Juan Williams Fired

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by moe.ron

It's not the people in the Islamic garb Juan should be worried about. It's the real terrorist that play off on Juan's line of thinking and send in a WASP to bomb that plane.

That's essentially what Barbara Walters said on The View the other day. I agree.

[Kevin]

I can see where NPR was coming from. Williams uttered words exposing a certain religious, racial or cultural bias, that, I think is indisputable. Whether his bias is justified is something people can disagree over. I think that it isn't. I'm on board with NPR up to a point.

Management at NPR was given two options, both bad:

1) Leave it to other on-the-air personalities and individuals to express outrage, demand apologies, but otherwise leave the relationship with Williams in place. This would have the possible effect of alienating more liberal, PC-demanding listeners, Islamic listeners, etc., who all donate a lot of money to stations every year. This could also jeopardize a lot of underwriting dollars, foundation dollars, etc., because those gifts are typically conditional, and might not be renewed if they become controversial.

2) Getting rid of Juan Williams, showing an obvious bias towards political correctness. This has had the result of alienating politically conservative listeners. This also, at least to my mind, calls to question whether NPR is about to "clean house" of any on-air personality who doesn't buy into the current political correctness orthodoxy. Also affected here will be donations from conservatives listeners to their local stations.

I can appreciate the tension, but if NPR's chief goal was journalistic integrity, they have obviously missed their calling. They have shown that they are not unlike Fox, CNN, or any other for-profit news entity. At the end of the day, their decisions are based upon revenue. This was a naked and blatant move to protect revenue sources. I absolutely do not approve from a moral stance, but I also wouldn't have been willing to write a check to make up what would have/could have been lost in response to the Williams utterance.

Conservatives like me have no choice really. I listen to NPR because it's the only place on the radio dial which provides decent hard news and analysis. They attempt to be free of bias, but they often fail. And that's just fine. I'm a big kid, I can listen critically.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

Juan had every right to say what he did. NPR probably was within their legal rights to sever his contract. But what he said did not reach the level of a firing offense. Freedom of Speech be damned.

According to the NPR Ombudsman on Talk of the Nation yesterday, this was not the first incident involving Juan Williams. She said the network has received more complaints about him than about anyone else on their roster. Some of that, she readily admitted, may be just a reaction to the fact that the other network was Fox. Ditto Mara Liason, although the ombudsman noted that she appears on what is clearly a news show, not a pundit show, and that was a large part of the problem: providing (ostensibly) news analysis on NPR and being a pundit, which calls for expressing opinions and biases, on Fox.

Otherwise, I pretty much agree with Kevin. I do think NPR tries more often than not to avoid bias, but I think the reality is that unbiased news when it comes to things like politics is a eutopian dream, not a likely reality. I still prefer NPR to just about any other news source, though it's not the only one I pay attention to, and I can use my big-boy filter and listen critically. I do the same with Fox, though I have little patience with or use for the pundit shows on any network.

Meanwhile, it's pledge drive time, and at least so far it doesn't seem to be making a difference pledge-wise here.

ETA: I somehow missed Dr. Phil's post quoted below by Ch2tf when I read the thread the first time, but I completely agree with what she said.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I can appreciate the tension, but if NPR's chief goal was journalistic integrity, they have obviously missed their calling. They have shown that they are not unlike Fox, CNN, or any other for-profit news entity. At the end of the day, their decisions are based upon revenue. This was a naked and blatant move to protect revenue sources. I absolutely do not approve from a moral stance, but I also wouldn't have been willing to write a check to make up what would have/could have been lost in response to the Williams utterance.

Conservatives like me have no choice really. I listen to NPR because it's the only place on the radio dial which provides decent hard news and analysis. They attempt to be free of bias, but they often fail. And that's just fine. I'm a big kid, I can listen critically.

I agree.

I really like NPR, Fox News, and CNN.

I laughed out loud when Jon Stewart handed CNN its ass while on Larry King. I agree with him that CNN tries too hard to be fair and balanced to the point where they don't take a strong stand from fear of offending any side. Larry King said "then why are you on my show?" Stewart said "because I like YOU."

[Ch2tf]

Something else that bothered me about Williams' quote is the "identifying first and foremost as Muslims". My question is what were they supposed to identify first and foremost as? And how exactly should they go about that?

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

Something else that bothered me about Williams' quote is the "identifying first and foremost as Muslims". My question is what were they supposed to identify first and foremost as? And how exactly should they go about that?

I agree. Many Christians identify first and foremost as Christian, not American, so it is hypocritical to fault another religion for the same mindset.

I'm tired of the brouhaha. It's over. He knew he was walking a tight rope. He made a misstep and is paying the consequences (though a $2M paycheck isn't such a bad consequence if you ask me!) NPR is hard-nosed when it comes to their employees credibility whether it is appearing on Fox News giving biased opinions or attending Jon Stewart's Rally to Restore Sanity. I applaud them for applying the same standard across the board. In the end, I wouldn't want to see a legitimate news person from any network/news organization compromised like that. That's how Dan Rather lost his credibility.

[Ghostwriter]

In the same vein should they have fired Andre Codrescu for this?

On the December 19, 1995, broadcast of All Things Considered, NPR commentator Andrei Codrescu reported that some Christians believe in a "rapture" and 4 million believers will ascend to Heaven immediately. He continued, "The evaporation of 4 million who believe this crap would leave the world an instantly better place.

I wonder.

[Drolefille]

I'm amused we're still going back 15 years to 'prove' how wrong NPR must be.

