Juan williams fired from NPR

[Ziggurat]

Oh god Zig! Protect me from the evil religious ideology that says claiming 'its not bigoted to say muslims are scary' is bad! I don't want the PC police to take my children!

Williams didn't say muslims are scary. He said they made him nervous in certain contexts. That's a true statement. Williams wasn't fired because Muslims made him nervous (if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you), he was fired because he said it. Certain truths are verboten.

But this doesn't seem to trouble you. Instead, it is merely an opportunity for you to express contempt for those who are troubled by it.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Williams didn't say muslims are scary. He said they made him nervous in certain contexts. That's a true statement. Williams wasn't fired because Muslims made him nervous (if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you), he was fired because he said it. Certain truths are verboten.

Yeah, that and the fact that he said it wasn't a bigoted reaction and was just a fact of life people should accept.

But that doesn't really fit with your PC ideology, now does it?

 

[Ziggurat]

Yeah, that and the fact that he said it wasn't a bigoted reaction

No he didn't. He said he wasn't a bigot. There's a rather important difference. And the difference comes down to the distinction between thought and action. As I said before, there's a reason "thought crimes" are repugnant. At least, they're repugnant to some people. Perhaps you aren't one of them.

But that doesn't really fit with your PC ideology, now does it?

It doesn't fit because it's not what happened.

 

[quixotecoyote]

It doesn't fit because it's not what happened.

Keeping saying that. Maybe it'll come true.

 

[Ziggurat]

Keeping saying that. Maybe it'll come true.

I point out the difference between actual events and your claim, and rather than explain or show how I'm wrong, you simply declare me to be so by fiat. Very... convincing.

 

[Cicero]

She didn't change, she added.

Since when does "not long for this world" mean anything other than expecting someone to die soon? Why didn't she say fired if that is was her intended meaning? She didn't expect to be challenged by her remark and only retreated when cornered.

Except later he went back on that.

Where was that? Why didn't NPR give any consideration to the totality of what Juan said?

Other than, you know, their ombudsman making a public statement on the NPR website that NPR journalists are not to do that and that they may need to choose between punditry and working for NPR.

What? Where did Jeffrey Dvorkin, NPR Ombudsman, or NPR's CEO/VP call out Nina?" They are defending her:

"Ms. Totenberg was invited -- to share her opinions as a panelist on Inside Washington, a syndicated television talk show produced by the CBS affiliate in Washington, D.C., not associated with NPR. During this particular show, Ms. Totenberg expressed her view that General Boykin's remarks would put the U.S. at a disadvantage in dealing with Muslims in Iraq and elsewhere, and that he should be replaced. In no way did she wish any harm to General Boykin. I have attached the Inside Washington transcript in which Ms. Totenberg makes clear that she was talking about General Boykin's tenure in his job."

"In my opinion, Totenberg made it abundantly clear that she was not calling for anything other than the resignation of Gen. Boykin. Those who insist that she MUST have meant otherwise are indulging in their usual attempt to demonize her and NPR.

But being this was Nina's second public wish for the death of a government official:

"Not me, I think he ought to be worried about what’s going on in the Good Lord’s mind, because if there is retributive justice, he’ll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it."-- National Public Radio and ABC News reporter Nina Totenberg reacting to Senator Jesse Helms’ claim that the government spends too much on AIDS research, July 8, 1995 Inside Washington.

why was she not fired in 2003 for her punditry?

Yes, that's why Williams was fired as soon as he dared go on Fox, instead of him appearing on a variety of Fox News programs over the past several years without any comment from NPR and only getting fired after he said some rather unfortunate things on air.

Oh, wait...

You should wait. NPR's wish to rid themselves of Mara Liasson and Juan because they work for FOX News has been ongoing for some time. Where have you been?

"Executives at National Public Radio recently asked the network’s top political correspondent, Mara Liasson, to reconsider her regular appearances on Fox News because of what they perceived as the network’s political bias, two sources familiar with the effort said.

According to a source, Liasson was summoned in early October by NPR’s executive editor for news, Dick Meyer, and the network’s supervising senior Washington editor, Ron Elving. The NPR executives said they had concerns that Fox’s programming had grown more partisan, and they asked Liasson to spend 30 days watching the network.

