"Viewers" complain to NPR in droves; threaten to "stop watching" - Polidicks

From the NYT: [quote][b]Of the thousands of complaints that have saturated NPR in the wake of Juan Williams’s firing earlier this week, some of the most telling have been from callers describing themselves as long-time “viewers” of NPR who warn that they are going to “stop watching.”[/b] NPR, of course, does not have viewers, it has listeners. But the public radio organization has come under severe criticism — largely from people who are not listeners, it believes — for having fired Mr. Williams, an analyst who was employed by both NPR and Fox News when he said on Fox that he felt fearful when he saw people in “Muslim garb” on an airplane. Some have said his comment was bigoted, but others have rallied to Mr. Williams’s defense, and many conservatives have seized on his firing to resurrect their war against public broadcasting. In an interview on Friday, Vivian Schiller, NPR’s chief executive, defended the decision to dismiss Mr. Williams and said it was not the product of political or financial pressures. His contract was terminated, she said, because “he had several times in the past violated our news code of ethics with things that he had said on other people’s air.” On one such occasion last year, Mr. Williams said on Fox that Michelle Obama has “got this ‘Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress’ thing going,” an allusion to a leader of the black power movement of the 1960s. In each instance, Ms. Schiller said, “We called him on it, we had a discussion, we asked him not to do it again.” NPR’s ethics code states that journalists “should not express views” in other outlets, like TV shows, that “they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.” People deserve second chances, Ms. Schiller said, but “we made the decision here because, at a certain point, if someone keeps not following your guidance, you have to make a break. And that’s what we did.” “And that is the sole reason,” she added. “This is not a First Amendment issue.” (continued below) [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/23/business/media/23williams.html?_r=2&ref=business&pagewanted=print[/url] [/quote] Absolute fucking lunacy. Someone must've screwed up the talking points again.

conservatives think freedom of speech applies here lol

He was warned. I suppose that 2 mil looked good enough to take the chance.

[QUOTE=JDK721v5;25604842]conservatives think freedom of speech applies here lol[/QUOTE] And whyyy doesn't it?

I listen to NPR almost erry day.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25605269]And whyyy doesn't it?[/QUOTE] he was under contract with NPR and part of the contract is: [quote]” NPR’s ethics code states that journalists “should not express views” in other outlets, like TV shows, that “they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.”[/quote] also, he was warned a few times before.

[QUOTE=JDK721v5;25605395]he was under contract with NPR and part of the contract is: also, he was warned a few times before.[/QUOTE] Then you're right, they dumb

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25605269]And whyyy doesn't it?[/QUOTE] Freedom of speech doesn't extend to private organizations, or private property for that matter. Along with what JDK said. [QUOTE=Tetracycline;25605557]Then you're right, they dumb[/QUOTE] No they're not, it's called a speech code.

[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;25605591]Freedom of speech doesn't extend to private organizations, or private property for that matter. Along with what JDK said.[/QUOTE] That's kinda silly, if Freedom of Speech doesn't pass on then the rest of the 1st amendment doesn't either, so private organizations are allowed to discriminate based on religion for example?

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25605615]That's kinda silly, if Freedom of Speech doesn't pass on then the rest of the 1st amendment doesn't either, so private organizations are allowed to discriminate based on religion for example?[/QUOTE] Yes, in fact, they are.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25605615]That's kinda silly, if Freedom of Speech doesn't pass on then the rest of the 1st amendment doesn't either, so private organizations are allowed to discriminate based on religion for example?[/QUOTE] A private organization should have the ability to fire someone if they are for instance a nazi when the organization is a Jewish one.

[QUOTE=Jimpy;25605715]A private organization should have the ability to fire someone if they are for instance a nazi when the organization is a Jewish one.[/QUOTE] I guess, but they can also kick people out for being Jewish in a company run by Nazi's

To the two above posts: I don't think companies normally need reasons. They aren't required to have someone working for them, so why even give a reason when you can just fire them?