My focus is on what he said, and 2 things stand out. Any time someone says "I'm not a bigot, but..." the next words out of their mouth are going to be bigoted. Second, neither the 9/11 hijackers nor the shoe bomber wore 'Muslim garb.' Mr. William's expressed a bigoted opinion about an entire group of people and didn't even base that opinion on reality. He added that people wearing Muslim garb are 'declaring themselves first and foremost as Muslims' and that attitude to me, demonstrates the undercurrent of belief that Islam is incompatible with being an American.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Mr. William's expressed a bigoted opinion about an entire group of people and didn't even base that opinion on reality. He added that people wearing Muslim garb are 'declaring themselves first and foremost as Muslims' and that attitude to me, demonstrates the undercurrent of belief that Islam is incompatible with being an American.

I believe he was discussing his feelings not an opinion. It may be semantics but I think there is a difference. One's feelings are one's feelings and simply stating them does not a bigot make. It is how you react to those feelings that makes the difference. If one reacts rationally then the feeling/fear has been overcome in that particular instance. I simply don't think a person should be fired for being politically incorrect or expounding a feeling or even a view that is contrary to the perceived liberal or conservative norms.

Jesse Jackson stated at one time that he feels afraid he might be robbed when approached by black men on a dark street. That is his feeling and it is his concern. I am pretty sure he is not bigoted towards black youth due to this feeling. Some may think that these feelings might be irrational but they are apparently real to him. Hypothetically, if Jesse Jackson had worked for NPR and made this same statement today would his firing have been justified?

[DrPhil]

I agree with MysticCat and Drolefille.

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

Jesse Jackson stated at one time that he feels afraid he might be robbed when approached by black men on a dark street. That is his feeling and it is his concern. I am pretty sure he is not bigoted towards black youth due to this feeling. Some may think that these feelings might be irrational but they are apparently real to him. Hypothetically, if Jesse Jackson had worked for NPR and made this same statement today would his firing have been justified?

Jesse Jackson is a Black male making a statement about young Black males.

Not the same thing at all.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

One's feelings are one's feelings and simply stating them does not a bigot make.

Pretty sure that "one's feelings" very well make that person a bigot, if they are bigoted feelings.

I simply don't think a person should be fired for being politically incorrect or expounding a feeling or even a view that is contrary to the perceived liberal or conservative norms.

That's completely fair. It's also short-sighted.

I believe that news reporters need credibility with their audience, and that staying stupid shit diminishes that credibility to an extent that is likely irrecoverable. As a result, I think news people are held to their own standard, and not the standard of "all people," which really hurts your argument here. I wouldn't fire the guy from a CEO position or as garbage man - I think, though, that as "news reporter" he's gone. Same as if he'd claimed that Illuminati killed Kennedy.

The term "politically correct" has become the j-school/political equivalent of "synergy" - everyone would just be better off not using it.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Pretty sure that "one's feelings" very well make that person a bigot, if they are bigoted feelings.



That's completely fair. It's also short-sighted.

I believe that news reporters need credibility with their audience, and that staying stupid shit diminishes that credibility to an extent that is likely irrecoverable. As a result, I think news people are held to their own standard, and not the standard of "all people," which really hurts your argument here. I wouldn't fire the guy from a CEO position or as garbage man - I think, though, that as "news reporter" he's gone. Same as if he'd claimed that Illuminati killed Kennedy.

The term "politically correct" has become the j-school/political equivalent of "synergy" - everyone would just be better off not using it.

Thank you so much. If I hear some one say that telling people how you feel doesn't make you a bigot one more time, I think I will scream! I guess someone saying, "I hate black people." isn't bigoted? It's ridiculous. Of course stating how you feel can be bigoted. Juan Williams made a bigoted statement. He lost credibility for his job on NPR, but he obviously did not for his job on Fox News.

[VandalSquirrel]

I've found this commentary from salon.com about Juan Williams being fired, and how there was no similar outcry for other firings rather interesting. Specifically it mentions other journalists who were fired, but their firing wasn't questioned, and also acknowledging the double standard for things said about Muslims as opposed to other groups.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/gl...10/21/williams

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Thank you so much. If I hear some one say that telling people how you feel doesn't make you a bigot one more time, I think I will scream! I guess someone saying, "I hate black people." isn't bigoted? It's ridiculous. Of course stating how you feel can be bigoted. Juan Williams made a bigoted statement. He lost credibility for his job on NPR, but he obviously did not for his job on Fox News.

I'm not going to apply the term bigot to all people who have thoughts/feelings/opinions about a group of people, but I'd like for someone to say "Yes, I have these thoughts and a fear, I admit it." Then I'd like them to do some introspection into why they have these thoughts or ideas, where it came from, and is it rational or based in fact. There isn't anyone who can say they've never had a thought pop into their head that was inappropriate, but it is what we do once the thought is there that makes a difference.

Second to that I'd also like people to learn the difference between factual news and infotainment/opinion. I'm not sure if this is being taught in school but K-12 and higher education needs to put into curriculums how to do research and find sources, and that being skeptical is a good thing.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Pretty sure that "one's feelings" very well make that person a bigot, if they are bigoted feelings.

Don't believe so.



Definitions of bigot on the Web and in my dictionary:

• a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own
  wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
• A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.
  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigot
• one intolerantly devoted to his or her own prejudices or opinions Merriam-Webster Dictionary

I don't see intolerance in either William's comments or Jackson's.