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.
FoxNews.com - NPR President: Our Listeners Are Smarter -- Just See What They Said About Balloon Boy (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/08/npr-president-listeners-smarter-just-said-balloon-boy/?test=latestnews - broken link)
If they are so intelligent, why haven't they:
1) use scientific methods to verify their claims (lexical/semantic analysis of discussion boards, etc)?
2) Found a method to pay their way?
I don't get why people bash NPR. It is one of the most "unbiased" sources of news because the vast majority comes from local sources.
It is one of the last stations that plays local music, since most radio is now owned by Clear Channel (i.e. a business).
Something like 5% of total funding comes from the government. The rest comes from other sources. It is actually a well run non-profit.
they have. again, check the google. the premise of your argument is invalid.
I'm desperately seeking peer reviewed literature used as a basis for their statistical model. I've found neither a model nor the literature.
I mean, use Flesch-Kincaid, information content...anything to base your claim on. Haven't seen it even on google. Let me know if you find it and I'll be happy to read the link. Thanks man!
use scientific methods to verify their claims (lexical/semantic analysis of discussion boards, etc)?
Hahaha, 1,690 comments at that Fox article
Twenty-foot diameter, 4-feet-tall would get you about 77 pounds of lift at sea-level, not including the weight of the equipment. Average 6-year-old is 45 pounds, average weight of equipment would be 32 pounds, which might have been reasonable if there was very thin Mylar
vs.
Liberals = College educated dumbazzzzes that think they are smart ("3 people liked this")
I don't get why people bash NPR. It is one of the most "unbiased" sources of news because the vast majority comes from local sources.
It is one of the last stations that plays local music, since most radio is now owned by Clear Channel (i.e. a business).
Something like 5% of total funding comes from the government. The rest comes from other sources. It is actually a well run non-profit.
Wikipedia says it was 16% last year. Not a huge percentage by any means (way less that the profit margin of companies like Exxon) but enough to legitimately say that without it they wouldn't be able to compete in the market place.
Quote from Wikipedia:
In 2009, (NPR) member stations derived 6% of their revenue from local government funding and 10% of their revenue from the federal funding in the form of CPB grants.
FoxNews.com - NPR President: Our Listeners Are Smarter -- Just See What They Said About Balloon Boy (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/08/npr-president-listeners-smarter-just-said-balloon-boy/?test=latestnews - broken link)
If they are so intelligent, why haven't they:
1) use scientific methods to verify their claims (lexical/semantic analysis of discussion boards, etc)?
NPR unbiased? I can't remember the last time I heard something worthwhile come out of that organization. I hear numerous negative news items and reports from them on conservatives, not one negative thing on sheik obama or any of his staff.
NPR is like Apple, a holier-than-thou nose in the air attitude. I'm sure Kerry and Gore give them a two thumbs up....
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.