[QUOTE=JDK721v5;25605395]he was under contract with NPR and part of the contract is: also, he was warned a few times before.[/QUOTE] A contract is a contract. You must abide by it.

A company has to have reasonable cause to terminate someone's employment. (Read: Wrongful termination lawsuits.) If he posted this on a personal blog with a disclaimer that his views don't coincide with those of NPR, then this would be (slightly) different. But he was appearing on a national television show where he would be known as a journalist from NPR. Their code of journalistic integrity applies in this case as he isn't just representing himself. Professional ethics come in to play here, this isn't some airline firing someone because they said on their blog that they like a different airline better.

Meh. Car Talk's my favorite thing on NPR, anyway.

[QUOTE=Kagrenak;25606523]A company has to have reasonable cause to terminate someone's employment. (Read: Wrongful termination lawsuits.) If he posted this on a personal blog with a disclaimer that his views don't coincide with those of NPR, then this would be (slightly) different. But he was appearing on a national television show where he would be known as a journalist from NPR. Their code of journalistic integrity applies in this case as he isn't just representing himself. Professional ethics come in to play here, this isn't some airline firing someone because they said on their blog that they like a different airline better.[/QUOTE] Not only that, but he's done it on multiple occasions. He's not a bigot, he just [I]can't fucking shut his mouth.[/I]

[QUOTE=ThatHippyMan;25607239]Not only that, but he's done it on multiple occasions. He's not a bigot, he just [I]can't fucking shut his mouth.[/I][/QUOTE] Please enlighten me on how exactly "muslims makes me nervous" isn't bigoted.

I get nervous whenever I see a black person at night. [editline]24th October 2010[/editline] It is a bigoted statement.

I love NPR. Wait Wait Don't Tell Me! A Prairie Home Companion Car Talk Good times...

[QUOTE=starpluck;25609208]I get nervous whenever I see a black person at night. [editline]24th October 2010[/editline] It is a bigoted statement.[/QUOTE] If you knew anyone in the real fucking world you'd know how common that belief is, yet they don't also support "I hate black people I hope they all get lynched" like you make it sound

It's a bigoted statement, but he isn't necessarily a bigot.

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25609349]If you knew anyone in the real fucking world you'd know how common that belief is, yet they don't also support "I hate black people I hope they all get lynched" like you make it sound[/QUOTE] shut up

Like fucking shit, if you lived in a place where black people just so happen to mostly be bad people, wouldn't YOU be nervous when you see a black person at night? Night is the most dangerous time, afterall

NPR fired one of their journalists because they broke a contract? What an outrage! [QUOTE=Doriol;25609191]Please enlighten me on how exactly "muslims makes me nervous" isn't bigoted.[/QUOTE] A bigoted statement doesn't necessarily make someone a bigot just like making a religious statement doesn't make someone religious. Just sayin', I have no idea if Jaun Williams is bigoted or not. [quote]Freedom of speech doesn't extend to private organizations, or private property for that matter. Along with what JDK said.[/quote]Why doesn't the first amendment apply but a private organization still can't discriminate based on race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Can someone make sense of it?

[QUOTE=Doriol;25609407]shut up[/QUOTE] How's about you start taking reality into account and not your fucking ignorant internety view on things

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25609420]How's about you start taking reality into account and not your fucking ignorant internety view on things[/QUOTE] says the misogynist who thinks women shouldn't be treated equally and should cover up their bodies

[QUOTE=Doriol;25609437]says the misogynist who thinks women shouldn't be treated equally and she cover up their bodies[/QUOTE] Oh dear god you really can't argue worth a shit can you? "Oh fuck he's posing me a threat in this argument I better try to defame him by bringing up past mistakes!"

[QUOTE=Doriol;25609437]says the misogynist who thinks women shouldn't be treated equally and should cover up their bodies[/QUOTE] "hey he brought up a good point lets make him look bad by bringing up his past beliefs"

[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25609349]If you knew anyone in the real fucking world you'd know how common that belief is, yet they don't also support "I hate black people I hope they all get lynched" like you make it sound[/QUOTE] What belief?