Why would NPR hire a snide vindictive person as ombudsman?

[qb]

Anyone who still maintains that NPR has not been co-opted by the right should take a look at how they handle criticism. I heard Mr. Dvorkan on Minnesota Public Radio defending the rightward shift of NPR's programming as attempting to represent the "general population" rather than a small group. My understanding of NPR's charter is to present an alternative to the commercial media's programming, not duplicate it.

Take a look at this exchange posted at http://www.mediawhoresonline.com

-----Original Message-----
From: amlittle
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 2:23 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Liasson and Williams

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am appalled to learn that Juan Williams and Mara Liasson will be covering the Democratic presidential campaign next year. Both of these so-called "journalists" have long since sold out to the "fair and balanced" agenda of their corporate masters at FOX "News." They clown and preen with the best of the bought-and-paid-for Washington pundits for hire, and have clearly sold out to the highest bidder.

While I know that government funding of NPR funding has been slashed dramatically, and you're ever more dependent on corporate sponsors, I have until now looked to NPR as the last bastion of the independent media in this country (outside of the BBC World Service). I have enthusiastically supported my local NPR stations with my own money. But assigning Williams and Liasson, who shuck and jive for the FOX "News" channel, is a depressing development.

Please, stop legitimizing these two sad fools, and reassign campaign coverage to one of your many other excellent, honest reporters. My vote goes to Peter Overby, whose brutally frank coverage of campaign finance reform really stood out against the competition. He clearly knows the beat, and might resist falling into the "common wisdom" trap that seems to ensnare so many campaign reporters.

Yours Very Sincerely,

Ann M. Little
Assistant Professor, History
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1776


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original Message From Jeffrey Dvorkin
<[e-mail]>

Dear Prof. Little,

Thank you for effectively reading and following the instructions from Media Transparency. I could be wrong but I guess that the academy's reputation for independent thinking may be less than it once was.

On your comments regarding Peter Overby, I would be happy to forward your note to him.

Regards,

Jeffrey Dvorkin
NPR Ombudsman


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: amlittle
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 3:02 PM
To: Jeffrey Dvorkin
Subject: RE: Liasson and Williams

Dear Mr. Dvorkin,

What a shameful reply. As it happens, I learned of your assignment from the weblog Atrios, and am unfamiliar with Media Transparency activism on this issue.

My letter was an entirely original composition, not astroturf. I'm rather proud of my own analytical and writing skills, and tend to avoid those sorts of spam campaigns anyway. I wrote to you as a longtime NPR listener and supporter, and I get from you a nasty reply rife with insinuations that could have been penned by David Horowitz.

You can't trivialize my point of view, just because it happens to be shared by a number of people. I guess you're having a bad day because you're probably getting a lot of e-mails like the one I wrote. Incidentally, I notice you didn't challenge my assertion that Williams and Liasson are compromised by their association with FOX "News."

Yours Very Sincerely,

Ann M. Little
Assistant Professor, History
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1776


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original Message From Jeffrey Dvorkin
<[e-mail]>

So you did get your orders from a weblog. Sorry I named the wrong one.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: amlittle
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 3:24 PM
To: Jeffrey Dvorkin
Subject: RE: Liasson and Williams

Dear Mr. Dvorkin,

I'm so flattered that you've taken the time to reply personally to my notes, although I find it a little strange since you clearly prefer to believe that I'm a mindless drone taking "orders" from someone. I'm just an American historian concerned about the fate of the republic, and about the debasement of our political discourse that has been pioneered by FOX "News," among other media organizations. I took the time to share my concerns with you, and in reply all I've received is childish clowning. I'm left to wonder if maybe Williams and Liasson aren't the only NPR staffers on the FOX payroll.

Ann M. Little
Assistant Professor, History
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1776


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original Message From Jeffrey Dvorkin
<[e-mail]>

Dear Prof. Little,

I apologize. I must say that your email got a response only because as a lapsed historian myself, I was somewhat perplexed that your email was part of a deluge from others who did seem so willing to follow orders. I should not have been so quick to lump you in and for that please accept my apology.

