Ahhh, Sunday morning. Heard twice from major garrels, all about the inept government in Pakistan. She talked about the drone bonbings, without actually ever mentioning that they were operated by her husband's organization, and that's a very significant omission! At one point she said that the Pakistan government looks "stupid" when they object to the predator drone attacks without actually being able to stop them. She also, stating as absolute fact, said that the Pakistan government is partial to the Taliban in Afghanistan. No backup information, no follow-up. She really must be a c.i.a. plant; at least this way every time we hear her, we know what the c.i.a. wants us to believe (as if it weren't obvious to begin with). But all this obvious Pakistan government-bashing makes one kind of wonder who actually assasinated the prime minister's wife. And speaking of telling us what they want us to believe, in between the major's field reports was some 'senior economics correspondent', whatever the fuck that is. Her nonsense was all about what "all the economisits I've talked to" had to say about what the U.S. consumer wants: more cheap shit, the cheaper the better. No mention of who these economists actually were, or where they worked, just "most economists" or "all the economists I've talked to". Senior economics gossip is more like it.
Wade Goodwyn's story on Sunday, as you noted on the NPR blog, was great. Imagine what NPR could do if the followed Wade's style and substance. He is consistently one of NPR's best.
Indeed, having Ann of Green Zone Garrels in the Afghan-Pak theatre is the journalistic (I use that term somewhat mockingly) equivalent to having Richard Perle appointed Special Envoy.
But if anyone can tackle that region for Neocon publicizing, our toughie Annie can. Pass the cigs and ammo, and get ready to strip again in your bombed-out hotel room, Garrels! There's a line around the block of torture victims who want to speak to you!
I just heard Phil Reeves give a report about the police academy attack in Lahore. It was an excellent example of 'old fashioned' responsible reporting, I should think. Description was followed by questioning, followed by response from certain persons interviewed, but Reeves was leaving doors open rather than presenting a consumer-friendly tied-with-a-bow package. One example: Reeves asks, 'Who are these attackers? The suspects are...' The key word is 'suspects', and you don't hear it much on NPR. Some might think this is an overly cautious approach to a story, but Reeves knows he's in an environment that has to be handled with canniness and wisdom, not faux cleverness or over-earnest blather (i.e. Inskreepiness or Northamism). You might say that old fashioned responsible reporting is needed in such situations, and I think Reeves delivers the goods.
Regarding NPR, Wednesday April 1: The G20 (or more accurately, the G19 + America-don't-give-a-damn) meeting is ramping up in London. There are huge protests there (of a kind rarely seen in the US).
This morning, NPR has been quick to characterize many protesters as anarchists (recalling the blanket condemnation of protesters in Seattle some years ago).
My name is Matthew Murrey and I'm from Florida, but have been living in the Midwest since 1984. I started this blog because no one else was blogging NPR's drift toward the right - and it made more sense than yelling at the radio.
"Q Tips" is an open thread post where you can place general comments or brief notes about NPR.
Comment Guidelines
I make every effort not to interfere with comments - BUT I will generally delete violent, gratuitously vulgar, or obscene posts. I realize it can be a subjective judgment call. Even when you're really angry, try to play nice.
11 comments:
Ahhh, Sunday morning. Heard twice from major garrels, all about the inept government in Pakistan. She talked about the drone bonbings, without actually ever mentioning that they were operated by her husband's organization, and that's a very significant omission! At one point she said that the Pakistan government looks "stupid" when they object to the predator drone attacks without actually being able to stop them. She also, stating as absolute fact, said that the Pakistan government is partial to the Taliban in Afghanistan. No backup information, no follow-up. She really must be a c.i.a. plant; at least this way every time we hear her, we know what the c.i.a. wants us to believe (as if it weren't obvious to begin with). But all this obvious Pakistan government-bashing makes one kind of wonder who actually assasinated the prime minister's wife.
And speaking of telling us what they want us to believe, in between the major's field reports was some 'senior economics correspondent', whatever the fuck that is. Her nonsense was all about what "all the economisits I've talked to" had to say about what the U.S. consumer wants: more cheap shit, the cheaper the better. No mention of who these economists actually were, or where they worked, just "most economists" or "all the economists I've talked to". Senior economics gossip is more like it.
Whow - Vinton Lawrence, indeed: A POO in the SOG of SAD! I don't think those people are allowed to marry outside the organization, are they?
Not to worry...Obama is going to "change" everything....we will soon be skipping, dancing and casting Rose petals hither and yon.
MTW,
Wade Goodwyn's story on Sunday, as you noted on the NPR blog, was great. Imagine what NPR could do if the followed Wade's style and substance. He is consistently one of NPR's best.
-JET
Indeed, having Ann of Green Zone Garrels in the Afghan-Pak theatre is the journalistic (I use that term somewhat mockingly) equivalent to having Richard Perle appointed Special Envoy.
But if anyone can tackle that region for Neocon publicizing, our toughie Annie can. Pass the cigs and ammo, and get ready to strip again in your bombed-out hotel room, Garrels! There's a line around the block of torture victims who want to speak to you!
Obama's double standard toward the auto and banking industries is GLARING but not getting much (if any) coverage on NPR.
For example, nary a mention here.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102496361
Surprise, surprise.
There's a line around the block of torture victims who want to speak to you!"
But I thought they only summoned Anne in the case of the "hardened terrorists" who don't want to talk.
They want to work out book deals with the Great Garrels.
I just heard Phil Reeves give a report about the police academy attack in Lahore. It was an excellent example of 'old fashioned' responsible reporting, I should think. Description was followed by questioning, followed by response from certain persons interviewed, but Reeves was leaving doors open rather than presenting a consumer-friendly tied-with-a-bow package. One example: Reeves asks, 'Who are these attackers? The suspects are...' The key word is 'suspects', and you don't hear it much on NPR. Some might think this is an overly cautious approach to a story, but Reeves knows he's in an environment that has to be handled with canniness and wisdom, not faux cleverness or over-earnest blather (i.e. Inskreepiness or Northamism). You might say that old fashioned responsible reporting is needed in such situations, and I think Reeves delivers the goods.
Regarding NPR, Wednesday April 1: The G20 (or more accurately, the G19 + America-don't-give-a-damn) meeting is ramping up in London. There are huge protests there (of a kind rarely seen in the US).
This morning, NPR has been quick to characterize many protesters as anarchists (recalling the blanket condemnation of protesters in Seattle some years ago).
Venzuelan protesters - - GOOD
G-20 protesters - - Not so Good
NPR knows which is which and why you need to know that also.
edk
Post a Comment