NPR Ombudsman Refuses To Speak To Glenn Greenwald About Torture

Bloggasm:

Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald has rarely been one to avoid responding directly to his right wing critics. He's been on Hugh Hewitt' radio show on multiple occasions and has even appeared on Michael Savage's show. As an opinionated pundit, he believes that people like him should be willing to face off with others in public forums that are not always friendly to their views, and he finds those that avoid doing so "cowardly and irresponsible."

Read the whole story: Bloggasm

Comments

[Clairvaux]

NPR is NOT an independent and objective organization.

They, like the MSM, do the will of the power structure. They just do it with a bit more polish and subtlety.

That makes them a more effective propaganda tool for manipulating liberals.

[kamandi777]

Exactly!

[LDnearthesea]

You mean for the manipulating right-wing corporatists!

[Peteo]

As a liberal I sadly have to agree with this comment. The BBC is much more professional and offers truly in depth reporting compared with the silly riverdance loving dilettantes that clog up their programing.

[helonias]

"Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require... for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country."
-- Washington; Sept. 14, 1775

"Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands,"
-- Washington; following the Battle of Trenton 1776

"Not only your Officers, and Soldiers have been treated with a Tenderness due to Fellow Citizens, & Brethren; but even those execrable Parricides [traitors] whose Counsels & Aid have deluged their Country with Blood, have been protected from the Fury of a justly enraged People."
- Washington; letter to his British counterpart, Aug19 1775

"Hell, there"s no reason to rough "em up. You give "em a hot meal and they"ll give you Hitler"s address. Give "em a beer and they"ll introduce you to their sister".
-- George Patton: Speaking about treatment of German prisoners. 1943

[NWNHNM]

Gosh, thanks for the words from the good ole days - you know, when our nation's leaders were human beings.

[Queenie Beanie]

I am not surprised. NPR has been slowly selling pieces of its soul for several years. I no longer listen and instead watch Moyers and Democracy Now.

[LDnearthesea]

I'm wondering if NPR affiliates will ban Democracy Now some time in the future. It wouldn't surprise me.

[zlohcuc]

There is a clearly delineated history of torture that includes reams of gory details about what man is capable of doing to his fellow human beings in the name of God ,truth or just making someone suffer for no apparent reason at all, I defy anyone to review some of these accounts and then defend them. It would be as difficult as defending the holocaust or inquisition. The scale or purpose does not have any bearing on the utter depravity of the practice.

[clevelandchick]

It would seem the corporate (Exxon) and non-profit (read Brookings Institute/Heritage Foundation) sponsors of our National Public Radio are pressuring them to be less than forthright.

[LDnearthesea]

It doesn't "seem." It is!

[MrsFonebone]

If you're the ombuds, then you are supposed to speak up and state the position. You don't have to defend it personally; people understand you are representing an agency or company.
NPR has such a screwed up agenda; they won't say "torture" but they weepingly report endless atrocities throughout the world mixed with happy little survivor stories. They believe "neutral" or "non-commercial" means "above the rules." I was done with them when they were silent when Gwen Ifill--whilst in the midst of writing her worshipful book on Obama, refused to recuse herself from the VP candidate debate, in spite of requests to do so--AND she then played the race card, saying no one would have raised the conflict of interest question to a white reporter--which was utter BS and shows you that people like Gwen don't really believe in equality; it's equality only as long as you are allowed to fall back on race issues whenever you are criticized. NPR allowed her to get away with this. NPR creates a little enclave of very predictable points of view and what are essentially distractions from real and more difficult issues. Got a gloom and doom story about the environment? We'll feature it. Got some story of a noble victim somewhere who is somehow surviving? Top of the programming.
But not too much gloom and doom and please, foreigners and minorities move to the front of the interests. But not women.
NPR has lost its way.

[ibsteve2u]

lollll....in short, NPR/PBS must make everybody happy, or suffer the consequences...

[LDnearthesea]

The consequence is being branded "liberal." In reality it isn't at all. Pacifica Radio doesn't take corporate sponsors. That's a huge difference.

[kingbuzz]

i gave up on National Pentagon Radio long ago.. actually heard them arguing ABOUT this one day.
Amy Goodman runs circles aroun them.

[disintaGreatNation]

I also gave up on NPR.
I, too, believed it had become National Pentagon Radio.
In 2003 (when I stopped listening), NPR was shilling for the war in Iraq, big time.
When I tune in now, it always seems to be a show about Wall Street.
No thanks.

[Peacein09]

Many of us contacted Shepherd about a year before the election because one of the NPR reporters in Iraq blithely stated that information gained from someone she'd seen after he'd been tortured verified Bush's claims (now Obama's?) that Iran was helping the Iraqui "insurgents." We were horrified to hear the nonchalant reference to torture as a apparently legitimate means to get information. I told Shepherd that I would never listen to NPR again. Shepherd responded that the reporter was being recalled stateside because the reporter was exhausted. I told Shepherd I understood that NPR was probably under the direction of a right wing Republican appointee as all of our nation's departments were, but that the reporters, if they wanted to retain a shred of moral decency, should resign in protest.

[ibsteve2u]

"[...] one of the NPR reporters in Iraq blithely stated that information gained from someone she'd seen after he'd been tortured verified Bush's claims [...] but that the reporters, if they wanted to retain a shred of moral decency, should resign in protest."

Given the timing, I wonder if you considered the possibility that such resignations might have lead to the installation of little clones of William Kristol?

Thanks to their reliance upon taxpayer dollars, NPR and PBS are in many ways in the unenviable position of operating "behind enemy lines".

I am pragmatic enough that I neither expect soldiers to resist torture unto death, nor do I expect NPR/PBS to be overly aggressive when a need arises to bite the hand that feeds them.

[koyak23]

The power to define is the power to control.

When NPR sanitizes torture via euphemism,it validates the Bush/Cheney doctrine and mitigates the horror of the war crimes committed in our name.

Shame on NPR !

[GrantedBKNY]

I'm not surprised. After the beating she got on "On The Media" I doubt she would want to do any more interviews. Her stance is practically unsupportable.

http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2009/06/26/02

[ibsteve2u]

I posit a reason for NPR's decision to avoid calling "enhanced interrogation" torture: The will to survive.

The fact is they have to be particular about the truths that they tell directly, else the righties in Congress and across the country will try to kill the public portion of their funding - which is the same situation PBS faces.

The value system - the "patriotism" - of the righties is not flexible enough to encompass freedom of the press if it involves telling any truth that they find to be inconvenient. But still, both PBS and NPR do a darn fine job of conveying the truth - and they convey it even into the rural areas where right-wing radio likes to dictate voting.

Which is why I get nervous when states like Pennsylvania remove funding for public broadcasting from their budgets...it may be fiscally motivated, but it serves only the righties.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

Who cares if NPR doesn't want to speak to Salon? I mean really? Why is this news? Presumably they do not have to speak to Salon.

[Veronica]

No one said they "had to."

Strawman.

[joncushman]

Two people I don't know or care about. One doesn't want to talk to the other. Big whop.

[northstar11]

it is not about the people --it is about the issue of torture------try to stay focused

[Veronica]

Then why bother to comment? It makes me laugh when people wear their ignorance of someone or something as a badge of honor, so much so that they have to tell everyone about it, wearing a pre-emptive bad attitude. You really have to lack self-awareness to go out of your way to comment about something you imply isn't important enough to care about.

[joncushman]

Veronica,

My my aren't you so full of yourself. HuffPost should be posting relevant information on the topic at hand, torture, not some silly childish fight between two bloggers----which I admit I don't care about----reason for my post. Get a clue, this isn't high school.

Huffpost needs to stay focused on providing intelligent content rather than becoming the TMZ of the blogosphere.