The truth is that the frightened executives at public TV and radio have long been more hospitable to interviews with right of center or extreme right-wing and corporatist talking heads than liberal or progressive guests.
PBS’s Charlie Rose has had war-loving William Kris tol on 31 times, Henry Kissinger 55 times, Richard Perle ten times, the global corporatist cheerleader, Tom Friedman 70 times. Compare that guest list with Rose’s interviews of widely published left of center guests — Noam Chomsky two times, William Grieder two times, Jim Hightower two times, Charlie Peters two times, Lewis Lapham three times, Bob Herbert six times, Paul Krugman 21 times, Victor Navasky one time, Mark Green five times, and Sy Hersh, once a frequent guest, has not been on since January 2005.
I think that FAIR and even that famed UCLA study have backed Nader up on the argument.
But while they do tend to interview right wingers and corporate reps more often, are they really trying to appease the right (as they did when they permanently banned Tales of the City from their national programming?), or do they cater to a sophisticated audience of liberals who want to be challenged and are bored with the preaching to the choir offered by Pacifica and other outlets?
29 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 21, 2011 at 7:36 am
Erasmus
I listen to Terry Gross and her “Fresh Air” on a regular basis. Ralph Nader labels her “hostile.” Not once have I heard her confront a guest in a “hostile” manner. Once again, I must question the judgment of Ralph Nader.
April 21, 2011 at 8:47 am
PAN
I think NPR/PBS cater to a sophisticated audience period. Unfortunately, most people that don’t mind being challenged by intelligent by well thought out opposing points of view happen to be liberal. Thus the huge popularity of conservative talk show radio where you can tune in and hang your hat on NOT being challenged.
April 21, 2011 at 9:19 am
brian
No they are not. The people that complain about PBS & NPR being “liberal” never watch or listen to them. Because they get their “news” from Fox……
April 21, 2011 at 9:38 am
Dave Kirby
Why does anyone pay attention Nader anymore? This is the jackass whose vanity run got Bush elected. He is also the guy who said there was no difference between Bush and Gore. I don’t listen to NPR unless I’m camped in the boonies and thats all there is. I am fed up with talking heads. I do watch PBS documentaries and think their children’s programming is the best there is. I think of PBS as one of the few unbiased sources of real information. CNN is tabloid light and Fox is absolutely masterbatorical. A political circle jerk.
April 21, 2011 at 9:41 am
Eric Kirk
Erasmus – I agree, she’s actually quite soft in her manner. But she will ask tough questions, which has led to several people walking out on interviews.
And she was pretty rough on Tiger Woods.
April 21, 2011 at 9:49 am
Eric Kirk
Incidentally, I’m told that the clips are actually from an interview with KISS star Gene Simmons, after he told her that all men should welcome him with open arms and all women should welcome him with open legs. I would actually like to hear that interview, because it sounds like she didn’t take crap from him.
April 21, 2011 at 10:12 am
Plain Jane
Is the video of the “interview” posted at 9:41 supposed to be a joke?
April 21, 2011 at 10:34 am
News reporter for, Humboldt
Hey, remember this guy ? http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2881477/ He’s now been in , Clint Eastwood’s new movie, J. Edgar .
April 21, 2011 at 10:59 am
News reporter for, Humboldt
PS,
Please block , Heraldo ( He’s the BIGGEST hypocrite & liar of all times ) .
April 21, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Ed Denson
I don’t know if NPR is liberal, but it is interesting. I listen quite often when I’m on the road, and I’m on the road quite often. I like Fresh Air, but I do wonder if it is winding down, because they so often replay shows from the past.
April 21, 2011 at 5:53 pm
Not A Native
Remind me again, please. What’s the litmus test that differentiates liberal media??
April 21, 2011 at 9:54 pm
Tom Sebourn
Not A Native, I always say that the liberal media are only as liberal as their conservative owners.
April 21, 2011 at 11:20 pm
Bruce Ross
“Real” liberals find PBS a den of corporate stoogery.
Conservatives find it unbearably leftist.
That’s the nature of trying to play things down the middle.
Still, I’m not sure how one late-night talk show has become the yardstick by which a show is judged. And why the hyper-establishment Charlie Rose? Why not Tavis Smiley or Bill Moyers or Amy Goodman (who they broadcast at an obscure hour on Redding’s — Redding’s! — PBS station)?
April 22, 2011 at 2:45 am
Captain Future
Charlie Rose seems to be the last of the TV programs of longer-than-soundbite conversations with intelligent people of accomplishment. That said, he’s pretty comfortable with the corporate elite. I recall how Craig Venter took him for an extended ride on the Human Genome Project, taking all the credit and putting down the public venture. And Venter’s outfit turned out to have stolen most of its stuff from the public lab and tried to make as much of it proprietary as they could get away with. Not to mention the outsized promises Venter made that are not close to coming true. It’s too bad PBS or even national NPR didn’t give Studs Terkel an hour a night.
April 22, 2011 at 5:44 am
Mitch
Very nice blog, Captain Future. (Click Captain Future’s name at his comment, or find it here: http://dreamingup.blogspot.com/)
I’m not up on the Human Genome Project or Craig Venter, but I do seem to recall that Venter was willing to do for a dime in a week what the NIH folks said would cost a dollar and ten years. Sometimes practicality matters more than brilliance. Maybe he’s more hot air than real accomplishment, but I think it’s safe to say there’s credit enough to spread around.