At a follow-up meeting last month, Liasson reported that she’d seen no significant change in Fox’s programming and planned to continue appearing on the network, the source said.

NPR’s focus on Liasson’s work as a commentator on Fox’s “Special Report” and “Fox News Sunday” came at about the same time as a White House campaign launched in September to delegitimize the network by painting it as an extension of the Republican Party.

One source said the White House’s criticism of Fox was raised during the discussions with Liasson. However, an NPR spokeswoman told POLITICO that the Obama administration’s attempts to discourage other news outlets from treating Fox as a peer had no impact on any internal discussions at NPR."

 

[Piggy]

Now NPR has played into the Fox News stereotype of them. That was just plain stupid.

You can't be seriously suggesting that NPR should be making hiring/firing decisions based on another network's stereotypes rather than its own policies and target market.

 

[Ziggurat]

You can't be seriously suggesting that NPR should be making hiring/firing decisions based on another network's stereotypes rather than its own policies and target market.

What do you think NPR's target market is?

 

[A'isha]

Since when does "not long for this world" mean anything other than expecting someone to die soon? Why didn't she say fired if that is was her intended meaning? She didn't expect to be challenged by her remark and only retreated when cornered.

You can quibble all you want, but the NPR ombudsman accepted that that's what she meant, and unlike Williams, Totenberg never went back and said "No, I meant what I originally said after all."

Where was that? Why didn't NPR give any consideration to the totality of what Juan said?

After he was fired, he went back on Fox News to talk about his statements. I quoted it above.

There, his defense is not "My words were taken out of context, and I went on to say that such bigoted reactions are wrong." Instead, he says

Wednesday afternoon, I got a message on my cell phone from Ellen Weiss, who is the head of news at NPR, asking me to call. When I called back, she said, "What did you say, what did you mean to say?"

And I said, "I said what I meant to say, which is that it's an honest experience that went on in an airport and I see people who are in Muslim garb who identify themselves as first and foremost as Muslims, I do a double take. I have a moment of anxiety or fear given what happened on 9/11. That's just a reality." And she went on to say, "Well that crosses the line." And I said, "What line is that?"

And she went on to somehow suggest that I had made a bigoted statement. And I said, "that's not a bigoted statement. In fact, in the course of this conversation with Bill O'Reilly, I said that we have as Americans an obligation to protect constitutional rights of everyone in the country and to make sure we don't have any outbreak of bigotry but that there's a reality."

You cannot ignore what happened on 9/11 and you cannot ignore the connection to Islamic radicalism and you can't ignore the fact that what has been recently said in court with regard to this is the first drop of blood in a Muslim war on America.

In other words, "My fear of seeing people in Muslim garb is totally justified and not bigoted at all since I'm simply revealing the reality of things, because there's a Muslim war on America."

That's not repudiating his bigoted reaction to Muslims, that's embracing and justifying it.

What? Where did Jeffrey Dvorkin, NPR Ombudsman, or NPR's CEO/VP call out Nina?" They are defending her:

They did it right in that very post you quote.

NPR journalists should be speaking, as well as writing and appearing, in other media. It is good for NPR and for its journalists, but when they do it, they should maintain NPR standards.

Some inside NPR might construe this as restricting their ability to engage in outside work. NPR may need to reinforce with its journalists that they have a choice between outside punditry or inside reporting.

You should wait. NPR's wish to rid themselves of Mara Liasson and Juan because they work for FOX News has been ongoing for some time. Where have you been?

That's why they fired her or demoted her from her position as their chief political correspondent after she refused to reconsider her appearances on Fox News.

Oh, wait...

 

[Piggy]

What do you think NPR's target market is?

About 25 million people, mostly Boomers, median age of 50, high-income, college grads, overwhelmingly white, and white-collar.

 

[jakesteele]

I'm not a bigot, I just say bigoted things!

And if someone said 'Blacks make me nervous', do you think Mr. Williams would just let that slide?

Although I agree with him, you are spot on. If a white person said, "I'm not a bigot, you know I marched for civil rights, but when I'm around young black males I get nervous." Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would come screaming out of the woodworks.

Just for the record, I am nervous around young black males on a city bus and muslims on an airplane.

