Well... I just noticed that I've been donating monthly to WAMU since December 2018! And I didn't realize it! So I called and cancelled my monthly support to them and told them it was because I felt their news coverage was biased. In the developing Uri Berliner story I keep thinking about how the NPR employees who are calling out their own CEO for not defending their coverage and leaving them feeling nervous and longing for more DEI (my language on all that) really believe they are doing good work. They wrote a letter calling for Katherine Maher to make a public rebuke of Uri Berliner's "factual inaccuracies and elisions" and I'm thinking.. "elisions????" These people! But it brought me to the TED talk Katherine Maher made and I am so mortified... she speaks of a "reverence for the truth" being "in the way of finding common ground and getting things done." OMG. Truth is that you cannot change sex and telling children you can is HARMFUL on so many levels and not the righteous work these journalists think it is. I posted a comment on the ted talk on youtube and my favorite part was this: "NPR seems to have replaced subject matter experts with ideology, material reality with implicit bias, and work ethic with identity." I wonder if people can understand what I mean by that sentence.
Am I totally paranoid and is it a far-fetched connection? I am just wondering why NPR decided to run a story on how hard it is to get growth hormones (seems like for legit diseases) right now. Are they trying to increase public sympathy to hormonal treatment of kids before they dive in?
My first reaction to the story was to worry about why there is a shortage... is there some kind of fraudulent use going on here? It seems to be a problem in manufacturing - that's the claim. But, get this, when I did a google search on the topic the article you linked there is being advertised on google as titled: "Prior authorizations make growth hormone shortage worse"
This is another example of manipulation and reporting with an agenda - the agenda is about removing barriers to accessing drugs BUT if anything should have "gate keeping" on it, growth hormones certainly should! And how can pre-authorization make a shortage worse? I feel like they have to make a case that there are children not getting their medication because they can't manage the inconvenience of the pre-authorization. It's a shortage, but is it really about pre-authorization? It just feels dishonest.
When I lived in Boston nearly 25 years ago I was a total NPR junky. My parents proudly supported WHYY when I was growing up and I proudly supported WBUR (Erin Sweeney back then during my time in Boston). In the past six years, I have completely stopped listening or reading any NPR news articles. The last time I supported the stations out of Baltimore or Washington (near me now) was years ago. What is going on? I recently caught the article in the news by Uri Berliner and now I see he's resigned. I am not writing in to condemn NPR or to support Uri. His article served to remind me of a lost love and my yearning to get back together with you is why I am writing. News isn't about ideology and it shouldn't have an agenda. I am still a liberal and, for me, being liberal means analyzing both sides of things, getting at truth, and having compassion for everyone involved. I want to think through the consequences of my actions and do the best I can for ALL the stake holders. I want the same from society, from education, and from research. There is a huge story you are missing right now. There is a medical scandal going on in which young people who are experiencing gender related distress are being exposed to dangerous treatments that do not have the support of a research base that indicates a beneficial outcome. Not only young people and children, but all people are vulnerable in this current situation, and there is a great deal of under reported harm and injustice happening. The Cass Review out of the UK is an in depth piece of work, not ideological in nature, that deserves to be reported on. It isn't all you're missing, though. Ask yourself these questions: Does the removal of healthy body parts sound like a healthy outcome? Is a commitment to life long hormone treatment (poorly studied and well known to be risky) sound like something a child can understand or consent to? Does the blocking of puberty, known to impact brain and body development in dramatic ways, sound like a wise idea? Are young people and children especially susceptible to magical thinking? Do people have a right to protest against another adult taking advantage of them for sexual gratification? Do women and children have a right to specify what they need for privacy? Does it happen that big companies manipulate others to make profits (thinking of big pharm and the porn industry as influencing on transgender policies)? Do female elite athletes deserve fairness in sports? I ask you this, NPR, why aren't you reporting on these stories? Maybe Uri Berliner is onto something here.
