NPR's Toothless Defense Strategy

It’s not the conservative attacks. It’s the network’s complete lack of a strategy to save itself.

Steve Inskeep, A veteran National Public Radio correspondent, is calling from Cairo, having just visited a 23-year-old man with welts on his back who says the Egyptian Army tortured him.
“That, to me, is a real story,” he says. At a time when he is trying to get flak jackets to his colleagues in Libya, Inskeep has little patience for charges that NPR leans to the left. “What’s important to us is the work we do,” he says. “I actually get ... Full Story »

Posted by Fabrice Florin - via Scott Rosenberg, Jay Rosen, Megan Taylor (t), Jon Mitchell (t), Josh_Young (t), Ray Nichols (t), Jeremy Caplan (t), Jeppe Kabell (t)
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Fabrice Florin - Mar 20, 2011 - 10:11 AM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Lynn R. Willis
4.9
by Lynn R. Willis - Mar. 20, 2011

This story presents an interesting, even sad, take on the misfortune that has befallen NPR in this age of political polarization and vengefulness. Here we learn how many of NPR's hardworking journalists feel betrayed by a management that won't stand up to the bullies and accusations from the right.

The charge that NPR has a left-wing bias is just so much baloney, as amply shown by the survey figures mentioned in the article. I have little hope for this fine nation if folks can't tell the difference between "fair and balanced" when offered by the likes of NPR or Fox News.

See Full Review » (19 answers)
Randy Morrow
3.1
by Randy Morrow - Mar. 20, 2011

But California Democrat Henry Waxman says, “The legislation is driven by ideology, reflecting Republican anger at NPR. Primarily, they want to ... More »

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Don Bertschman
3.8
by Don Bertschman - Mar. 20, 2011
See Full Review » (17 answers)
Fabrice Florin
4.0
by Fabrice Florin - Mar. 20, 2011
See Full Review » (1 answer)

Comments on this story (1)Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.8

Good
from 5 reviews (71% confidence)
Quality
3.9
Facts
4.5
Fairness
4.5
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Style
4.0
Accuracy
4.5
Balance
4.0
Context
3.7
Depth
4.0
Enterprise
3.5
Expertise
4.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.0
Transparency
3.5
Responsibility
4.0
Popularity
3.7
Recommendation
4.0
Credibility
3.8
# Reviews
2.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!