fuzzy, I understand that. Children like repetition and familiarity in their bedtime stories about Good and Evil. but things are a lot more complex.

My thoughts on the matter:

I think NPR has gone over the top on this, certainly. I don't personally care about NPR, but their stated reasons don't seem to have any teeth. It's just a bland platitiude that could be (and is, by organizations generally) dredged out to justify every single firing, since the statement carries no hard information.

Yes, political correctness quite likely is the culprit here.

People need to mellow out a little, and stop acting reflexively. If you disagree with someone's coment(s), take it on head-first, argue with it. What's the problem? (I dunno...we could ask NPR, but they'd offer us some pre-written template about "editorial standards," without actually explaining themselves.)

One last thing: If "lib-lefties" always behave as this author (and our friend Scriblett) claims, then how do we explain my last two paragraphs here? I might be profoundly unique among all "lib-lefties," but this seems dubious.....

Edited October 23, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Michael Hardner]

Still, if he said "blacks make me nervous" would that have been much different ?

Would they fire him for that ?

Should they ?

Would anyone care ?

[bush_cheney2004]

Still, if he said "blacks make me nervous" would that have been much different ?

Yes...but now he will be saying "whites at NPR make me nervous".

[Michael Hardner]

Yes...but now he will be saying "whites at NPR make me nervous".

Maybe the Fox viewers will complain about his anti-White statements and he will get fired. Would that rile you up ?

[bush_cheney2004]

Maybe the Fox viewers will complain about his anti-White statements and he will get fired. Would that rile you up ?

Nope....we have access to Juan Williams from several print and broadcast media outlets. He plays his role as lefty foil very well and is hardly controversial...until now!

[waldo]

The linked article is pretty poor. It's not up to snuff for a professional newspaper.

He rails aghainst "lib-lefties" (without ever atempting to define what he means); offers one good decent example (the

NPR story in question); and then pads it with a bunch of fluff; including a personal anecdote, and a quote by Twain which was not written about "lib-lefties" in the first place.

He engages in these sweeping generalization about how "lib-lefties" (all of us? Some of us? Who?) don't support free speech unless it aligns with our views.

not surprising - not at all... this is par for the course for Lorne Gunter, failing-flailing "journalist" extraordinaire - just one of many in the National Post stable.

My thoughts on the matter:

I think NPR has gone over the top on this, certainly. I don't personally care about NPR, but their stated reasons don't seem to have any teeth. It's just a bland platitiude that could be (and is, by organizations generally) dredged out to justify every single firing, since the statement carries no hard information.

as I said previously, from an NPR perspective it reflects upon the NPR code of ethics... that Williams repeatedly flaunted and ignored, for which he was, repeatedly, warned about at NPR. In any case, Williams' submissive act to the Fox News Sunday gang was nothing but a predictable sham... as did Colmes on Fox News, Williams played the token "leftist" foil (always mismatched in sheer numbers, allotted time, and typically muzzled-held in check by Chris Wallace... although watching Williams occasionally reign in the asshat Kristol was always worth the price of checking in to Fox News Sunday). Plain and simple, NPR had enough... if they used this as the final convenient act of ethics betrayal (journalist versus analyst), so be it.

lots of buzz about NPR 'just looking' for an excuse to offload Williams given his long history with Fox News. I expect if Williams feels he's been unjustly let go, he'll seek available recourse... is there a problem? When you read the NPR follow-up commentary it appears to emphasize a breech of NPR's code of ethics - also highlighting distinctions on NPR viewership over an evaluated blurring of objectivity between the roles of a reporter/journalist versus a commentator/analyst... so don't feel too troubled for Williams continued analyst role, given Fox News has just signed him to a $2 million contract extension. Juan William's speech... is still free!

this PBS Newshour commentary offers insight, also bringing reality to those typically wailing about cutting NPR's U.S. federal financing... funding which is indirect and minimal - follow the supplied CPB link (Corporation for Public Broadcasting), "What is the Difference Between CPB, PBS, and NPR?"

NPR has been distancing itself from Williams for quite a while now, changing his title and reducing his role at NPR amid increasing discomfort over the views he has voiced as a pundit on Fox News Channel.

[Moonlight Graham]

Dumb reason to fire somebody.

[Shady]

Yes, the NPR so-called code of ethics. The code that seems to be applied only to Williams, but not to others.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes, the NPR so-called code of ethics. The code that seems to be applied only to Williams, but not to others.

Ouch! Nice find....

[Shady]

Ouch! Nice find....

