Can taxpayer-supported media exist in a heavily partisan political climate? Should it? After extensive controversy over NPR and PBS, the rubber is finally about to hit the road
“started to change at NPR after Trump was elected in 2016.”? Are you fucking kidding me? People’s Public radio has always been a left-wing echo chamber.
Yeah but they stopped trying to pretend otherwise ca 2016. Actually a couple years before that is when I noticed the shift to an open, unrelenting embrace of "social justice" and identity politics.
Spot on! That's the truth regarding the entire DNC and all of it's people and tentacles. That's why the transition to what they are today seemed to happen overnight. People look at Trump as the cause, but all he did was pull back the curtain, or maybe give them all reason to drop the charade. How long does it take to remove a mask?
It was always that to some extent, but in the mid-teens it became unlistenable even for a lot of blue tribe people. I enjoyed it in 2012 and now it makes me want to vomit, and my views haven't shifted much.
Yes but they also had some fun weekend shows my favorite was CarTalk, The Moth was good until it went sad as I describe it, all the good shows slowly became sad and after we would listen to some of them I felt like slamming my fingers in my car door for relief.
Thanks for reminding me of Car Talk! Me and my friends used to go around talking in the back and forth style famously used by the show's two hosts, Tom and Ray Magliozzi. (had to look up their names)
I used to like their quiz shows on the weekends until every joke had an anti-Trump or anti-conservative punch line. for the bast 10-15 years PBS has been one long circle jerk for snobby Urban elites.
Yeah. It used to be mostly cultural and educational stuff (as intended). In the 70s in my small town, public radio was the only symphonic music most of us ever heard. There was Car Talk and Prairie Home Companion etc. And yes, local coverage of stuff like high school band concerts.
Car Talk was great. Prairie Home Companion was fun. Also Wait Wait, Science Talk, and This American Life. Through 2020 I didn't much notice its progressive slant because I was a progressive at that time and NPR was reflecting my values.
My favorite show was On The Media with Brooke Gladstone and Bob Garfield. I assumed it was founded upon respect for press freedom and the First Amendment.
Then Gladstone did a hit piece on Joe Rogan. I was shocked by the lies the reporter told about him, characterizing him as nothing more than a meat-head comedian into weight lifting, hawking vitamin supplements, and promoting right-wing ideas.
But I knew he was a Bernie bro and had interviewed Bernie at least twice. And I knew, from listening consistently, that his podcast was the most eclectic in the world, literally, and that he's a superb, knowledgeable interviewer.
Gladstone must have assumed that her audience and his couldn't possibly overlap, so she could tell lies about him and they would be none the wiser. Maybe there was professional jealousy too. Whatever it was, it was my wake-up call that OTM and NPR could not be trusted.
I grew up listening to public radio content of all types -- in the early 70's -- as a young classical music fan.
Only later as an adult did I begin to notice a pervasive bias showing -- including in such subtleties as variations in voice tone, inflection and enunciation.
Then the traditional NPR speaking style -- a subtly condescending, mic-caressing, oh-so-cultured imp-on-your-shoulder murmur -- started to grate. And the spell was broken.
Reminded me of JRRT's description of Saruman's voice:
"Suddenly another voice spoke, low and melodious, its very sound an enchantment. Those who listened unwarily to that voice could seldom report the words that they heard; and if they did, they wondered, for little power remained in them. Mostly they remembered only that it was a delight to hear the voice speaking, all that it said seemed wise and reasonable, and desire awoke in them by swift agreement to seem wise themselves. . . ."
You missed the last step - when the "NPR speaking style" stopped caring about truth and facts, then started uttering pure nonsense.
They may not realize it, but they're part of a yet-to-be-identified religion. I've got a name for their new faith: Trumpianity. It's unity is in hating all things Trump touches, and hating everyone that disagrees with them. At least most Christians have the decency to say something like, "I'll pray for you", to people who criticize them.
Yes, I did miss the last several steps of NPR’s descent — I was already long gone. (Though the first stages of not caring about [or not being unable to recognize] facts were already apparent.)
