Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NPR News Take on DADT Report: "Significant Minority" "Significant Minority" "Significant Minority"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
alcibiades_mystery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:35 PM
Original message
NPR News Take on DADT Report: "Significant Minority" "Significant Minority" "Significant Minority"
NPR News, which, over the last six years or so, has become a complete joke of nicely packaged conservative schlock, apparently finds the meaning of the DADT report to be that a significant minority of service members in some branches (i.e., the Marine Corps) have a problem with repeal of DADT. I know this because I must have heard the term "Significant Minority" about 45 times in the hour or so that my wife had NPR, both this morning and in the car when picking up the kids. (If it was my choice, I'd just listen to music). "Significant Minority" OPPOSE repeal. That's NPR's interpretation of a report that shows more than 70% of service members in aggregate don't give a flying fuck if the outrageous DADT law is repealed. SEVENTY fucking PERCENT.

Here's how they report it:

"The report shows that closetothreequartersseelittletoproblemwithrepeal. HOWEVER, a SIGNIFICANT MINORITY of COMBAT TROOPS and MARINES OPPOSE REPEAL. Let me tell you more about that SIGNIFICANT MINORITY who OPPOSE REPEAL for the next three minutes, just in case you actually heard the first part (whispered: about the overwhelming majority who see no fucking issue at all). Blah blah blah "Significant Minority" blah blah blah "Significant Minority" Blah blah blah "Significant Minority" blah blah blah "Significant Minority," and exeunt."

It is disgraceful reporting, clearly intended to kibosh repeal. Perhaps they do this in the interest of so-called balance. But it is disgusting. Reminds me again why NPR doesn't see dollar one from me until they clean up their fucking act. It's become a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. You have it correct.
You didn't misjudge the language. It's intentional, not accidental. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. from the official report's summary...
Consistently, the survey results revealed a large group of around 50–55% of Service
members who thought that repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell would have mixed or no effect;
another 15–20% who said repeal would have a positive effect; and about 30% who said it
would have a negative effect.7 The results of the spouse survey are consistent. When spouses
were asked about whether repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell would affect their preference for
their Service member’s future plans to stay in the military, 74% said repeal would have no
effect, while only 12% said “I would want my spouse to leave earlier.”8

To be sure, these survey results reveal a significant minority—around 30% overall
(and 40–60% in the Marine Corps and in various combat arms specialties)
—who predicted
in some form and to some degree negative views or concerns about the impact of a repeal
of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Any personnel policy change for which a group that size predicts
negative consequences must be approached with caution. However, there are a number
of other factors that still lead us to conclude that the risk of repeal to overall military
effectiveness is low.

The reality is that there are gay men and lesbians already serving in today’s U.S.
military, and most Service members recognize this. As stated before, 69% of the force
recognizes that they have at some point served in a unit with a co-worker they believed to be
gay or lesbian.9 Of those who have actually had this experience in their career, 92% stated
that the unit’s “ability to work together” was “very good,” “good,” or “neither good nor poor,”
while only 8% stated it was “poor” or “very poor.”10 Anecdotally, we also heard a number
of Service members tell us about a leader, co-worker, or fellow Service member they greatly
liked, trusted, or admired, who they later learned was gay; and how once that person’s sexual
orientation was revealed to them, it made little or no difference to the relationship.11 Both
the survey results and our own engagement of the force convinced us that when Service
members had the actual experience of serving with someone they believe to be gay, in general
unit performance was not affected negatively by this added dimension.

(clip). However, later on...)
However, while a higher percentage of Service members in warfighting units predict
negative effects of repeal, the percentage distinctions between warfighting units and the entire
military are almost non-existent when asked about the actual experience of serving in a unit with
someone believed to be gay. For example, when those in the overall military were asked about
the experience of working with someone they believed to be gay or lesbian, 92% stated that their
unit’s “ability to work together,” was “very good, “good” or “neither good nor poor.”18 Meanwhile,
in response to the same question, the percentage is 89% for those in Army combat arms units
and 84% for those in Marine combat arms units—all very high percentages.19
(clip)
In the course of our assessment, it became apparent to us that, aside from the moral
and religious objections to homosexuality, much of the concern about “open” service is
driven bymisperceptions and stereotypes
about what it would mean if gay Service members
were allowed to be “open” about their sexual orientation. Repeatedly, we heard Service
members express the view that “open” homosexuality would lead to widespread and overt
displays of effeminacy among men, homosexual promiscuity, harassment and unwelcome
advances within units, invasions of personal privacy, and an overall erosion of standards of
conduct, unit cohesion, and morality. Based on our review, however, we conclude that these
concerns about gay and lesbian Service members who are permitted to be “open” about
their sexual orientation are exaggerated, and not consistent with the reported experiences
of many Service members.

In today’s civilian society, where there is no law that requires gay men and lesbians
to conceal their sexual orientation in order to keep their job, most gay men and lesbians
still tend to be discrete about their personal lives, and guarded about the people with whom
they share information about their sexual orientation. We believe that, in the military
environment, this would be true even more so. According to a survey conducted by RAND of
a limited number of individuals who anonymously self-identified as gay and lesbian Service
members, even if Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell were repealed, only 15% of gay and lesbian Service
members would like to have their sexual orientation known to everyone in their unit.12 This
conclusion is also consistent with what we heard from gay Service members in the course
of this review:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Owl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Hey NPR, way to play down the insignificant majority
they've really been sucking lately -- what a bunch of tools...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. "playing down the insignificant majority" is a frikkin American VALUE now,
silly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. We shouldn't even bother trying to save federal NPR funding.
A non-alternative NPR, an NPR that acts just like the MSM, simply can't be worth having. The good things about NPR are basically all gone anyway.

NPR's been dead since Cokie Roberts first clocked in there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
5. Just like a significant minority of Americans opposed desegregation
too bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
6. We must cater to the bigots
That's what I hear. "Gee, we'd like to follow the Constitution and everything but, you know, there's just a significant minority of people who can't quite see their way clear to granting all citizens every right under the Constitution. It's too bad, because we'd really like the country to be for everyone in it, but the bigots won't let us, despite their small and dwindling numbers. Oh well, we tried."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindandSoul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
7. Another "free" media turned coat!. . .So unfair. . . I will not send my contritubion any more!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. I was part of the significant minority that voted for John Kerry in 2004
And I don't recall George W. Bush soliciting my opinion over the next four years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Correction: you were in the insignificant majority
silly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rgbecker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. Jim Lehrer was in the Marines.....just saying. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. BULLSHIT! I listened to those reports and they said nothing of the sort...
they did accurately report that the Marines did not like the idea, and that most of the opposition in other forces came from combat units.

They also reported, almost incessantly, that the majority of those polled supported the repeal of DADT and would have no problem serving with gays. Even the combat troops who were against the idea generally said they could deal with it if it happened.

(I'm giving them more money this year.)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
13. i'm with you
i have pushed in the CD too many times lately behind their right wing political reporting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
14. I just listened to what you're talking about....FUCK NPR!
FUCK THEM AND THE HOMOPHOBIC HORSE THEY RODE IN ON...It was he most disgusting thing they have ever done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scruffy1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-10 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
15. Turned off NPR years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC