I listen to NPR as well, have for years, donate to my local station, and I’ve only ever heard them discuss right-wing talking points as exactly that: clearly labeled right-wing talking points that are relevant to informing listeners about the current state of the national discourse.
While anonymous donors of any kind rub me the wrong way, the article you linked doesn’t provide evidence of the things I was asking for citations about.
Rather it specifically talks about a) concerns about the rapidity of journalism within NPR when having to go through more editor review and b) accusations of left-leaning bias from a former employee
I appreciate your concerns but the links you provided don’t back up the claims I was responding to, and while they are concerning for a few reasons, none of those reasons are “becoming more right wing” or “repeating right wing talking points as fact or opinion”.
I regularly listen to a lot of their programming, especially in the morning. In lieu of articles all I have is what I personally heard on Morning Edition, All Things Considered, and during their special coverage pre and post election.
Morning Edition had a disproportionate amount of coverage for the “Undecided” and “Abandon Harris” movements, at least in my region. They interviewed someone billed as (paraphrased) “former Trump appointee, who testified against him, and is now going to work for him again.”
Then, immediately after the election (like 10pm that night), they interviewed a legal representative for The Heritage Foundation, who spouted nothing but lies about Trump’s non-involvement with Project 2025. There was no fact checking for this interview.
Earlier this year, they interviewed Sean Duffy who repeatedly said that there was no issue with FAA operations re: EWR communications lapses, when weeks later it was revealed that he was making sure his family avoided routing through that airport.
I know this anecdotal evidence doesn’t mean much but something is seriously off at NPR within the last couple years. It’s definitely not the same quality of reporting that it was before.
Mere accusations of being left-leaning and mysterious anonymous money were enough to insert an entire editorial board to filter the news.
They don’t report things that should be important if they are offensive to right-wing politics.
They don’t report on wage theft.
They don’t report on health care abuses.
They don’t report on lies or incompetence in the Trump administration.
They lick boots and rationalize genocide. They’ve always been a little right leaning in that reporting reality as it is is extremely hostile to right-wing politics so they have to protect people from the truth.
NPR has not been left-wing or even vaguely left of center for a while. They are rapidly homophobic or racist, but they are islamophobic and they will indulge whatever is the right-wing rumor or paranoia of the day.
Having links to back up your claims would go a long way to convincing people. Otherwise your words are just you yelling at clouds and hoping somebody will listen.
I listen to NPR as well, have for years, donate to my local station, and I’ve only ever heard them discuss right-wing talking points as exactly that: clearly labeled right-wing talking points that are relevant to informing listeners about the current state of the national discourse.
While anonymous donors of any kind rub me the wrong way, the article you linked doesn’t provide evidence of the things I was asking for citations about.
Rather it specifically talks about a) concerns about the rapidity of journalism within NPR when having to go through more editor review and b) accusations of left-leaning bias from a former employee
I appreciate your concerns but the links you provided don’t back up the claims I was responding to, and while they are concerning for a few reasons, none of those reasons are “becoming more right wing” or “repeating right wing talking points as fact or opinion”.
I regularly listen to a lot of their programming, especially in the morning. In lieu of articles all I have is what I personally heard on Morning Edition, All Things Considered, and during their special coverage pre and post election.
Morning Edition had a disproportionate amount of coverage for the “Undecided” and “Abandon Harris” movements, at least in my region. They interviewed someone billed as (paraphrased) “former Trump appointee, who testified against him, and is now going to work for him again.”
Then, immediately after the election (like 10pm that night), they interviewed a legal representative for The Heritage Foundation, who spouted nothing but lies about Trump’s non-involvement with Project 2025. There was no fact checking for this interview.
Earlier this year, they interviewed Sean Duffy who repeatedly said that there was no issue with FAA operations re: EWR communications lapses, when weeks later it was revealed that he was making sure his family avoided routing through that airport.
I know this anecdotal evidence doesn’t mean much but something is seriously off at NPR within the last couple years. It’s definitely not the same quality of reporting that it was before.
Mere accusations of being left-leaning and mysterious anonymous money were enough to insert an entire editorial board to filter the news.
They don’t report things that should be important if they are offensive to right-wing politics.
They don’t report on wage theft. They don’t report on health care abuses. They don’t report on lies or incompetence in the Trump administration.
They lick boots and rationalize genocide. They’ve always been a little right leaning in that reporting reality as it is is extremely hostile to right-wing politics so they have to protect people from the truth.
NPR has not been left-wing or even vaguely left of center for a while. They are rapidly homophobic or racist, but they are islamophobic and they will indulge whatever is the right-wing rumor or paranoia of the day.
Having links to back up your claims would go a long way to convincing people. Otherwise your words are just you yelling at clouds and hoping somebody will listen.