Regards,

Jeffrey Dvorkin

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. Glad Dvorkin gave Media Transparency a well deserved plug!

It is a great site and one of my favorite references for those that are financed by the right wing..a very useful tool.

www.mediatransparency.org

[Loonman]

2. NPR used to be great

Now they're whores like everyone else.

[Buzz Clik]

23. Are you the Loonman of rushfans?

I've never seen that nick elsewhere...

[radwriter0555]

3. National Propaganda Radio baby.

Now that they're corporate owned and controlled.

[BiggJawn]

4. Network reps have been shit-canned for less

Guess the NPR (National PUTSCH Radio) ombudsman thought he isn't constrained by the same rules his counterparts at NBC abd CBS are.

You DID forward his replies to your inquiries to his higher-ups, didn't you?

You're much more tolerant than me. Mr. Dvorkin would have been apartment shopping for a box on a steam grate by now if he'd tried that with me.

[not systems]

5. I would expect no less.

They have drifted past the center line.

They are well into the neo-con/neo-lib war party camp
at least the big shows like TOTN, ATC, ME and WE.

All the years that Cookie was presented as credible
voice were just warm up for the current crop of moles.

[Cat Atomic]

6. Didn't two extreme conservatives get appointed to the

board of directors of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting recently? Perhaps they had something to do with hiring the Fox pundits.

As to that reply by the NPR ombudsman- it's extremely unprofessional and childish.

[Cocoa]

7. that's pathetic

Little nailed it with her comment about David Horowitz, Dvorkin's thing about "the academy" was a dead giveaway. He clearly has some kind of hangup that caused him to single out Professor Little.

I wonder, did Dvorkin have a bad experience at a university?

[Timefortruth]

8. The irony is that abandoning journalistic integrity isn't going to

buy them support from the right anymore than it did for CNN or MSN. But it looks like they will have to find that out on their own.

What it will do is disillusion the paid supporters, like myself, who had grown to rely on them for some sort of unbiased reporting.

[pmbryant]

9. Truly pathetic. He never did address the issue.

:eyes:

--Peter

[sendero]

10. At least he replied....

....when I complained about the Iraq war cheerleading back in Feb of last year, I didn't get anything other than the auto-reply.

NPR is merely trading on the good history it built up over many years of good service. Now, their reporting is decidedly un-balanced, and the idea they are trying to appeal to a broad base does not wash. There are hundreds of media outlets that try to appeal to a "broad base".

I urge anyone and everyone to withhold financial support from NPR affiliates. Our money is the only real power we have. If they want the right-wing dollars, that is their right - but they shouldn't get our dollars as well.

[glitch]

26. support individual shows like NOW and Alternative Radio

and community stations instead.

[BOHICA06]

11. You unload a rascist flamethrower

on the man and you expect sweetness and light? Please!

Did you expect him to fall to his knees quivering at the moral superiority of your position? He was put on the defensive and defend he did; at least he said he'd pass on your Overby approval. Heck, having him write back was a victory.

[Don Claybrook]

16. Do you understand what an ombudsman is?

Do you know the job function of an ombudsman? Do you understand his job description?

[BOHICA06]

17. Hmmmmm...

The Mandate and Office of Ombudsman

1. The Ombudsman is the public's representative to National Public Radio, empowered to respond to significant queries, comments and criticisms regarding NPR programming.

2. The Ombudsman will serve as an independent source of information, explanation, amplification and analysis for the public regarding NPR's programming and NPR's adherence to its programming standards and practices.

3. The Ombudsman is empowered to receive complaints from the public regarding NPR programming, and refer the complaints to relevant management for response.