Most of what they used to do wasn't news. I grew up in a semi-rural area in the 1970s, and learned to read watching Sesame Street, and NPR was the only classical music most of us ever heard. On Saturdays there was, Car Talk, Prairie Home Companion, well-told stories, and stuff like that. It was a valuable resource for us. Which I hope survives through private donations.
As opposed to corporate controlled media selling you stuff you don't need to buy with money you don't have. I guess you never heard of Bernays and the mind control through media he put on steroids.
Great timeline. It also shows that for 50 years there have been some politicians who wanted to cut public funding and it never happened. I hope it happens now. If publicly funded journalism was a right-wing echo-chamber, I would feel the same way.
I agree. The timeline is super helpful in educating readers and providing the perspective and context needed to understand this or any subject. I love Matt's new "timeline" approach.
Having said that, I'm squarely in the defund camp, regardless of bias or content. The government and media should be as far removed from one another as possible.
I recall one of the ex-Obama admin podbros writing about Fox News something to the effect of "imagine having an entire propaganda network for your side." He of course left out that his side has all the rest of them, including taxpayer-funded networks.
What's stunning is that Democrats have been able to keep funding of a leftwing news outlet with taxpayer funds. I wouldn't want taxpayer funds going to something like Fox News and I certainly don't want funding of leftwing NPR and PBS to continue. Democrats are openly corrupt and in your face about it.
I recall during the 2012 campaign when the libs were pretending that all of government was like Big Bird, the pre-Russiagate FBI, NASA, and DARPA. First: if only. Second: if Big Bird is so beloved, he doesn't need federal funding, as the partnership with HBO later demonstrated.
I remember with fondness the old days when PBS was primarily airing British shows and other things not on the other 3 networks. I saw some great stuff on our station back in the 70's and 80's, things that have stuck with me. When the public radio stations played Jazz, Classical and alternative music all day. Somewhere this all changed. It was most apparent on the radio where NPR news crept from a few hours in the morning or an hour around noon to this all day wall of soft-spoken propaganda after which you might be lucky to hear some music-if they still played any and didn't cut away to more talk shows.
Public radio is just no fun anymore. If it is only going to be a propaganda wing it needs to be cut off the public teat.
If I remember correctly, when PBS first started, there were three networks and a scattering of local stations. PBS was the only thing offering an alternative to big three news, cop shows, Westerns, and sitcom. Now, there hundreds of different ways to get information and entertainment. There is no longer an argument to be made for the State to have a taxpayer-funded propaganda arm.
Lilias, Yoga, and You; Wall Street Week; and Firing Line kept me a contributor for many years. It ceased in the 80's, they hated Reagan almost as much as Trump.
I loved Lilias! I would rush home from school so that I could catch the last half of the show, especially the relaxation at the end. Then came Dr Who (4th doctor, Tom Baker), and there was Dave Allen and Monty Python on Sunday nights. Short movies (student type projects) shown late on Saturdays.
I didn't see what happened in the 80's, I moved out of the parent's house and didn't get a TV for years. By that time, cable was the thing and most everything I used to watch was no longer on PBS.
It’s difficult to listen to NPR news for long before starting to wonder about their choice of subjects and especially their adjectives. If you don’t quickly conclude they ONLY view life from the left, you really aren’t listening. Stop the Federal funding- they won’t change but we’ll get to keep our money!
Its not just the political reporting. NPR established a 'climate desk' a few years ago, purportedly to report on climate change. But the funders of the climate desk are the Rockefeller Foundation and the Chan Zuckerberg foundation. About 10 minutes of research is required to discover that both of these foundations are far from unbiased. Both have taken extreme positions on climate change, demanding the complete phase out of fossil fuels. This net zero demand, according to unbiased scientists, amounts to genocide and impoverishment for most countries.
