How do you figure? I thought radio stations always track this kind of stuff. Seems a cop out to make this claim without a citation or two. From my experience, the numbers have been tracked at just about every radio station in the country for at least the last 20-30 years. We hear all the time about metro ratings and such. Those numbers aren't just pulled out of a hat. If they were then some serious lawsuits would be filed by advertisers, don't you think?
Muslims, Political Correctness, and the Juan Williams saga
- Thread starter Hopper
- Start date
How do you figure? I thought radio stations always track this kind of stuff. Seems a cop out to make this claim without a citation or two. From my experience, the numbers have been tracked at just about every radio station in the country for at least the last 20-30 years. We hear all the time about metro ratings and such. Those numbers aren't just pulled out of a hat. If they were then some serious lawsuits would be filed by advertisers, don't you think?
Hopper
Banned
Read the post he's referrin to, Frank (posted by Kicky). Btw, you are quotin Eric, not me (as your post seys).
Impartiality is not a hat you put on and take off, at least not on NPR.
Williams’ appearances on Fox News, especially O’Reilly’s show, have caused heartburn repeatedly for NPR over the last few years. Management said he’s been warned several times that O’Reilly is a professional provocateur and to be careful.
I don't think that anyone disputes he's been profesional on NPR. I never heard him be unprofessional.
Absolutely. I'm sure it was a very difficult decision to dismiss a very knowledgeable, eloquent journalist over things that didn't happen on NPR.
So, an angry segment appears on Fox News, NPR gets a higher call volume (full of angry messages) than they have ever experienced (with nothing even a close second), including statements that they need to have government funding cut off, but that's just a coincidence?
I don't know of any other firing that got a major segment on Fox News.
What is NPR's opinion on the matter of which Williams spoke, do you think? Because outside of a couple of commentators, they don't give opinions, they let their guests do that, and their commentators are non-partisan.
It was tracked, which is how they know the call volume was atypically high.
Hopper
Banned
Do I think it's "just a coincidence" that the whole liberal panel of "The View" (according to Goldberg) thought NPR was "totally wrong" in firing Williams? No, I don't. I think that was their reaction to him being fired for the reasons he was. It it a conincidence that many liberals were very pissed about this? What do you mean by "is it a co-incidence?" Reactions, by definition, are not "coincidences." They are a response to the event being reacted to, not sumthin that just happens willy-nilly, for no conceivable reason.
Do you think Fox is the ONLY source that reported this? That ONLY Fox listeners knew? According to the Ombudsman, the responses were to NPR's own story, if I recall correctly. NPR publishes it announcement, at it's website, and it gets response (via the "contact us" tab) via email. Do Fox listeners frequent the NPR website as a matter of habit, ya figure?
All of that occurred before any "angry segment," as you call it, appeared on Fox, according to the time frame given. Same with "The View's" broadcast, which could not have been run during O'Reilly's "angry segment" if it had not happened beforehand.
I'm sorry, Eric, but I can't help but see the posts you are makin in this thread as being motivated by much other than a percieved duty to "toe" the party line and support whatever NPR does, without even analyzing how plausible, sincere, or appropriate those actions may be. Unlike you, many other liberals were not reluctant to call out NPR for what it did in this case. You, on the other hand, try to suggest that all the negative reactions NPR got was ONLY (or at least mainly) from Fox listeners. I guess this perception helps you maintain the "us against them" perspective that you seem to favor.
Last edited:
Hopper
Banned
I agree that Williams is not "impartial" on the muslim question. He is decidedly in favor of preventing bigotry against muslims from arising. He is, according to NPR, paid to give his opinion at NPR. Do you think he was fired because, on that very Fox segment, he warned against over-generalizing against muslims. Is that the "partiality" that got him fired, ya figure?
Last edited:
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
I haven't read about everything Juan has done.
But Jeez. It says a lot to me about foxnews. For one, they're always the victim of some grand controversy. George Soros? Seriously? If it's not the Hollywood types, it's people like George Soros. Maybe next year it will be Santa Claus or Paris Hilton. It just seems like the "world" is combining against foxnews, conservatives, God, and everything that America stands for.
As if these big shots really cared.... Sheesh!
It's amazing to me that Foxnews can get away with and even defend their right to call the President racist, non-American, a Nazi yet will defend a man who clearly made statements that you just cannot do over the radio. You cannot say something inflammatory things like, "Every time I go to the airport, I get nervous when I see people in Muslim clothing and call themselves Muslim.
I highly doubt Bill O'Reily on his show would defend a Muslim saying that, "every time he went to office buildings he got nervous when he saw white male Christians."
It just says a lot to me about Foxnews's standards and agendas. They're for free speech, just as long as it's something they agree with. They don't care how incorrect or inflammatory the speech is, just as long as bashes liberals and promotes the conservative agenda.
Meanwhile, NPR has the right to fire who they want. What's wrong with that? It's what makes the free market free. It's the single most important component of the free market. If the owners of NPR don't like what Juan Williams is producing, they, as management, have the right to replace him. In this case in particular, Juan Williams clearly stepped over the line and deserved to be fired regardless of anyone's political affiliations.
Once again, the hypocrisy of some people is showing.... Fair and Balanced my foot...
But Jeez. It says a lot to me about foxnews. For one, they're always the victim of some grand controversy. George Soros? Seriously? If it's not the Hollywood types, it's people like George Soros. Maybe next year it will be Santa Claus or Paris Hilton. It just seems like the "world" is combining against foxnews, conservatives, God, and everything that America stands for.
As if these big shots really cared.... Sheesh!
It's amazing to me that Foxnews can get away with and even defend their right to call the President racist, non-American, a Nazi yet will defend a man who clearly made statements that you just cannot do over the radio. You cannot say something inflammatory things like, "Every time I go to the airport, I get nervous when I see people in Muslim clothing and call themselves Muslim.
I highly doubt Bill O'Reily on his show would defend a Muslim saying that, "every time he went to office buildings he got nervous when he saw white male Christians."
It just says a lot to me about Foxnews's standards and agendas. They're for free speech, just as long as it's something they agree with. They don't care how incorrect or inflammatory the speech is, just as long as bashes liberals and promotes the conservative agenda.
Meanwhile, NPR has the right to fire who they want. What's wrong with that? It's what makes the free market free. It's the single most important component of the free market. If the owners of NPR don't like what Juan Williams is producing, they, as management, have the right to replace him. In this case in particular, Juan Williams clearly stepped over the line and deserved to be fired regardless of anyone's political affiliations.
Once again, the hypocrisy of some people is showing.... Fair and Balanced my foot...
Hopper
Banned
What "line" did he "clearly" step over, and how is it clear? Does he "deserve" more than just bein fired, ya figure? Some other "punishment" due?
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
I think it's pretty clear that you can't stereotype a world religion and link it to terrorism.
If you want to be more specific, then the line that NPR, Juan's employer has set.
I'm not sure why this is so difficult. Actually, I do understand why it's so difficult to understand since it's being used as foxnews's point of fear. This year it's George Soros, who no one even knew existed 6 months ago. Next year it'll be Paris Hilton and how she's funding to make everyone get an abortion and do drugs.
NPR reserves the right to fire whoever they want. That's a part of being an employee. If Juan wants to set his own standards (to an extent) then maybe he should start up his own cable tv show or radio station where he can spout off (more) things that he wants (but what NPR doesn't).
That's the wonderous part of living in a free market system.
Lets compare this to real life situations.
Maybe I work at a callcenter. I hate the restrictions that the callcenter puts on me. They demand low call time, don't allow me to hang up on customers, and have really crappy schedules. As an employee, I can either:
1. Deal with it or not meet the standards and be fired (which is what happened to Juan).
2. Find another job.
Juan is doing neither, he's whining. Fox is happy to oblige, because using this story and twisting and exaggerating it can help promote their fear agenda.
What Juan can do though, is start up his own call center. In America, he could become a business owner! Imagine that! Isn't that what Foxnews and conservatives are always trying to protect? Rights to freedom, small business ownership, and earning by the sweat of your own brow?
Juan can start up his own business or call center, with his own rules. One that doesn't demand low call time, one that allows employees to hang up on customers, and one that has flexible schedules.
I suggest Juan and anyone that doesn't want to deal with someone Else's rules do. If you don't like the standards that CNN, Fox, or MSNBC have, then start up your own news agency.
that's what makes America great
Hopper
Banned
Juan Williams thinks that's pretty clear, too. He makes that point repeatedly in the Fox segment he was supposedly fired for. Do you even know the context of his "objectionable" remarks?
Mebbe I shoulda slapped that vid in here, too. Here's a link to it:
[video]https://video.foxnews.com/v/4381309/factor-debate-over-danger-from-muslim-world/
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
The man shouldn't be saying those types of statements on NPR. Sorry.
I watched your video, and if Juan feels that NPR is restricting his freedom of speech, then Juan should start up his own news agency. He can say all the sterotypical messages he wants. That's what makes America great.
If you feel like your job is restricting you, then find another. Start up your own business. Or go back to school.
If conservatives feel like this isn't possible anymore, then maybe they should look at the policies which have destroyed the American dream. Perhaps all of this paranoia that the left has been spouting off for decades about this country becoming a country of haves and have nots is actually becoming a reality.
Hopper
Banned
He wasn't sayin them on NPR, but that's not important. What "types of statement" should he "not be saying," and why shouldn't he? Do you disagree with the resistance he is giving O'Reilly in this segment? Is he, as Eric may have suggested, being partial by supporting muslim rights and denouncing stereotyping. Should he refrain from uttering such opinions? If so, why?
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
He's employed by a news agency and has a standard set by his employer to live by.
NPR shouldn't have to give him a list of things that he can and cannot say. A few months ago my own employer sent out a letter warning us of the things that we tweet and post on facebook. It didn't go into any real specifics, but the warning was clear that we should stay away from even the appearance of saying anything racist, negative towards the company, or controversial.
If I felt that this was infringing upon my rights, I could do the 3 things I suggested in my previous post.
But while I'm an employee, I need to adhere to their rules and standards. Juan didn't, and is now paying for his consequences.
Isn't that what conservatives are constantly harpring on? Personal accountability?
It appears from what I'm getting from Hopper and Bill O'Reiley is that fox and conservatives want to take away the freedom from the employer, don't want Juan to be accountable for his personal decisions, and don't believe in the American Dream anymore. Interesting.
Hopper
Banned
I read this post, but have no comment on it.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
How so? Because he violated NPR's standards?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Williams
I couldn't agree w/Schiller more:
If Juan or anyone has a problem w/this, then stop complaining, and start up your own business.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Furthermore:
This would essentially being like the Jazz telling Deron to not ski, and Deron then breaking his leg skiing. Would you really defend Deron in that case?
My own employer sent me a letter warning me of what I wrote on facebook. Could I really expect to thumb my nose at them and expect to have a job?
Juan Williams wanted to do whatever the hell he wanted. He did. And is now being held accountable for it.
I find it appalling (but not surprising) that you and Bill O'Reiley are defending this joke.
This would essentially being like the Jazz telling Deron to not ski, and Deron then breaking his leg skiing. Would you really defend Deron in that case?
My own employer sent me a letter warning me of what I wrote on facebook. Could I really expect to thumb my nose at them and expect to have a job?
Juan Williams wanted to do whatever the hell he wanted. He did. And is now being held accountable for it.
I find it appalling (but not surprising) that you and Bill O'Reiley are defending this joke.
I agree it is likely The View also inspired a lot of people who don't listen to NPR to call to complain.
I was referring to the size of the reacion, not the particulars of the individual reactions.
Of course not.
Not in the quotes posted. Of course, it's much more convenient to rely on your memory than check prior posts in this thread.
Irrelevant, as anyone who goes to the site can send feedback, whether they frequent the site or not.
You mean before any segment you quoted? Or, di dyou montor Fox News, the View, etc. all that day?
Thank you for claifying your inabilities.
I am not so addled that I confused "all the negative reactions" with "volume of calls and emails to a particular location". I still don't see any reason to think the voume was primarily NPR listeners.
This seems to be just your way of dodging, rather than justifying, your own quote:
So, what is their opinion that they really meant for him to give, given that it is "apparent"?
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Yes, you can.
Hopper
Banned
What are you talking about? What "quotes posted?" It seem pretty clear to me.
What do you mean "any segement?" Are you talking about the first video? Even that (which aired long before "the factor") quoted NPR's own reporter.
Again, it seems clear to me that the occurrences referenced by the ombudsman preceded the "angry segment." Do you have any basis for claiming otherwise? NPR made it's announcemnt Wednesday night and got 6800 emails in response before this ever hit fox news.