Let's see how those rules apply:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/nina-totenberg-next_511512.html?page=2
...
Schiller said Williams' firing is not a reflection of his comments
(on Fox News Channel) that he gets nervous when he sees people in
Muslim garb on an airplane. She said she has no problem with people
taking controversial positions, but that such opinions should not come
from NPR reporters or news analysts.
If thats true, NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg might
want to start looking for a new job. Over the past month, in her
regular appearances on Inside Washington, she has: criticized a
ruling of the Roberts Court as scandalous; claimed that Michelle Obama
gives people warm and fuzzy feelings; called Bill Clinton the most
gifted politician Ive ever seen; and lamented that the Democratic
Party is diverse enough to include moderates that want to extend all
Bush tax cuts.
On last weekends Inside Washington, which aired October 17, she
told us that Michelle Obama is an incredibly graceful surrogate for
her husband who gives people warm and fuzzy feelings.
Related Stories
On October 10, Totenberg compared the Supreme Courts decision in
Citizens United, the prominent campaign finance case, to Watergate.
Host Gordon Peterson said:
Thanks to the Supreme Court Citizens United ruling earlier this
year, 501(c) nonprofits can pump millions of dollars into our
elections and they dont have to tell us where the money is coming
from. The best government money can buy, Nina.
Totenberg, who covers the Supreme Court, was not shy about expressing
her opinion. Well, you know, really, this is the next scandal. Its
the scandal in the making. They dont have to disclose anything. And
eventually, this is the kind of thing that led to Watergate.
The week before, on October 3, she decried Republicans a concerted
minority for holding up business in the Senate and declared that
their willingness to exploit antiquated congressional rules was a
loony way to do business.
Her most partisan comment came when Charles Krauthammer pointed out
that 31 Democrats in the House had written to Nancy Pelosi to call for
extending the Bush tax cuts, Totenberg wished them out of the party.
When a party actually has a huge majority, it has a huge diversity.
And that is part of the problem that Democrats have. But would I like
it to be otherwise? Of course.
On the same show, Totenberg said that she was looking forward to Jon
Stewarts Rally for Sanity, but for reasons that might strike some as,
well, implausible. Let me just say let me just say something in
defense on Jon Stewart here. Im a devotee of the program because
its fun
And I must say hes been pretty savage about Obama and pretty
savage about Democrats who smear people, too. So I kind of like the
idea of the Rally for Sanity.
Does Stewart really savage Obama? A little more than two weeks after
Totenberg made these comments the White House announced that the
president would appear on Stewarts show. Spokesman Robert Gibbs said
that Stewarts audience was an important part of Obamas base.
On the September 26 show, Totenberg called Bill Clinton the most
gifted politician Ive ever seen.
And, as Reasons Michael Moynihan points out, back in 1995 Totenberg
famously suggested justice would be served if Jesse Helms and his
grandchildren contracted AIDS.
So should Totenberg be fired to expressing these controversial
opinions? I dont think so. But she is, according her bio on the
website, NPRs award-winning legal-affairs correspondent. Williams
was a news analyst a title that suggests he might go beyond mere
reportage.
So if NPRs Schiller manages to keep her job after questioning
Williamss sanity, she should have to answer a very basic question:
Why is it unacceptable for an NPR news analyst to express his views
but entirely appropriate for an NPR reporter to express hers?
The answer is obvious: Its Fox.
One final note: Nina Totenbergs NPR bio proudly touts her work as a
panelist on Inside Washington, a favorite venue for expressing her
controversial views. NPRs bio of national political correspondent
Mara Liasson, a Fox News contributor who rarely expresses her opinion,
makes no mention of her work for Fox.
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Here it is for those of you who care about such things:
>
> http://www.npr.org/about/aboutnpr/ethics/ethics_code.html
>
> Check out sections 8, 9 and 10 for bits relevant to this particular case:
>
> 8. NPR journalists may not speak to groups where the appearance might
> put in question NPR's impartiality. Such instances include situations
> where the employee's appearance may appear to endorse the agenda of a
> group or organization. This would include participation in some
> political debates and forums where the sponsoring group(s) or other
> participants are identified with a particular perspective on an issue
> or issues and NPR journalist's participation might put into question
> NPR's impartiality.
>
> 9. NPR journalists must get permission from the Senior Vice President
> for News, or their designee, to appear on TV or other media. Requests
> should be submitted in writing to the employee's immediate supervisor
> and copied to [email protected] . Approval will not be
> unreasonably denied if the proposed work will not discredit NPR,
> conflict with NPR's interests, create a conflict of interest for the
> employee or interfere with the employee's ability to perform NPR
> duties. The Senior Vice President or designee must respond within
> seven days of receiving a request. It is not necessary to get
> permission in each instance when the employee is a regular participant
> on an approved show. Permission for such appearances may be revoked if
> NPR determines such appearances are harmful to the reputation of NPR
> or the NPR participant.
>
> 10. In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based
> forums, NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in
> their role as an NPR journalist. They should not participate in shows
> electronic forums, or blogs that encourage punditry and speculation
> rather than fact-based analysis.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Judah
>
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Yes NPR does have a code of conduct. Pity Fox doesn't seem to have
>> one. If they did would they allow Beck to shill for his various
>> enterprises?
>>
>> Whoops pardon me, Fox is a commercial enterprise and therefore doesn't need
>> one.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is he for real?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> NPR's code of conduct requires *all* appearances to be cleared each
>>>> and every time before an NPR person gets interviewed. They take their
>>>> impartiality stuff very seriously and don't let their employees go out
>>>> on their own. That's part of the contract and that's why he was
>>>> canned. He was told no and did it anyway.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:329767
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
