On 2 Feb 2006 07:12:54 -0800, "John S." wrote:


clifto wrote:
John S. wrote:
Well, maybe the conservatives are trying to play catchup with their
wildly successful liberal competition on NPR.

If NMPR is so successful, why is it that they need government funding for
100% of their operation? Contrast that to conservative talk radio, which
barely has enough time to fit in all the interested advertisers.

NPR is not 100% funded by payments from the government - the proportion
of government payments is a very small portion of their budget.

NPR is successful in the sense that it has a large audience because it
offers a wide range of programming that it's listeners want to hear.

And they are way more objective than an ad-supported company. My
Bircher Dad loved All Things Considered and Morning Edition. He was a
pretty fart smeller.

In article ,
David wrote:
On 2 Feb 2006 07:12:54 -0800, "John S." wrote:


clifto wrote:
John S. wrote:
Well, maybe the conservatives are trying to play catchup with their
wildly successful liberal competition on NPR.

If NMPR is so successful, why is it that they need government funding for
100% of their operation? Contrast that to conservative talk radio, which
barely has enough time to fit in all the interested advertisers.

NPR is not 100% funded by payments from the government - the proportion
of government payments is a very small portion of their budget.

NPR is successful in the sense that it has a large audience because it
offers a wide range of programming that it's listeners want to hear.

And they are way more objective than an ad-supported company. My
Bircher Dad loved All Things Considered and Morning Edition. He was a
pretty fart smeller.



FYI: The John Birch Society has come put against the war in Iraq [3],
the Abramaff corruption [1], Bush's illegal wiretapping, the patriot
Act [4], and Bush's insistance on the legality of torture [2]


[1] http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman...cle_3116.shtml

[2] http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman...cle_3119.shtml

[3] http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/20...7-2003/war.htm

[4] http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/20...09_trading.htm

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

David wrote:
On 2 Feb 2006 07:12:54 -0800, "John S." wrote:


clifto wrote:
John S. wrote:
Well, maybe the conservatives are trying to play catchup with their
wildly successful liberal competition on NPR.

If NMPR is so successful, why is it that they need government funding for
100% of their operation? Contrast that to conservative talk radio, which
barely has enough time to fit in all the interested advertisers.

NPR is not 100% funded by payments from the government - the proportion
of government payments is a very small portion of their budget.

NPR is successful in the sense that it has a large audience because it
offers a wide range of programming that it's listeners want to hear.

And they are way more objective than an ad-supported company. My
Bircher Dad loved All Things Considered and Morning Edition. He was a
pretty fart smeller.

That's a strange thing to say about your dad...

All the newscasters and program moderators I've heard carry their own
biases and beliefs into their presentations. We just have to realize
that news and information no matter the source has been filtered in
some way.

On 2 Feb 2006 08:06:07 -0800, "John S." wrote:


All the newscasters and program moderators I've heard carry their own
biases and beliefs into their presentations. We just have to realize
that news and information no matter the source has been filtered in
some way.

Give us some examples, please.

"David" wrote in message
...
On 2 Feb 2006 08:06:07 -0800, "John S." wrote:


All the newscasters and program moderators I've heard carry their own
biases and beliefs into their presentations. We just have to realize
that news and information no matter the source has been filtered in
some way.

Give us some examples, please.

Pull your head out of your butt and look around. Lemmie guess, you think
buzzflash and scoop are not biased?

On Thu, 2 Feb 2006 12:49:36 -0600, "MnMikew"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
On 2 Feb 2006 08:06:07 -0800, "John S." wrote:


All the newscasters and program moderators I've heard carry their own
biases and beliefs into their presentations. We just have to realize
that news and information no matter the source has been filtered in
some way.

Give us some examples, please.

Pull your head out of your butt and look around. Lemmie guess, you think
buzzflash and scoop are not biased?

I already know how I think. I asked so I might figure out what you
mean and whether there is a significant factual underpinning.

Scoop?

My fave these days is the right-wing www.antiwar.com

David wrote:
On 2 Feb 2006 08:06:07 -0800, "John S." wrote:


All the newscasters and program moderators I've heard carry their own
biases and beliefs into their presentations. We just have to realize
that news and information no matter the source has been filtered in
some way.

Give us some examples, please.

The list of examples would be each news reporter that has ever composed
a story and every broadcaster that has ever announced a news cast.
Inclusions and omissions of information, voice tone, raised eyebrows,
giving an opinion, etc., are all ways of coloring and filtering the
news. And there is not a person in the news business that isn't aware
that it happens, no matter how they try to be "objective".

On 5 Feb 2006 08:42:19 -0800, "John S." wrote:


David wrote:
On 2 Feb 2006 08:06:07 -0800, "John S." wrote:


All the newscasters and program moderators I've heard carry their own
biases and beliefs into their presentations. We just have to realize
that news and information no matter the source has been filtered in
some way.

Give us some examples, please.

The list of examples would be each news reporter that has ever composed
a story and every broadcaster that has ever announced a news cast\0\0\0Inclusions and omissions of information, voice

Hmmm...David seems to be a bit tongue tied today.

On 6 Feb 2006 07:03:02 -0800, "John S." wrote:


Hmmm...David seems to be a bit tongue tied today.

I replied. Apparently the NSA swallowed it up.

One of the techniques used by the bad guys is the undermining
confidence of the foundations of Democracy.

A skeptical news media is essential to a healthy government. A news
media in lock step with the entrenched power structure does not serve
the people.

Again, please give us some examples of ideology affecting the
dissemination of factual information. Thank-you.