 

[Cicero]

Now NPR has played into the Fox News stereotype of them. That was just plain stupid.

FOX News is not to blame for the fact that NPR is devoted to championing the liberal POV. Blame Dan Schorr, Terry Gross, Bob Edwards, Diane Rehm, Nina Totenberg, Vivian Schiller and Ellen Weiss for how a tax payer funded radio network (even if only 2% comes from a federally funded organization) touts a liberal agenda.

On today's NPR Diane Rehm Show that discussed the firing of Juan, a caller, Robert, from Regensburg, Germany, challenged Diane about NPR's failure to have balance. Diane could not provide an example of any other NPR show that "consistently presents an accurate and fair way what is at least the 50% view point in the country more traditional and conservative views." Her usual reply to such questions was her favorite platitude, "We try our very best." Right. And T errell O wens tries his very best not to be "Team Obliterator."

35:45 into show
http://thedianerehmshow.org/audio-player?nid=13202

 

[portlandatheist]

I wonder if folks of the JW is a bigot camp think that Catholics who feel uncomfortable with letting their young sons be with priests unsupervised are anti christian bigots?
I think this whole situation is analogous to fear of flying in general: many people have an irrational fear of flying despite their understanding that flying is safer than driving , but images of prior catastrophes trigger a strong irrational response and they got along with the business of flying anyway without letting the fear change their behavior. Likewise, JW probably doesn't have anything against Muslims, but the trauma of 9/11 and other close calls trigger an emotional response nonetheless even though he likely realizes the risk is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. These types of fears are a common experience, its how we react to them that really matters.

I have an anecdote: There was a time that skin heads thought my local bar was a cool place to hang out. They made me feel incredibly uncomfortable and angry at the bar owner for not immediately kicking them out. This is despite my knowledge that most skin heads don't burn down churches or beat up minorities. Fortunately, the bar owner made it known they were no longer welcome. Does this make either me or the bar owner a bigot?

 

[Hazel]

1. Juan wasn't following the rules of his employer. If you don't like the rules, get out of the game. NPR has been very good to Juan and they deserved better. Now maybe Fox will hire him and let him say anything he wants but I doubt it. Fox also have rules.

2. I've always thought of Juan as a very intelligent and thoughtful person. He seemed to have a great insight into situations. He should know that, in times like this, we do not make such public statments even if they are true. I don't care if he was only saying that it makes him nervous. He should know that this would arouse anger and bad reaction. It should never have been said so publicly.

3. It should occur to anyone, including Juan, that terrorists, no matter their religion, race, or nationality, do not make themselves so obvious by their dress if they want to get on an airplane. That should at least slow down his fearful reaction.

4. I keep wondering what Juan's reaction would be if someone on the panel had said "a group of black men coming down the street scares me". I wonder what the country's reaction would be. No, I don't wonder. I know what the public reaction would have been.

I have as much of an aversion to PC as anyone. Yet it is a fact that there are times when it needs to be respected. If you are a public figure, watch what you say. Even among your neighbors, watch what you say. Don't ignite a conflagration. Too many real terrorists are ready and willing to do that. We don't need it from the rest of us. We need sanity.

As for NPR firing Juan, I agree with NPR. However, right or wrong on their part, if they had not, you'd have the same arguments going on from the other direction. There is no winning in this situation. Juan had been cautioned many times about how he spoke and he blatantly ignored his employers wishes. How many of us would still be working if we ignored our employers' rules?

Those are my thoughts and now I'll go away. Carry on.

 

[applecorped]

If a white person said, "I'm not a bigot, you know I marched for civil rights, but when I'm around young black males I get nervous." Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would come screaming out of the woodworks.

Jesse might come screaming if a white person said that but as noted earlier he DID say:

"I hate to admit it, but I have reached a stage in my life that if I am walking down a dark street late at night and I see that the person behind me is white, I subconsciously feel relieved."

 

[Hazel]

Jesse might come screaming if a white person said that but as noted earlier he DID say:

"I hate to admit it, but I have reached a stage in my life that if I am walking down a dark street late at night and I see that the person behind me is white, I subconsciously feel relieved."

He has that much faith in us Whites????? Poor man.

 

[AlBell]

Which I gave.