If this isn’t proof that what they have been doing, are doing, and plan on continuing to do, biased opinions, then I don’t know what it will take to open people’s eyes and minds
Liberal and non Liberal, I for one will be quick to confess I’m a slow reader, but I certainly have entertained various media outlets, including NPR at one point. Then I started to pay attention and being the inquisitive person that I am, had long ago concluded that the best way to educate myself is to do the research myself. Call it indoctrination or laziness or complacency or whatever, but it is awful and apparent and should be obvious to everyone that no singular media outlet is trustworthy. I’m not that old but old enough to have noticed that everything started to go to shit in late 1998. That summer is when I noticed we’ve all taken a turn, and we’ve been on that path At Least since then.
Well, your research has failed you if it led you to the conclusion that Biden is an elderly puppet on a string. Whatever his shortcomings, Biden is a true statesman and a decent human being, but you cannot say the same for Donald Trump. Personally, I’d rather stick with the guy who inherited a botched pandemic, huge deficits (which, along with a destroyed supply chain caused the inflation Biden has been blamed for), who is not in bed with Putin, who restored NATO, who understands what Article 5 is, and who actually did not lose jobs (like the other guy) but has added 14 million jobs, who believes in bipartisanship, and whose successes include the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act.
If your research leads you to vote for a man motivated by anger and a desire for revenge, who engages in childish name-calling and bullying, who even mocked the stutter that President Biden has worked on his whole life, then you need to find new sources of information. Biden represents old-school values of being nice to people. What's so hard about being nice to others?
I stopped listening to NPR years ago. Why? I had moved from Washington, D.C. to a rural area of the Northeast. Three times in a row, when I got in my car & turned NPR on, they were talking about "trans" people. The last time it was a sympathetic report on a convicted murderer who wanted a sex change operation, on the taxpayer dime. I said, "That's it! I'm done!" and I never listened to them again.
In fact, there are no trans people around here. I've been here 11 years now and never met a single one. People have other issues. But NPR is in a 'bubble' that imagines whatever their cause du jour is, that the universe must trained to revolve around it. They're like an immature college student who converts to a cult. They can't shut up about how the cult is the most important thing in the world. Then they wonder why their friends start abandoning them.
Wake up bubble-people. Every day Americans face difficulties or tragedies that have nothing to do with "trans." We respect and defend the right of transsexuals to live a productive life in peace.
We don't respect the radicals who insist, in faddish form, that the entire world needs to adopt the language of the TRA subcultures. To do so would be a form of prostrating oneself before imagined 'superiors.' (Why not force everyone to adopt the slang of jazz musicians, skateboarders, etc?) Nor do we respect those who try to indoctrinate and brainwash the young and vulnerable.
N.B.: In another state, I had a primary care physician who was a transsexual. She was the best PCP I ever had, and had I not moved, I'd still be her patient. I was so impressed with her, I looked her up online, and that's when I saw a photo from 'back in the day' that essentially told the story, unintentionally. Isn't it ironic that she's also harmed by the ascent of the radicals and the suffocating, self-absorbed do-goodism of a subset of moronic liberals?
I used to be an avid listener until about 10 years ago. It was around that time that *every* *single* story was somehow tied in to race and homosexuality. Then came the constant straw manning of pro-life views. I emailed them quite a bit, never suggesting they stop saying what they were saying, only that they represent the other position. You know, balanced journalism. I can’t imagine how far left they’ve gone in the past four or five years.
You are complicit in the mutilation and sterilization of thousands of children.
I am a Democrat who USED to trust NPR as a news source, but you obviously value your political ideology over your journalistic integrity or protecting our nation's children.
You are on the wrong side of this issue. NPR will go down in history as an instrumental in this horrible medical scandal that will effect generations.
If you do not get on the right side of this, NPR will become synonymous with journalistic cowardice and greed.
You have a journalistic responsibility and you are failing miserably.
