ByteOnBikesHere it comes
NPR? BBC? I’m confused by this meme now…
The so-called "left-leaning“ (in reality Centrist at the best of times and sometimes quite far right) media have a frequent tendency to report on ridiculous claims by the fascists without any indication that it’s utter nonsense or even that there’s no evidence for it.
Can I get a citation for NPR doing this? That would be surprising
The Velour Fog Editorial “backstops” courtesy of anonymous donors.
podcastnewsdaily.com/…/article_fb8101e2-146c-11ef…
www.nytimes.com/2024/…/npr-editing-backstop.html
I’ve been listening to NPR for years and since 2024 they started including right wing rhetoric in their reporting. It started getting really obvious the closer we got to the last election.
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 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 read asking for citations about.
Rather it specifically talks about a) concerns about the rapidity of journalism within NPR when having to go through now 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.