Yep, she's on a show called Inside Washington every weekend. And she's constantly breaking NPR's so-called code of ethics.

Anyways, looks like there's more purging abound. Media Matters is now calling for the firing of Mara Liasson, an NPR commentator that also does Fox News once in a while. Hmmm, Media Matters, funded by George Soros. NPR, just recieved a donation of over a million dollars from George Soros. It's all starting to add up now. Purge, purge, purge all dissenting voices!!!

[Pliny]

Juan was talking about his feelings of apprehension when getting on a plane if he saw some Muslims getting on the same plane. Do you think that NPR fired Juan because they were a little apprehensive of Muslim retaliation?

Waldo: no - do you pliny?

Perhaps they are endearing themselves to Islam? Perhaps they believed their image to the general public would be improved?

[BubberMiley]

"Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment ... Common sense becomes racism when skin color becomes a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me." --Juan WIlliams, 1986

[Shady]

Williams had a great segment on what you can say on NPR without getting fired.

- You can wish AIDS upon a Republican Senator.

- You can wish 4 million Christians would "disappear" from the earth.

- You can call protestors you disagree with sexual pejoratives such as "teabaggers."

Apparently that's all in line with NPR's policy and so-called code of ethics.

[Shady]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViVWsZ4p5PM

[nicky10013]

So now that we've seen the light about not taking racism too seriously, when is Helen Thomas or Rick Sanchez getting their job back?

Edited October 23, 2010 by nicky10013

[scribblet]

If you actually read all of what Williams said you will find that he did say, not all Muslims... etc.

Rex Murphy has an excellent article today on this, he says it all very nicely,

excerpted:

What Mr. Williams described might be an eccentric reaction; it might be commonplace. But, after the Twin Towers, after the Pentagon, after London and Madrid and all the rest, Mr. Williams’ response here isn’t irrational. Nor can it be confused with a blanket attack on all Muslims. In post-9/11 America, thanks mainly to Islamist terrorist Osama bin Laden and 19 Muslim hijackers, there is for many people a frisson of anxiety surrounding the subject of Muslims, airports and airplanes. Mr. Williams’ crime was to mention its existence.

Juan Williams is a long-time liberal commentator and pundit, an acknowledged authority on the civil rights moments and as decent a personality as one can hope for in present-day journalism. To smear him as a bigot, which in effect NPR has done, is a testament to how twisted the public conversation can become under the Kafkaesque impulses of political correctness.

---

Meanwhile, this hypersensitivity has its inverted mirror. Even as certain public bodies such as NPR strain themselves to root out the mere scent of intolerance toward Islam, Seattle-based cartoonist Molly Norris, who idly proposed a “Let’s Draw Mohammed Day” (and later withdrew all association with that project and apologized), is now in hiding after being declared a “prime target for death” in a fatwa. Have we heard as much about her and her plight — more drastic by far than the state of Juan Williams’ nerves at an airport — as about the NPR flap? Is her story not more news-worthy? Yet, the threat to kill a citizen in a democracy because she is alleged to have “offended” Islam is almost treated as normative. No hot and pressing edicts from NPR on that fatwa.

---

What does NPR’s firing of Williams tell us? It tells us most shamefully that NPR long ago abandoned the ideals of real free speech and a real free press when they come into the slightest clash with the superior imperatives of political correctness. And NPR is far from alone is this dereliction. These days, too many genuflect where others once stood and fought.

Read more: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/23/rex-murphy-npr-firing-assists-the-fatwa-on-free-speech/#ixzz13H2JWad4

[nicky10013]

If you actually read all of what Williams said you will find that he did say, not all Muslims... etc.

So? How come there was no outcry over Sanchez and Thomas? Anyone who agrees with their firing and not William's is a blatant hypocrite.

Edited October 24, 2010 by nicky10013

[Bitsy]

Maybe it is because I grew up in the segregated south but I have a sense of alarm when I hear a sentence that begins, “I am not a bigot, but..............

scribblet, I am not sure what you mean by subscribers so do you have a link for your assertion that NPR is “already losing subscribers”. I have not read this and find it rather strange since I known of few conservatives and certainly no teabaggers that listen to NPR much less support it with contributions.

[Shady]

since I known of few conservatives and certainly no teabaggers that listen to NPR much less support it with contributions.

Exactly. Because it's a mouthpiece of the left, funded through tax payer money. That needs to end, and it needs to end now. Let George Soros pay for that crap, not the American tax payer. And it seems as though he's more than willing to do so, judging from his recent million dollar donations.