How is this even a question? Fuck no. No amount of fed or state funds should be allocated for “media” this is what happens, first of all and second you get nothing but smug ass career “media” types in the positions of power there. It can’t “fail” if it’s being subsidized so why even try to be fair. Sink or swim NPR. I think we ALL know how that would end. 🤷🏻♂️
Like Walter on ATW today I was in upper MW (Wisconsin) when NPR was quite different. The creation of stations at (mostly) universities provided statewide coverage. Those old enough to remember that the range of radio signals was limited in the 1970s appreciate what a boon this was...almost like rural electrification. More than anything satellite radio and internet access in rural areas take away the need for the network aspect. Set aside the lack of viewpoint diversity, the need for that technology is now outdated. Currently, NPR uses a combination of satellite and terrestrial radio systems to distribute its programming. NPR uses satellite technology to deliver its programming to member stations. (Public Radio Satellite System (PRSS)--Once the programming reaches local stations via satellite, these stations broadcast it to listeners over the air using traditional FM (and sometimes AM) radio signals. Each member station operates its own transmitters, which are licensed by the FCC.. The stations typically broadcast on FM frequencies between 88.1 and 91.9 MHz, a band reserved for non-commercial, educational radio in the U.S.
I do not know how much LOCAL programming each member station provides. However, NPR is on Sirius-- "NPR Now," typically on Channel 122. This channel features a mix of in-depth news, features, and entertainment produced and assembled by NPR specifically for SiriusXM. I see a lot of discussion about content but little about duplicative technologies. Here is a link that explains the distribution system: https://www.nprdistribution.org/
I work in interior construction since the mid 90's and I would listen to WNYC or WHYY all day everyday until Laura Walker practically destroyed the station. My wife and I now play a game when we're driving called let's put on the sad station and count down the seconds before they mention racism, illegal immigrant's problems, trans issues, feminism, and orange man bad. Less than 30 seconds is the max time. Peter Boghossian and friends did a series called All Things Reconsidered it's hilarious.
NPR delivers a great and irresistable product. Misinformation, disinformation and malinformation is for chumps and plebes...we deliver pure distilled psuedo-information...the very life blood of the growing psuedointellectual class. We give our listeners an effortless felt experience of being better informed--nay, more intelligent!--than our neighbors. Waxed mental floss...crack for Karens. You too can be brilliant without the nuisance of reading a book, listening to long and tedious lectures or otherwise putting in any effort whatsoever. Fear not NPR employees, the hypnosis sector of the astrology industry is growing fast and they have an insatiable need for people with smooth and calming speech patterns.
Thanks for the timeline. I stopped listening in the 90s as it was increasingly evident, every day, that it was biased. It was sad as I did really love StoryCore or whatever it was called. The downfall was the inherent left political propaganda. Government can sell it to the private sector. Let Soros, Hoffman, Gates and Jobs buy it.
I used to listen to NPR. I used to donate. It had its inherent biases because it was staffed primarily by upper middle class types from posh neighborhoods who went to elite schools... people like Katherine Maher. But the biases were manageable. The production values and content of shows like All Things Considered were excellent. It was informative and entertaining. And then they went down the DEI rabbit hole and lost their minds. They became insufferable. I don't donate or listen anymore. They shouldn't be publicly funded, just like Newsmax or MSNBC shouldn't be.
“started to change at NPR after Trump was elected in 2016.”? Are you fucking kidding me? People’s Public radio has always been a left-wing echo chamber.
Yeah but they stopped trying to pretend otherwise ca 2016. Actually a couple years before that is when I noticed the shift to an open, unrelenting embrace of "social justice" and identity politics.
Spot on! That's the truth regarding the entire DNC and all of it's people and tentacles. That's why the transition to what they are today seemed to happen overnight. People look at Trump as the cause, but all he did was pull back the curtain, or maybe give them all reason to drop the charade. How long does it take to remove a mask?
It was always that to some extent, but in the mid-teens it became unlistenable even for a lot of blue tribe people. I enjoyed it in 2012 and now it makes me want to vomit, and my views haven't shifted much.
I remember Parks and Recreation having a hilarious recurring bit about the insufferable PBS news readers in 2010.
Yes but they also had some fun weekend shows my favorite was CarTalk, The Moth was good until it went sad as I describe it, all the good shows slowly became sad and after we would listen to some of them I felt like slamming my fingers in my car door for relief.
I used to love Car Talk, even though I had no interest in cars!
Car Talk was great, even for us car guys!
Loved car talk. Bought a Volvo anyway, and the guys were right. All repairs cost "about a thou.'"