4. Should a complainant deem a response from NPR management unsatisfactory, the Ombudsman is empowered to investigate NPR's standards and practices with regard to the matter raised, respond to the complainant, inform the management of findings and conclusion, and make public any conclusion(s) if the issue is relevant to people other than the complainant. The Ombudsman may also intervene if NPR management fails to provide a timely response to a complaint.

5. The Office of the Ombudsman is completely independent of NPR staff and management, reporting directly to the President and, through the President, to NPR's Board of Directors.

6. The NPR Ombudsman will identify issues and trends in contemporary artistic, editorial, and journalistic broadcast programming for the benefit of NPR's professional staff, member stations, and the public. The Ombudsman will use on-air broadcasts, and online and public discussion groups to present issues and suggest ways for NPR's practices to uphold the highest professional standards.


Doesn't saying anything about being polite or taking it up the six from letter writers. Perhaps the writer should follow-up on what further action has been taken.

[Don Claybrook]

18. You're good with the clipboard

But don't you think the public face of NPR, the interface between listeners and management, should be polite in his demeanor? Yeah, I know the call screeners for the hypocritcal drug addict radio host probably don't act with any politeness, but we're attempting to discuss the behavior of civilized human beings, not Neanderthals. If you want Howard Stern as an ombudsman, more power to you, but Dvorkin clearly failed in his duties.

By the way, what event in 2004 will cause us to bend over, because here it comes again? Is that the etymology of your screen name? Let me in on the joke.

[BOHICA06]

20. Though tongue in cheek...

the response was overtly polite and covertly condecending. Nto nearly in the same spirit as the original email.


No need to hijack the thread...but if the nominee doesn't come from the center - Edwards, Lieberman, Kerry - then it is so!

[outinforce]

12. Snide and Vindictive Gets Snide and Vindictive

My view on this may truly be in the minority here, but I feel obliged to point out that the exchange between Professor Little and Mr. Dvorkin begins with a letter from Prof. Little that can (in my view, anyway) only be described as snide and vindictive.

And that is a real shame, because Prof. Small had many good points to make.

But, apparently, she thought or felt that being snide and using such "hot button" phrases as "they clown and preen" and "two sad fools" would serve her purpose.

And then she wonders why the response she receives is both snide and vindictive.

My experience is that if one wants a polite and thoughtful response, it is usually best to make a polite and thoughtful request.

Snide begets snide. Vindictive begets vindictive. And the message gets lost in the process.

[qb]

14. Not for an ombudsman.

He should have used a professional tone or chosen not to respond.

[outinforce]

19. Perhaps, However.....

I am very familiar with the role, functions, and responsibilities of an ombudsman. VERY familiar.

And while I take your point that Mr. Dvorkin should have used a more professional tone or chosen not to respond, I remain steadfast in my notion that anyone corresponding with an organization -- and especially when one is attempting to convince that organization that it should do something differently -- should avoid the sort of language and tone that Professor Little used.

Look at what she did.

Does she point out with any specificity her complaints against Juan Williams and Mara Liasson? No. Instead of pointing out specific reports or assignments that Williams or Liasson have mis-handled or in which they did not apply sound journalistic judgment, Prof. Little calls them names ("sad fools"), she questions their journalistic credentials ("these so-called journalists), and even goes so far as to suggest that they have compromised their own professional ethics by selling out to the highest bidder.

Instead, in other words, of taking the time to craft a thoughtful complaint about actual reports that Williams or Liasson had actually done, Prof. Little chose to castigate two reporters with whom she apparently disagrees.

I don't blame the ombudsman for treating such a letter with some contempt. I'm sure Professor Little would not appreciate being called a "so-called" Professor, nor would she appreciate having her own professional ethics called into question.

In fact, it strikes me that Dvorkin, in his response, treats Professor Little to a taste of what she has done to both Williams and Liasson.

And she doesn't like it at all. In fact, she calls the response "shameful".

It is just as shameful as her original letter.

In my view.

