Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!houxm!whuxl!orb From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Re: NPR Bias? Message-ID: <738@whuxl.UUCP> Date: Thu, 24-Oct-85 13:50:45 EDT Article-I.D.: whuxl.738 Posted: Thu Oct 24 13:50:45 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 26-Oct-85 06:34:51 EDT References: <1746@akgua.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany Lines: 52 I think it is the fact that NPR examines issues in depth which leads to conclusions that it is "liberally biased". There are many "facts" presented in the media by such unbiased sources as Ronald Reagan which are never questioned by the mainstream media. Ronald Reagan says over and over and over and over again: "The U.S. unilaterally disarmed in the 70's" The media reports that Reagan said: "The U.S. unilaterally disarmed in the 70's" Ask the typical American person, "did the US disarm in the 70's" most will answer (in my experience of talking to hundreds of people about the arms race issue): "Yes" Yet if one examines the *facts* rather than Ronald Reagan's pronouncements then one finds that, yes, to comply with arms treaties the US dismantled some older weapons systems, just as the Soviets also dismantled some older weapons systems. Yet these systems were more than replaced by new and more dangerous weapons so that in 1970 the US had 4000 strategic nuclear weapons, while in 1980 the US had 10,000 strategic nuclear weapons. NPR reports things like that. The mainstream media DO NOT. To simply parrot official statements and positions without critically examining them and also presenting the facts is irresponsible and dangerous journalism. One notes NPR's coverage of both sides of issues with its extensive coverage of the State of Emergency in Nicaragua. The mainstream media have scarcely mentioned it. NPR has given it extensive coverage. NPR also presents opinions from all sides of the political spectrum- conservatives Kevin Phillips and John Mcloughlin(spelling?) as well as Democratic Socialist, Michael Harrington. This is a refreshing change from the bland never too daring commentary on the major networks. Moreover what is "liberal" and "conservative"? Is it "conservative" to believe in the absurdity of Creationism? Is presenting the massive evidence in favor of evolution proof of liberal bias? Or is one to only present quotations from the Bible irrespective of scientific evidence? On the other hand is it proof of conservative bias to point out the problems with collective agriculture? Or to report persecutions of Soviet dissidents? I think NPR does an excellent job of covering many issues neglected by the mainstream media. Such indepth coverage and broad spectrum of opinion is invaluable. tim sevener whuxn!orb