Thanks for reminding me of Car Talk! Me and my friends used to go around talking in the back and forth style famously used by the show's two hosts, Tom and Ray Magliozzi. (had to look up their names)
The tiny desk concerts are pretty much the only thing worth listening to on NPR.
I like Tiny Desk Concerts, as well.
Awesome, let them start a syndicate with their own money, not mine.
I used to like their quiz shows on the weekends until every joke had an anti-Trump or anti-conservative punch line. for the bast 10-15 years PBS has been one long circle jerk for snobby Urban elites.
Yeah. It used to be mostly cultural and educational stuff (as intended). In the 70s in my small town, public radio was the only symphonic music most of us ever heard. There was Car Talk and Prairie Home Companion etc. And yes, local coverage of stuff like high school band concerts.
I would listen to Jonathan Swartz every Sunday, I learned about the Great American Songbook from his show.
Car Talk was great. Prairie Home Companion was fun. Also Wait Wait, Science Talk, and This American Life. Through 2020 I didn't much notice its progressive slant because I was a progressive at that time and NPR was reflecting my values.
My favorite show was On The Media with Brooke Gladstone and Bob Garfield. I assumed it was founded upon respect for press freedom and the First Amendment.
Then Gladstone did a hit piece on Joe Rogan. I was shocked by the lies the reporter told about him, characterizing him as nothing more than a meat-head comedian into weight lifting, hawking vitamin supplements, and promoting right-wing ideas.
But I knew he was a Bernie bro and had interviewed Bernie at least twice. And I knew, from listening consistently, that his podcast was the most eclectic in the world, literally, and that he's a superb, knowledgeable interviewer.
Gladstone must have assumed that her audience and his couldn't possibly overlap, so she could tell lies about him and they would be none the wiser. Maybe there was professional jealousy too. Whatever it was, it was my wake-up call that OTM and NPR could not be trusted.
Yes! And then Bob Garfield did a hit piece on Julian Assange. That's when they became dead to me.
I didn’t know. Wow.
With Tump they started attacking a person.
Seems before it was ideas.
I grew up listening to public radio content of all types -- in the early 70's -- as a young classical music fan.
Only later as an adult did I begin to notice a pervasive bias showing -- including in such subtleties as variations in voice tone, inflection and enunciation.
Then the traditional NPR speaking style -- a subtly condescending, mic-caressing, oh-so-cultured imp-on-your-shoulder murmur -- started to grate. And the spell was broken.
Reminded me of JRRT's description of Saruman's voice:
"Suddenly another voice spoke, low and melodious, its very sound an enchantment. Those who listened unwarily to that voice could seldom report the words that they heard; and if they did, they wondered, for little power remained in them. Mostly they remembered only that it was a delight to hear the voice speaking, all that it said seemed wise and reasonable, and desire awoke in them by swift agreement to seem wise themselves. . . ."
You missed the last step - when the "NPR speaking style" stopped caring about truth and facts, then started uttering pure nonsense.
They may not realize it, but they're part of a yet-to-be-identified religion. I've got a name for their new faith: Trumpianity. It's unity is in hating all things Trump touches, and hating everyone that disagrees with them. At least most Christians have the decency to say something like, "I'll pray for you", to people who criticize them.
Or, "well, bless your heart."
Yes, I did miss the last several steps of NPR’s descent — I was already long gone. (Though the first stages of not caring about [or not being unable to recognize] facts were already apparent.)
True. But there's hard bias and then there's weaponized, institutionalized propaganda.
And?
Et tu, Barrio?
Most of what they used to do wasn't news. I grew up in a semi-rural area in the 1970s, and learned to read watching Sesame Street, and NPR was the only classical music most of us ever heard. On Saturdays there was, Car Talk, Prairie Home Companion, well-told stories, and stuff like that. It was a valuable resource for us. Which I hope survives through private donations.
As opposed to corporate controlled media selling you stuff you don't need to buy with money you don't have. I guess you never heard of Bernays and the mind control through media he put on steroids.
Yup
How long have you been listening. I started in 1971 when it started in Pittsburgh.