[hippywife]

21. It doesn't always make a difference.

I sent the following email to Mr. Dvorkin in August regarding an article he had written and was posted at Common Dreams. Even tho I sited specifics and was professional for the most part in the articulation of my concern, I still got no response from him. My guess is that that are so many people holding their feet to the fire these days, he probably has little time for anything but short, terse responses.

Dear Mr. Dvorkin:

I read your essay Journalists' Opinions: The Eunuch in the Harem? at commondreams.org regarding journalists expressing their opinions and it reminded me that there has been some concern lately regarding some of the interview practices at NPR. Namely, not holding subjects accountable for statements made in interviews. One of the most glaring examples was the June 20, 2003 interview by Bob Edwards on Morning Edition "Iraq's Weapons Program Subject of Hearings."
( http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1304909 )

In the midst of Capitol Hill sniggling over whether the term "hearing" or "investigation" should apply when looking into the possibilty that we were led into this conflict by either poor intelligence or purposeful deception, Bob Edwards was interviewing Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Indiana regarding the administration and the intelligence they used to support the war. Mr. Bayh, in the most condescending terms, stated that what the listeners need to understand is that weapons of this kind, particularly biological weapons, are easily hidden and that it takes no more than a jar full of small pox or a backyard pool sized amount of anthrax to inflict serious damage; that no intelligence is ever concrete and the only thing the administration can do is make the best estimations possible based on the information at hand. No kidding? I simply could not believe what I was hearing! I waited, in vain as it turned out, for Mr. Edwards to counter his comments with the fact that this administration on numerous occassions stated unequivocally that WMD's existed in huge quantities (tons even) and they knew where they were to be found. If that was the first question that arouse in my mind, I would have expected it to be the first to come to the mind of a professional journalist. It gave me the feeling that Mr. Edwards was not listening to what was being said but anticipating his own next question on the subject.

In your essay, you stated: "In this pundit-crazed media culture, there are more than enough people who opine as soon as the klieg lights come on. NPR and its listeners deserve a better form of public discourse." I whole-heartedly agree. I find many pundits to be loud, overbearing, and obnoxious. What I am still looking for, however, in this "better form of public discourse" is the kind of excellent independent journalism that holds these subjects accountable for what they say. You don't have to be an in-your-face Chris Matthews or John McLaughlin, to ask what should be an obvious follow-up question to a statement.

I rely on NPR for the majority of my off-line news. It is the only station programmed or ever accessed on my radios, at home and in the car. With the failings of the major corporate news outlets to seriously report or question possible problems with the Bush administration's arguments for this war, I thought I could expect better from NPR. So, while you are "in the process of writing up your ethics guide," please bear in mind, that many of us look to NPR to get to the truth of the matter. With the staff and experience you have at your disposal, this could be done with surgical precision and class, not the bullying tactics of the pundits.

Thank you for taking the time to listen to my concerns.

[qb]

13. Just to clarify: I'm not Professor Little

I'm only posting the e-mails I read at MWO (the comments above the e-mails are mine). Incidentally, I didn't see anything racist in Professor Little's e-mails.

[sendero]

15. Apparantly...

... neither of you have worked in a public service or public relations role. Your job in that role is to make some kind of response to the points presented, regardless of whether or not said points are made with tact.

People with complaints are not always pleasant. People who cannot handle that should seek an alternate career.

The fact is, he jumped to a conclusion that was unwarranted. He never actually addressed the question posed. I give him an 'F'.

[DUreader]

22. NPR Whores Suck Corporate Dick. What Did You Expect?

[Buzz Clik]

24. Dr. Little's lack of civility is remarkable.

Although Dvorkin's comments were equally poor, I don't blame him in the slightest.

NPR is an excellent source of news and uses the conservative filter a lot less than any other outlet that's available at a national level. Considering how the conservatives hate NPR and that they run Washington DC and that the Feds fund (in part) NPR, it isn't surprising that NPR has backed off a bit.

I'm still a loyal listener.

[Printer70]

25. LOL

Humorous exchange. It's next to impossible to reform the media- more drastic action is needed.