How NPR Covered the 10-21-2007 GOP Debate
On October 21st 2007 Fox News sponsored a GOP debate in Florida. If you read blog posts, you’ve probably got the impression many people don’t trust Fox News. Robert Greenwald with Brave New Films even did a film called Out Foxed.
Do people have a false sense of fair reporting from NPR? Next to NPR’s failure to cover the anti War Protests of October 27th 2007, I find this the most telling piece of news coverage NPR has ever done.
On October 22 NPR broadcast a misleading story by Mara Liasson: GOP Candidates Take Aim at Each Other (note there’s link on their page to listen to the broadcast).
If I hadn’t actually watched the debate, I would have thought nothing of it. But having actually watched the debate, I was left in total shock after I listened to the NPR report.
Was the radio station I once trusted and donated money to skewing news coverage beyond belief?
Listen to the NPR program GOP Candidates Take Aim at Each Other (it’s only 4 minutes long), and then watch these news clips.
-
.
-
.
-
.
Mara Liasson managed to get the name Hillary Clinton in every sound bite. She never mentions Ron Paul’s name once. I have heard some people say this is a liberal bias. I argue NPR would be covering Dennis Kucinich if they actually had a liberal bias and wanted to support true liberals. As of date of this post, if you do a Google search on NPR for “dennis kucinich site:npr.org” you get just over 500 hits. If you do a Google search for “hillary clinton site:npr.org” you get nearly 2000 hits; “barack obama site:npr.org” well over 2000. Mara Liasson also contributes to Fox News.
If anyone has watched Orwell Rolls in his Grave, they know Michael Powell (Colin Powell’s son) got rid of equal access laws for political candidates when he was head of the FCC. As a publicly funded radio program we need neutrality from NPR to counteract this problem. We don’t appear to be getting it.
No related posts.
[...] NPR Covered the 10-21-2007 GOP Debate Loozianajay wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptMara Liasson kept managing to get the [...]
Hi,
There are two key points that you’re missing with regard to Ron Paul The first one is that he’s all for reducing the influence of government in people’s lives… with at least one key exception. He’s on record as stating that one of the first things he wanted to do as President was to overturn Roe V. Wade. When it comes to abortion… Ron Paul is all in favor of government involvement! Given that there are an increasing number of stories now coming out regarding the selling of babies… including by religiously-affiliated adoption agencies… there is more behind the abortion issue than the right to life!
The other key point with Ron Paul involves his desire to return to a metal currency. The gold and silver that he’s all in favor of is being taken out of Indigenous lands… primarily in the U.S. and Canada… along with uranium (yellow cake) and most recently diamonds! Just as there are blood diamonds in Africa… we now have its equivalent in North America!
Now… had you posted videos of Cynthia McKinney… I would be more in agreement with you!
Regards,
Jules
You make a valid point, but it doesn’t have anything to do with how NPR covered this debate, except it’s an issue not being addressed by NPR.
What people should really take into consideration, is in every US backed coup (documented on these pages), the US was supposed to be saving the world from Communism or Socialism, only to install a fascist dictator.
What does fascism involve if someone actually knows what it means? http://mrxfromplanetx.com/14/-points-of-fascism
The wars and interventions only take place in the first place so a corporate stronghold can be maintained on a weaker countries assets. A country who will never gain strength because their assets are being sucked dry.
It means privatizing assets. Ron Paul’s theory is privatization is great, and that is the free market solution. The reality is only the most rich and powerful can afford to buy the countries assets. Corporations buy up all of their competition to eliminate their completion.
According to Walter Lippmann in Public Opinion (1922), a free market never existed. I believe it never will. The rich will always have the power to pay off politicians for special favors. The only way to stop corporate power from taking over the world, and the way to create a free market would be to break up the corporations so they have to compete against each other.
That’s not a free market than is it if you have to step in and intervene so the rich and powerful won’t buy everything up. That’s the paradox of a free market.
The problem on the liberal side is people commonly don’t see how the rich and powerful have infiltrated the government and are running things for their own benefit. Even the FDA is riddled with VP’s from the very corporations they are supposed to be regulating.
http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/07/06/daily47.html
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monlink.cfm
It’s pretty damn hopeless, but you never know. Things are certain to go to hell if no-one does anything.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2CCs-x9q9U