No, you didn't.

Of course you don't want answers. Ignorance is easier and allows you to continue to advocate bigotry.

Don't hurt yourself patting yourself on the back.

I think I'll go with "foolhardy".

 

[Ziggurat]

About 25 million people, mostly Boomers, median age of 50, high-income, college grads, overwhelmingly white, and white-collar.

So... upper middle class. And people wonder why public funding for an institution which caters to the upper middle class might not be needed.

Fund funding aside, why is this target market relevant to the firing of Williams? He's middle-aged, high-income, a college grad, and white collar. He's not white, but surely you're not suggesting this had anything to do with why he was fired, are you?

 

[Ziggurat]

1. Juan wasn't following the rules of his employer. If you don't like the rules, get out of the game. NPR has been very good to Juan and they deserved better. Now maybe Fox will hire him and let him say anything he wants but I doubt it. Fox also have rules.

Evidently someone hasn't been keeping up.

2. I've always thought of Juan as a very intelligent and thoughtful person. He seemed to have a great insight into situations. He should know that, in times like this, we do not make such public statments even if they are true. I don't care if he was only saying that it makes him nervous. He should know that this would arouse anger and bad reaction. It should never have been said so publicly.

Conform to the dogma! Don't dare to speak the truth!

Sorry, but being able to speak the truth is especially important in "times like these". When you allow the truth to be silenced because of "anger and bad reactions", what exactly do you think the end result is going to be?

3. It should occur to anyone, including Juan, that terrorists, no matter their religion, race, or nationality, do not make themselves so obvious by their dress if they want to get on an airplane. That should at least slow down his fearful reaction.

And maybe it does. But so what? BTW, have you actually listened to the whole 6 minute segment? Because if all you've listened to is the 1-minute clip, you really aren't getting the context. He said a lot more than is commonly quoted.

4. I keep wondering what Juan's reaction would be if someone on the panel had said "a group of black men coming down the street scares me". I wonder what the country's reaction would be. No, I don't wonder. I know what the public reaction would have been.

Do you? Do you really?

What was the nation's reaction when Jesse Jackson said pretty much exactly that? Did you even know he said that?

I have as much of an aversion to PC as anyone. Yet it is a fact that there are times when it needs to be respected.

Now this is ironic. Williams' critics have pointed out that his preface of "I'm not a bigot" can't remove any bigotry from what he said after that. And now you tell us you have an aversion to political correctness, but only as a preface for telling us how political correctness must be respected. That's not exactly an overwhelming aversion you've got going there, and it sure as hell isn't as much of an aversion as some people have.

 

[Mycroft]

Saying that violent extremists using Islam as their justification are planning further attacks on us is not a bigoted statement.

I don't know why you feel the need to add "using Islam as their justification"? I think the Osama Bin Ladens, the Ayatolla Ali Khameneis and other fundamentalists/extremists of the world are most likely sincere in their beliefs. From their point of view, they are not using Islam as a justification for anything. They're following the requirements of their religion to the best of their ability.

That billions of other Muslims disagree doesn't change that.

Expanding that to say that there is "a Muslim war on America" and that it's "just reality" to be afraid of everyone wearing "Muslim garb", though, is bigotry.

I think it's important to recognize a few facts.

1) There is a Muslim war on America. That same war is being waged on Europe and moderate Muslims as well.

2) While it's true that it is a Muslim war, most Muslims are not waging that war. Most Muslims are victims of that war. The extremists want to bring them in with threats of violence just as much as they want to make non-Muslims fearful.

3) Some are not. Some side with the violent extremists. Some with action. Some with financial support. Others with just agreement.

Because it treats the vast majority of Muslims who aren't violent extremists plotting attacks on us the same as the small minority that are.

I disagree.

I think it's natural that upon learning someone is Muslim to wonder if their personal interpretation of Islam leads them to support or engage in violent extremism. I think the bigotry would be in assuming that being Muslim means that they do, without recognizing that the majority of Muslims don't.

I think it's exactly the same as upon learning someone is Christian to wonder if their religion leads them to be anti-science, anti-evolution, anti-vaccination, and anti-separation of Church and State. The difference is that the Christian extremism isn't very likely to lead to violence.