Great timeline. It also shows that for 50 years there have been some politicians who wanted to cut public funding and it never happened. I hope it happens now. If publicly funded journalism was a right-wing echo-chamber, I would feel the same way.
Thanks, Allison. The consistency in the efforts to cut funding stood out to be me as well.
I agree. The timeline is super helpful in educating readers and providing the perspective and context needed to understand this or any subject. I love Matt's new "timeline" approach.
Having said that, I'm squarely in the defund camp, regardless of bias or content. The government and media should be as far removed from one another as possible.
I'm amazed at his ability to pull all these things into a cognitive timeline. Can you imagine how much time and energy that takes? Yikes.
Thank you for doing it for us. 90% of us would not take the time to do this.
Showing that indeed the Republicans were right all along.
I recall one of the ex-Obama admin podbros writing about Fox News something to the effect of "imagine having an entire propaganda network for your side." He of course left out that his side has all the rest of them, including taxpayer-funded networks.
What's stunning is that Democrats have been able to keep funding of a leftwing news outlet with taxpayer funds. I wouldn't want taxpayer funds going to something like Fox News and I certainly don't want funding of leftwing NPR and PBS to continue. Democrats are openly corrupt and in your face about it.
If they are bragging about how many listeners they have, why am I forced at gun point to pay for them?
Well stated, sir!
I recall during the 2012 campaign when the libs were pretending that all of government was like Big Bird, the pre-Russiagate FBI, NASA, and DARPA. First: if only. Second: if Big Bird is so beloved, he doesn't need federal funding, as the partnership with HBO later demonstrated.
I remember with fondness the old days when PBS was primarily airing British shows and other things not on the other 3 networks. I saw some great stuff on our station back in the 70's and 80's, things that have stuck with me. When the public radio stations played Jazz, Classical and alternative music all day. Somewhere this all changed. It was most apparent on the radio where NPR news crept from a few hours in the morning or an hour around noon to this all day wall of soft-spoken propaganda after which you might be lucky to hear some music-if they still played any and didn't cut away to more talk shows.
Public radio is just no fun anymore. If it is only going to be a propaganda wing it needs to be cut off the public teat.
If I remember correctly, when PBS first started, there were three networks and a scattering of local stations. PBS was the only thing offering an alternative to big three news, cop shows, Westerns, and sitcom. Now, there hundreds of different ways to get information and entertainment. There is no longer an argument to be made for the State to have a taxpayer-funded propaganda arm.
I remember in the 80's, stationed on Guam, I could watch Miss Marple and Sherlock on PBS. It was the best, at the time. (sigh)
Didn’t we call PBS “educational TV” back then? Lots of daytime programming for school-aged kids to learn math and such?
Lilias, Yoga, and You; Wall Street Week; and Firing Line kept me a contributor for many years. It ceased in the 80's, they hated Reagan almost as much as Trump.
I loved Lilias! I would rush home from school so that I could catch the last half of the show, especially the relaxation at the end. Then came Dr Who (4th doctor, Tom Baker), and there was Dave Allen and Monty Python on Sunday nights. Short movies (student type projects) shown late on Saturdays.
I didn't see what happened in the 80's, I moved out of the parent's house and didn't get a TV for years. By that time, cable was the thing and most everything I used to watch was no longer on PBS.
It’s difficult to listen to NPR news for long before starting to wonder about their choice of subjects and especially their adjectives. If you don’t quickly conclude they ONLY view life from the left, you really aren’t listening. Stop the Federal funding- they won’t change but we’ll get to keep our money!
Its not just the political reporting. NPR established a 'climate desk' a few years ago, purportedly to report on climate change. But the funders of the climate desk are the Rockefeller Foundation and the Chan Zuckerberg foundation. About 10 minutes of research is required to discover that both of these foundations are far from unbiased. Both have taken extreme positions on climate change, demanding the complete phase out of fossil fuels. This net zero demand, according to unbiased scientists, amounts to genocide and impoverishment for most countries.