Oh, the last time I saw Charlie Rose — years ago — he was too busy masturbating himself to actually finish asking any questions. Maybe he’s improved.
April 22, 2011 at 7:31 am
Joel Mielke
If that unctuous sycophant Charlie Rose has ever asked an interesting question, I’d like to hear it. And, Mr. Ross, PBS did have a slot for Tavis Smiley for a brief time, but he was too well-informed, and probably too black, for the hand-wringing management at PBS.
April 22, 2011 at 11:59 am
Bruce Ross
Joel,
I can’t speak for Humboldt County’s station, but KIXE in Redding broadcasts Smiley every weeknight. (At midnight, but he is on the air.)
April 22, 2011 at 9:06 pm
Anonymous
Yes !! There is no doubt.
April 23, 2011 at 6:23 am
moviedad
Propaganda for the rich from the get-go. The fact that anyone can conceivably target NPR and PBS as “Liberal” show just how insane this country has become.
If you want to weed out the Liberal-Progressives in media, just think back to 2003 and the start of the second Iraq war…now let’s see, where were those liberals……Oh yeah, they were non-existent.
Does it really matter what color the rope is at your hanging?
April 23, 2011 at 9:28 am
Cristina Bauss
The definition of “liberal” in the United States has become hopelessly warped by the antics of the far right, and the left’s constant capitulation to it in the hopeless effort to find “middle ground.” A couple of years ago or so, Jeffrey Toobin wrote an article for the New Yorker about one of the Supreme Court justices – I think it was Stephen Breyer – and made an observation that really stuck with me: the most far-right justice on the Supreme Court of South Africa is to the left of the most far-left justice on the Supreme Court of the United States.
April 23, 2011 at 1:29 pm
Eric Kirk
Still, I’m not sure how one late-night talk show has become the yardstick by which a show is judged. And why the hyper-establishment Charlie Rose? Why not Tavis Smiley or Bill Moyers or Amy Goodman (who they broadcast at an obscure hour on Redding’s — Redding’s! — PBS station)?
Bruce-
Amy Goodman is independent, not affiliated with either PBS or NPR, though she ends up on NPR affiliates as well as Pacifica’s.
Moyers is off the air, and Nader says there’s been nothing to replace him. I just pasted on paragraph. He does make a good case that PBS and NPR air more conservative opinions, but I do think there is liberal leaning in just the nature of the stories they choose to cover. I also think the NPR news services are among the best in the country in terms of depth.
April 23, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Eric Kirk
Not A Native, I always say that the liberal media are only as liberal as their conservative owners.
I’ve heard that somewhere! Where again? Hmmmm.
April 23, 2011 at 2:13 pm
Not A Native
Well, maybe ‘liberal media’ is like ‘porn’ was to Potter Stewart. Undefinable.
In the sense of political science, the ‘Left’ are proponents of Marx’s economic and socio-political worldview. By that measure, few US media represent liberal viewpoints.
April 23, 2011 at 3:49 pm
Eric Kirk
Actually, “liberal” is classically capitalist. You’re looking for “social democratic” or “socialist. Most countries have conservative, liberal, and left wing parties (social democrats or labor parties). Conservatives being “right,” socialists being “left” and liberals being centrist – based upon a parliamentary setup from somewhere in Europe in the 19th century. In the US we have only the conservatives and liberals, who would be centrists in any other country. We don’t have a left here. We have to pro-corporate parties, one pro-choice and one anti.
April 23, 2011 at 4:45 pm
Unk John
Eric,
According to Parkinson in his hilarious “Parkinson’s Law”, the terms “left” and “right” came from the French parliament where the socialists were on the left side of the hall and the conservatives were on the right.
As others here have already stated, I don’t believe NPR or PBS are liberal, but they do give us some programming that no one else does.
As for Ralph Nader, I can’t always agree with him, but I would take issue with Dave Kirby’s condemnation of him. However, I am fresh out of time. The sun finally came out here and I have much to do.
April 23, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Not A Native
Eric, I think we’re pretty much in agreement if you consider Marxism and socialism as close(politically)
April 24, 2011 at 7:14 pm
podsnap
NPR news in just a bunch of corporate/jingo propaganda crap. I can hardly listen to it anymore, it is so infuriating. I can’t imagine that anybody thinks they are “trying to be middle of the road.”
Now they don’t even try to call themselves public radio anymore, the name is changed to NPR. (Nationalistic Propoganda Radio?) Wonder who’s funding ‘em now?
April 25, 2011 at 5:48 am
Noble
Good question. All I know is, every week when I sit down to watch NOVA I’m greeted by a big blaring ad for David Koch foundation.
Pacifica (Amy Goodman) used to get big bucks from the Ford Foundation, don’t know if they still do.
Blogs are the closest thing we have to truly independent.
April 25, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Not A Native
On reflection, I think concrete examples are in order. Paul Krugman is regularly broadcast on both PBS and NPR. Certainly Fox News doesn’t include him as having an informed opinion
Are Krugman’s observations here Left, Liberal, or Conservative.