Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

NPR Fires Pro-Bush Disc Jockey


stratoman

Recommended Posts

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/4/4/135934

Friday, April 4, 2003

NPR Fires Pro-Bush Disc Jockey

The taxpayer-supported drones at National Pinko Radio have fired a disc jockey for not parroting NPR's leftist party line on the war against Saddam Hussein.

Art Timko, manager of WEMU-FM at Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti, booted Terry Hughes, who had hosted an R&B program for 20 years.

Hughes has spoken in favor of the war in Iraq and President Bush's handling of it while denouncing NPR's bias against Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Associated Press reported today.

"We have a policy that our announcers don't express opinions on matters of a controversial nature," Timko said.

Oh, that's right. It is NPR's policy to prepackage its left-wing opinions inside its "news" reports.

Timko grumbled that on his last show, Hughes cut off four hourly NPR propaganda reports - oops, "newscasts."

Hughes agreed that his opinions were controversial. "But this is personality radio," he said. "I have nothing but opinions on my show, every show."

Surprisingly, considering NPR's core audience of intolerant Guilty White Liberals, Hughes' on-air comments drew only a handful of complaints, but his dismissal has already prompted about 90 e-mails "expressing disappointment, curiosity, outrage," Timko admitted.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

Media Bias

Saddam Hussein/Iraq

Editor's note:

Have an Opinion About This? Click Here to Send an URGENT PriorityGram Today

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TEG-

I hope you'd know by now that I'd never endorse the firing of someone for their political beliefs. I'm not clamoring for Colmes firing from Fox, for example. ;)

I like a lot of people on the right am sick of NPR getting supported off of the public dole to spout leftist crap. They make CBS look conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Redman,

I was trying to poke fun at the people here, and abroad, who fervantly defend organizations (funded either privately or off the public dole) abilities to hire, fire, include and exclude whomever they deem appropriate (which is often inappropriate).

But just so I understand better, if NPR wasnt given public $'s, do you think people here would defend that stations actions in firing the DJ?

Conversely, would they come down on a station who fired a DJ who was anti-war simply because he was anti-war?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by The Evil Genius

But just so I understand better, if NPR wasnt given public $'s, do you think people here would defend that stations actions?

Of course not, but the fact that it's operated on public money and happens to be firing someone who's right-of-center only adds to my antipathy for them. I can't speak for others in that regard.

And I can take a joke. Your post(s) read more like you're trying to provoke a response, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by redman

Of course not, but the fact that it's operated on public money and happens to be firing someone who's right-of-center only adds to my antipathy for them. I can't speak for others in that regard.

And I can take a joke. Your post(s) read more like you're trying to provoke a response, however.

Noted and perhaps, busted ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=========original message===========

To Art Timko,

I find it absolutely appalling the firing of one of your DJ's just because he supports President Bush and the War in Iraq. Your radio station is nothing more then a left wing propaganda machine. It's a shame that hard working tax payers make it able for you to have a job. I will never listen to NPR!!

Dear Listener,

Thank you for writing to the NPR Ombudsman. Because many listeners

have concerns and comments about what they hear (or don't hear) on NPR, the volume

of emails may preclude an individual response. But be assured that every email is

read and forwarded to the appropriate person at NPR.

Occasionally a listener's email is quoted on the Ombudsman's column.

"Media Matters" appears on the NPR website each Friday at www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman <http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman>.

Thank you again for writing.

Jeffrey A. Dvorkin

NPR Ombudsman

635 Massachusetts Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20001

Tel: 202-513-3246 (direct)

Fax: 202-513-3329

E-Mail ombudsman@npr.org

jdvorkin@npr.org

http://www.npr.org/yourturn/ombudsman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wrote them too:

I wanted for you to know that every morning I USED to wake up and turn on NPR. However, because of your discrimintory policy regarding the firing of Art Timko because of his vocal support of the President, I will no longer be listening to you in the morning. Furthermore, the fact that you can purpetuate such bigoted policies on MY tax dollar angers me even more. You people would not know what "fair and balanced" was if it fell off a tree and hit you right in the face.

-An angry former listener

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here was their response:

Dear Listener,

NPR adheres to the journalistic standards of presenting accurate, fair and

objective reporting of all events that shape our world. NPR firmly believes

that news coverage should be aired seperately from personal opinion.It is

unfortunate that Mr. Hughes stepped over that line and used public radio as

a vehicle to air his own political opinions. NPR stands behind the station's

right to uphold its appropriate journalistic practice of keeping personal

opinions separate from objective news reporting.

:jerkoff: :jerkoff:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack, 2 problems with that.

1- He didnt say anything bad about NPR, he stated his opinions of the war and Bush.

2- It's not a private business. It's Govt sponsored. They CANNOT restrict speech.

If it was WTEM, they could do what they want. BUt NPR is Govt sponsored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NPR is right in that there is a line between editorializing and news. Depending under what auspice he was reporting it may have been completely inappropriate. If he is acting as a reporter in the way that the reporters do here on WAMU or WETA he is there pretty much as a deliverer of news. If he was a talk show host then NPR has little footing. I listen to NPR also, and I find that they do try to represent each side. It's amazing how much whining about NPR I've seen in this thread especially in light of its budget and the fact that it is not a government radio station but largely a subscriber model with grants from many foundations and the government. Truth is, if they didn't present information that was different, valued, or balanced how many would listen let alone fund it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Kilmer17

Jack, 2 problems with that.

1- He didnt say anything bad about NPR, he stated his opinions of the war and Bush.

2- It's not a private business. It's Govt sponsored. They CANNOT restrict speech.

If it was WTEM, they could do what they want. BUt NPR is Govt sponsored.

"Hughes has spoken in favor of the war in Iraq and President Bush's handling of it while denouncing NPR's bias against Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Associated Press reported today. "

I would say denouncing the boss might be bad for job security.

On the second point, of course they can restrict speech. He was hired to do a job. Suppose he was hired to play records(some know what they were) but instead did a talk show?

I don't recall the same upset from those on the right when NPR fired Juan Williams? What am I missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you should Jack. Freedom of speech and all.

Bottom line, if they fired him for making an editorial speech and he was not allowed (Right word?) to editorialize on EITHER side. I could probably accept it. BUt I understand that they fired him because of the slant of his speech. That's a different ball of wax,isnt it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Kilmer17

I think you should Jack. Freedom of speech and all.

Bottom line, if they fired him for making an editorial speech and he was not allowed (Right word?) to editorialize on EITHER side. I could probably accept it. BUt I understand that they fired him because of the slant of his speech. That's a different ball of wax,isnt it?

Who said if was fired for the which side he slanted? That's just the perception from those on the right.

Either way, with all that's going on, I don't think this is very important anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...