Opportunity Lost at NPR Yesterday
NPR can be truly maddening. On the other hand, a show like 'All Things Considered' can be read as an unfiltered look into the disinformation machines, operated with great skill by politicians of all stripes. ATC's Melissa Block is an especially helpful conduit, considering that she never asks the obvious or departs from a script that is so narrow that it, itself, seems like it might have been crafted by Eric Holder.
Listening to Block's interview with Rep. Hoekstra, my expectations were low:the idea of an experienced Republican politician being given a platform by the credulous Ms. Block made me think of the sound waves turning into a deceptively calm sewage canal.
Then, suddenly, I heard something that bubbled through the sludge
BLOCK: So Congressman, Eric Holder, the attorney general, was clear yesterday that this investigation will be limited to those who are acting without legal authorization, without the legal guidance. So it's not nearly as broad as you seem to be portraying.
Rep. HOEKSTRA: Well I'm not portraying it, I think you're right. We - they're looking at the ones that operated outside the law. These people have been evaluated and dealt with. Eric Holder is going back and reevaluating them. But one of the things we've learned with special prosecutors is the original parameters don't necessarily always define the scope within they act. All you need to do is ask former President Bill Clinton, all you need to do is ask Scooter Libby, these special prosecutors tend to develop a life of their own, an independent voice that doesn't report to anybody. And I think that's one of the things that we need to take a look at and we need to be aware of.
BLOCK: Congressman Hoekstra, thanks.
Rep. HOEKSTRA: Hey, thank you.
BLOCK: That's Congressman Peter Hoekstra of Michigan. He's the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee.
What bubbled through the sludge was, of course, Hoekstra's invocation of the prosecution of President Clinton as an example of a 'special prosecutor' gone wild.
Consider, first, that this prosecutor gone haywire induced the House of Representatives to impeach him. Consider, next, that the man denouncing Kenneth Starr's witch hunt voted to impeach the President as a result. This is a matter of public record, and if Block did not know offhand Hoekstra's voting record, she could have asked him if he voted for the President's impeachment. No, the man's total hypocrisy went unchallenged by this journalist. The opportunity was lost to discredit him, by the asking of a quite simple question.
If this happens on NPR, it must be far, far worse on other news outlets.
Then, suddenly, I heard something that bubbled through the sludge
BLOCK: So Congressman, Eric Holder, the attorney general, was clear yesterday that this investigation will be limited to those who are acting without legal authorization, without the legal guidance. So it's not nearly as broad as you seem to be portraying.
Rep. HOEKSTRA: Well I'm not portraying it, I think you're right. We - they're looking at the ones that operated outside the law. These people have been evaluated and dealt with. Eric Holder is going back and reevaluating them. But one of the things we've learned with special prosecutors is the original parameters don't necessarily always define the scope within they act. All you need to do is ask former President Bill Clinton, all you need to do is ask Scooter Libby, these special prosecutors tend to develop a life of their own, an independent voice that doesn't report to anybody. And I think that's one of the things that we need to take a look at and we need to be aware of.
BLOCK: Congressman Hoekstra, thanks.
Rep. HOEKSTRA: Hey, thank you.
BLOCK: That's Congressman Peter Hoekstra of Michigan. He's the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee.
What bubbled through the sludge was, of course, Hoekstra's invocation of the prosecution of President Clinton as an example of a 'special prosecutor' gone wild.
Consider, first, that this prosecutor gone haywire induced the House of Representatives to impeach him. Consider, next, that the man denouncing Kenneth Starr's witch hunt voted to impeach the President as a result. This is a matter of public record, and if Block did not know offhand Hoekstra's voting record, she could have asked him if he voted for the President's impeachment. No, the man's total hypocrisy went unchallenged by this journalist. The opportunity was lost to discredit him, by the asking of a quite simple question.
If this happens on NPR, it must be far, far worse on other news outlets.
Advertisement
















Good catch!
Thanks. Rec'd.
August 26, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am listening to (what else?) ATC now, and I heard(during the segment in which they respond to listeners' comments) that quite a few listeners found Block's interview to be a travesty of journalism: one irate listener said, "You have lost me forever as a listener" for this.
I am glad to know I wasn't the only one to be shocked by this ridiculous performance.
August 26, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I stopped listening to NPR long ago, for numerous reasons, but mostly because of classism -- they appeal to and defend and upper-middle white audience and social strata. In other words, they remain in strict conformity to their own insular view of the world.
And their stubborn "inability" to do other than fiercely protect the status quo: their notion of credible goes to the Cato Institute for "credible" perspectives.
But trumping those is the defening silence and entirely lacking impact of complaints about such as the foregoing.
NPR is a pseudo-liberal equivalent of the FOX Fraud.
August 27, 2009 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I listen to NPR mostly for the 'local' programming (I live in NYC and WNYC has some excellent programs, most notably Brian Lehrer's show), and then there is the BBC after midnight, and Hearing Voices at 7 am Sunday morning is sometimes well worth listening to.
Otherwise, it's largely as you say, and this problem is most evident on what is apparently its most profitable show, ATC.
August 27, 2009 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think Diane Reihm (sp?) is allowed to discuss any issue without having someone from the American Enterprise Institute on her show. It must be in her contract or something.
And NPR still goes to Cokie Roberts for her "expert" analysis. Jeesh.
August 27, 2009 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
"If this happens on NPR, it must be far, far worse on other news outlets". No, NPR has now caught up in the race to the unquestioning bottom.
August 27, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink