Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:37 PM
 
8,418 posts, read 7,414,580 times
Reputation: 8767

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"why does everyone posting here from the right side of the aisle seem to have a problem with NPR exercising its right of free speech?"

It has NOTHING to do with "FREE" speech.

We, the TAXPAYERS are paying for it.

They should NOT be biased.

You MISSED the ENTIRE point.

Almost 20 TRILLION id debt and we should continue to fund a a biased enterprise.

The dems/liberals have NO shame!

Sesame Street ALONE probably makes enough to pay for the whole thing.
And you're shrieking.

I won't engage you if you refuse to read the thread in its entirety and simply shriek.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:37 PM
 
13,511 posts, read 17,036,232 times
Reputation: 9691
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
NPR has Waylon, Hank and Merle. In fact, these days, the only airplay all 3 get is on NPR any more.

NPR's news is the most balanced I've heard; all through the campaign, their news staff interviewed conservatives just as much as any other group, and the interviews were all given very fair treatment on all sides.
The top management of NPR became much more conservative back in the Bush years, and hasn't changed since. But in comparison to the stations that broadcast nothing but far-right talk, anything other than extreme is considered to be liberal. But so far, I've never heard an NPR station that was all talk, all politics, all the time. The talk radio stations always include human interest shows that don't center around political topics.

Every NPR station sets its own format. Some are more talk radio than anything else, but others are more music and entertainment than talk, and the talk shows are not all political in nature. I find if I don't like one NPR station, there's another on the dial I will like.

NPR is the only place a listener can find classical, jazz, bluegrass, blues, folk, zydeco, and many other musical styles that aren't to be found on the commercial stations.

Since they're all supported at least as much by private donations as public, what's the problem? Listeners to commercial radio end up paying for their listening too, when they patronize a commercial radio shows' sponsors.

If you don't like NPR, find something else on the dial.
Maybe if NPR's female hosts were forced to wear Fox New's "porn star pink" shade of lip gloss, right wing knuckle heads would like it more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:37 PM
 
Location: Southern California
29,266 posts, read 16,753,924 times
Reputation: 18909
Not Republicant here....leave them alone I say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:41 PM
 
78,408 posts, read 60,593,823 times
Reputation: 49691
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
Freedom of speech and protection for all voices to be heard. You know, the Constitution.
You really need to take 15 minutes and read up on Freedom of speech.

Just wiki it, don't have to go for the full blown version, just the cliff notes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:42 PM
 
8,418 posts, read 7,414,580 times
Reputation: 8767
Quote:
Originally Posted by NxtGen View Post
I agree, there is nothing right about wanting to ban NPR, but we should strip it as well as all radio programs that rely on federal funding. Don't you agree?
No, I don't. I've stated above that there is a national interest in maintaining a news source that is independent and free of corporate influence.

If you disagree because you believe that NPR actually takes political positions, then I invite you to point out where they do so on their web site's political page.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:46 PM
 
78,408 posts, read 60,593,823 times
Reputation: 49691
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72 View Post
Maybe if NPR's female hosts were forced to wear Fox New's "porn star pink" shade of lip gloss, right wing knuckle heads would like it more.
R is for radio!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:53 PM
 
4,279 posts, read 1,904,317 times
Reputation: 1266
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
No, I don't. I've stated above that there is a national interest in maintaining a news source that is independent and free of corporate influence.

If you disagree because you believe that NPR actually takes political positions, then I invite you to point out where they do so on their web site's political page.
NPR is a hard left, hard progressive station.

They have a right to exist, but they don't have a right to demand people to pay them to exist. If they can't exist without government handouts, they aren't worth having. Time to take off the training wheels and let them ride the big boy bike.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by KonaldDuth View Post
It is amazing to me that some people believe NPR is an objective news source. During the campaign they ran about 20 anti-Trump articles per day. They've since ramped it up to about 50.
This is true.

However, government should never fund the arts even if they are objective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 03:40 PM
 
13,511 posts, read 17,036,232 times
Reputation: 9691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
R is for radio!
Yeah, I know. But these guys can't stay tuned to something for more than 5 minutes that doesn't have an eagle screeching or the word "liberal" said every 30 seconds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,740,494 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
No, I don't. I've stated above that there is a national interest in maintaining a news source that is independent and free of corporate influence.
No, there is not. That is not a valid government function.

Quote:
If you disagree because you believe that NPR actually takes political positions, then I invite you to point out where they do so on their web site's political page.
Their web site is irrelevant. It's their broadcasts that are very biased.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top