How is this even a question? Fuck no. No amount of fed or state funds should be allocated for “media” this is what happens, first of all and second you get nothing but smug ass career “media” types in the positions of power there. It can’t “fail” if it’s being subsidized so why even try to be fair. Sink or swim NPR. I think we ALL know how that would end. 🤷🏻♂️
TIMELINE is really helpful. Thank you, Greg.
Like Walter on ATW today I was in upper MW (Wisconsin) when NPR was quite different. The creation of stations at (mostly) universities provided statewide coverage. Those old enough to remember that the range of radio signals was limited in the 1970s appreciate what a boon this was...almost like rural electrification. More than anything satellite radio and internet access in rural areas take away the need for the network aspect. Set aside the lack of viewpoint diversity, the need for that technology is now outdated. Currently, NPR uses a combination of satellite and terrestrial radio systems to distribute its programming. NPR uses satellite technology to deliver its programming to member stations. (Public Radio Satellite System (PRSS)--Once the programming reaches local stations via satellite, these stations broadcast it to listeners over the air using traditional FM (and sometimes AM) radio signals. Each member station operates its own transmitters, which are licensed by the FCC.. The stations typically broadcast on FM frequencies between 88.1 and 91.9 MHz, a band reserved for non-commercial, educational radio in the U.S.
I do not know how much LOCAL programming each member station provides. However, NPR is on Sirius-- "NPR Now," typically on Channel 122. This channel features a mix of in-depth news, features, and entertainment produced and assembled by NPR specifically for SiriusXM. I see a lot of discussion about content but little about duplicative technologies. Here is a link that explains the distribution system: https://www.nprdistribution.org/
I work in interior construction since the mid 90's and I would listen to WNYC or WHYY all day everyday until Laura Walker practically destroyed the station. My wife and I now play a game when we're driving called let's put on the sad station and count down the seconds before they mention racism, illegal immigrant's problems, trans issues, feminism, and orange man bad. Less than 30 seconds is the max time. Peter Boghossian and friends did a series called All Things Reconsidered it's hilarious.
I have played a similar game: The word that wins is "Trump". Never takes long.
I started listening to NPR a lot in my car after biden was installed. Keep the enemy close and all that.
What I learned is: NPR sucks.
Defund NPR (and PBS). Do it now.
I am now listening to music on my commute drives. Don't miss NPR. Won't miss NPR.
You could probably make buzz-word bingo-like games along those lines too.
NPR delivers a great and irresistable product. Misinformation, disinformation and malinformation is for chumps and plebes...we deliver pure distilled psuedo-information...the very life blood of the growing psuedointellectual class. We give our listeners an effortless felt experience of being better informed--nay, more intelligent!--than our neighbors. Waxed mental floss...crack for Karens. You too can be brilliant without the nuisance of reading a book, listening to long and tedious lectures or otherwise putting in any effort whatsoever. Fear not NPR employees, the hypnosis sector of the astrology industry is growing fast and they have an insatiable need for people with smooth and calming speech patterns.
Well said!
National Propaganda Radio ... and by some remarkable coincidence, it always espouses leftwing causes.
Defund it.
National Socialist Radio-has a more accurate ring to it.
The leftwing position on the current thing is objectively true (even though there is no objective truth) according to the experts and fact checkers.
Thanks for the timeline. I stopped listening in the 90s as it was increasingly evident, every day, that it was biased. It was sad as I did really love StoryCore or whatever it was called. The downfall was the inherent left political propaganda. Government can sell it to the private sector. Let Soros, Hoffman, Gates and Jobs buy it.
That way it will be clear what they are, rather than their current masquerade as nonpartisan.
The status quo is completely unacceptable. Taxpayers cannot be expected to fund a far-left monoculture, which is what NPR is.
I used to listen to NPR. I used to donate. It had its inherent biases because it was staffed primarily by upper middle class types from posh neighborhoods who went to elite schools... people like Katherine Maher. But the biases were manageable. The production values and content of shows like All Things Considered were excellent. It was informative and entertaining. And then they went down the DEI rabbit hole and lost their minds. They became insufferable. I don't donate or listen anymore. They shouldn't be publicly funded, just like Newsmax or MSNBC shouldn't be.
Same
You can be a journalist or you can be a partisan. You cannot be both.
AMEN