If NPR Is Non-Biased… Why Is MoveOn.org Trying to Save Them?

If NPR is a non-biased news organization…
Why is MoveOn.org trying to save them?

Maybe NPR has suddenly decided to promote neutral non-biased news organizations?
The Boston Globe reported:

…MoveOn.org, the left-wing pressure group, is promoting a petition that urges Congress to “protect NPR and PBS and guarantee them permanent funding, free from political meddling.’’ Yet political “meddling’’ is the inescapable price of taking political dollars. Conservatives would complain about NPR’s liberal tilt no matter where its funding came from, just as liberals complain about the conservative tilt of Fox News. But if NPR were no longer on the government dole, its political leanings would no longer be a congressional issue. The budget storms in Washington pose no threat to Fox because Fox doesn’t run on taxpayer money. They wouldn’t threaten NPR either — if only NPR would give up its subsidy.

The public broadcasting industry is waging an aggressive campaign to save its federal allowance, which comes to about $450 million a year. A lavish new website, 170MillionAmericans.org, claims that “more than half of all Americans use public media each month’’ and exhorts supporters to “send a message to Washington that public broadcasting matters to you.’’

#1 March 14, 2011 at 10:00 pm
MrGoodWench commented:

campaign to save its federal allowance, which comes to about $450 million a year. A lavish new website, 170MillionAmericans.org, claims that “more than half of all Americans use public media each month’’
++++++++++
So these 170 million idiots can’t send in $ 5 each, in a YEAR to keep NPR off taxpayer dollars?
#2 March 14, 2011 at 10:15 pm
Rob De Witt commented:

“More than half (of all upper middle-class White people in university areas.”

FIFY
#3 March 14, 2011 at 10:22 pm
wanumba commented:

#1
Bingo!!
#4 March 14, 2011 at 10:24 pm
wanumba commented:

The problem with “elites” is they are stingy cheap. NPR has a deadbeat audience.
#5 March 14, 2011 at 10:26 pm
nelle commented:

When I’m broke, I cancel the cable and do without any tv. So can the government.
#6 March 14, 2011 at 10:28 pm
nelle commented:

Entertainment, I mean. Cut out the spending on non-essentials.
#7 March 14, 2011 at 10:36 pm
shibumi commented:

Moveon.org is trying to save NPR… because they’re unbiased too!

/hahaha, no really, I did not mean that seriously, moveon.org unbiased, hahahaha.
#8 March 14, 2011 at 10:43 pm
tommy mc donnell commented:

if NPR had a conservative bias how long do you think it would be funded. maybe we should ask our liberal representatives to fund a conservative radio station. you know to be fair.
#9 March 14, 2011 at 10:56 pm
Paul52 commented:

Can I sign a petition to be free from MoveOn and its meddling?
#11 March 14, 2011 at 11:04 pm
donh commented:

I don’t want my tax money underwriting a media empire controlled by an unrepentant Kapo.
#13 March 14, 2011 at 11:11 pm
Big L commented:

I pay for cable for internet and tv.the TV is a bust as it is Spanish lang, sports, paid programming,re-run tv shows that were lousy the first time around, lousy movies and it costs almost 100 bucks per month. the internet is ok,tho.Not down, a good job.incl in the 100bucks.
However…why can’t the lefties hold bake sales for NPR and CPB.Pledge breaks, direct donations of 46.00 or so each month.
check out npr.org and look at the tax return. Many salaries at $180K, and top salaries at $300K.
also one line was the revenue of $115,000,000 from apparently the sale of radio stations.
If the funding continues, lets have a complete analysi of Npr funds. REquire salaries to be
more like $60-70K…
you are on a leash from now on,npr…if the GOP caves as is likely, full disclosure.
#15 March 14, 2011 at 11:25 pm
wodun commented:

If you read the comments over at NPR, the NPR fanbois actually think Fox does get money from the government. They also think corporate sponsorship means that news is biased except in the case of NPR where corporate sponsorship means they can be neutral.
#16 March 15, 2011 at 12:51 am
Opus#6@AmericanPerspective commented:

NPR and public broadcasting is not necessary now, with all the channels/stations that we have. They need to stop asking the taxpayers to support their politics.
#17 March 15, 2011 at 12:59 am
Taqiyyotomist commented:

NPR IS political meddling.

Wonder of Wonders… George Soros’, KING of political meddling, KING of irony-lessness.
#19 March 15, 2011 at 4:53 am
squeaky commented:

from doug ross on the 3rd – what is it with people who want you to give until it hurts? while they’re pleading to keep big bird on the air for “the children” is there any giving back from their head honchos? i know mc mansions are pricey and all but so is my hovel [not exactly a hovel].
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2011/03/figures-pbs-npr-and-other-state-run.html
#20 March 15, 2011 at 5:37 am
BigAlSouth commented:

This is too funny. Just imagine the Marxist slant of NPR with “permanent” government funding, free from meddling by conservative taxpayers.

Hey George, think I’ll pass on that one . . .
#21 March 15, 2011 at 6:40 am
theBuckWheat commented:

There is a physician’s saying, “obstruction begets infection”. This bit of wisdom explains why for example, when skin pores get clogged, the area behind the blockage can harbor an infection that might fester into something dangerous.

This saying also gives us guidance for organizations. When management can Insulate itself from being held responsible for its actions, they can find it easy to make decisions that are self-serving. Behind their obstruction, an infection festers. In such cases, removing the obstruction and allowing the disinfectant of ample sunshine in generally solves the problem.

In the case of NPR, that organization’s management has become insulated by the assured funding they enjoy, in part from the tax payers. The best disinfectant would be to force them to be fully funded by the people with whom they share so much in common ideologically and philosophically. Let elites fund elites. Above all, please stop living large at the expense of the very people you sneer at in your private moments with wealthy anonymous donors.
#22 March 15, 2011 at 7:43 am
bg commented:

++

“It is NPR policy.”

==
#23 March 15, 2011 at 10:51 am
burt commented:

When they owe their job to George Soros, how can they be unbiased?
#25 March 15, 2011 at 3:57 pm
Millitant Conservative commented:

We don’t need NPR, most people still have radios. Just listen to free AM talk radio, you’ll learn something, save money and be cured of liberalism.

KILL NPR & PBS!

powder is dry
#26 March 15, 2011 at 11:58 pm
silentcal_rox commented:

give reid a choince, NPR, or the cowboy poetry fest. both worthy causes? LOL!
#28 March 16, 2011 at 10:11 am
Rachel commented:

NPR should be saved by conservatives. It is the last place where there is a national forum for conservative debate. NPR daily hosts representatives from the CATO Institute, the Heritage Foundation etc. I am very concerned about the conservative debate if NPR is defunded. I doubt that the audience of Glenn Beck will have the patience to listen to intellectual conservative debate and NPR is really the last forum for that debate.

Recent non-partisan studies of NPR for bias have shown that they have on Republican/conservatives 55% to 45% Democrats/liberals. I suspect that anyone condemning NPR has not spent the time actually listening to NPR lately. This is the last place that liberals actually have to hear conservative viewpoints. Defunding NPR will only serve to make NPR no longer have to present the conservative point of view — it is the federal funding and constant attacks on NPR that force them to present our point of view.
#29 March 17, 2011 at 4:40 pm
AngryBird commented:

I can anyone imagine paying for a public good or service that does not directly benefit him?
I don’t benefit from farm subsidies, the home mortgage deduction, or the war on drugs … can we de-fund them next?