How can you sleep at night, knowing that you are DOING THIS?
You cannot keep covering up the truth. Biology will prevail over ideology.
Perhaps if you get on this right side of this right now, and begin DOING YOUR JOB; you MIGHT be lucky enough to be spared the legal ramifications of your actions and deliberate misinformation, but even if you decide to suddenly start performing ACTUAL journalism, you will still have to live with the knowledge that you covered up information that would have protected the lives of children.
I really wish I could remember the particulars, but I can remember sitting in my car last year in a parking lot, listening to NPR on the car radio. They were reporting on the story of a hospital receiving threats for performing gender "affirming" surgeries on minors. What hit me is that the person being interviewed was stressing the hospital "only" was performing top surgery (aka chopping off the breasts of young females.) At the very end of the interview, the NPR interviewer lowered her tone of voice, sotto voce, and mentioned almost in passing something like "you hear anecdotal stories of a few young people who've expressed misgivings...." It hit me right then like never before, how incredibly biased NPR had become. Her comment stood out to me because the story of detransitioner Chloe Cole had been in the news at the same time as this report.
Part of me doesn’t even want to give them the opportunity. I quit supporting them. I don’t have confidence they’ll give it the attention it deserves. Almost says more about their integrity if they dismiss it. Their choice, their demise.
I just sent this note to NPR-All Things Considered
Back in 1975 when I was in college I was interviewed on All Things Considered about a program I created to educate students about terminal illness and end of live care. Back then and for at least the next 35 years I was a regular NPR and ATC listener. Sadly that is no longer the case (although I do still regularly listen to Planet Money) because the lack of objectivity has become a glaring deficiency. A publicly financed news service should encompass the full spectrum of public debate but NPR falls far short of that goal as URI Berliner’s recent essay highlighted and quantified. This brings me to the point of this letter. Last week the much anticipated Cass Report was released in the UK but conspicuously NPR has not covered it. Why not? Could it be because you don’t agree with the findings and recommendations? Is that a reason not to cover such an important and well researched report? If it is then you are failing in your obligation to the people who support your service with their tax dollars. As Berliner pointed out, this would not be the first time your corporation has chosen to ignore a story that didn’t align with your viewpoint.
I submitted. But honestly I don't think it's going to make a difference until the lawsuits start happening. Everything is about money sadly. For now I'm speaking out as much as I can and signing petitions. And keeping reality alive in our home, I'm thankful my daughter isn't asking for medical intervention at this point. If she ever does it will be a hard no.
NPR is just another left wing propoganda machine, like CNN and MSNBC and many other mainstream “ news” outlets.
Well... I just noticed that I've been donating monthly to WAMU since December 2018! And I didn't realize it! So I called and cancelled my monthly support to them and told them it was because I felt their news coverage was biased. In the developing Uri Berliner story I keep thinking about how the NPR employees who are calling out their own CEO for not defending their coverage and leaving them feeling nervous and longing for more DEI (my language on all that) really believe they are doing good work. They wrote a letter calling for Katherine Maher to make a public rebuke of Uri Berliner's "factual inaccuracies and elisions" and I'm thinking.. "elisions????" These people! But it brought me to the TED talk Katherine Maher made and I am so mortified... she speaks of a "reverence for the truth" being "in the way of finding common ground and getting things done." OMG. Truth is that you cannot change sex and telling children you can is HARMFUL on so many levels and not the righteous work these journalists think it is. I posted a comment on the ted talk on youtube and my favorite part was this: "NPR seems to have replaced subject matter experts with ideology, material reality with implicit bias, and work ethic with identity." I wonder if people can understand what I mean by that sentence.
I listen to NPR
NPR sucks
Am I totally paranoid and is it a far-fetched connection? I am just wondering why NPR decided to run a story on how hard it is to get growth hormones (seems like for legit diseases) right now. Are they trying to increase public sympathy to hormonal treatment of kids before they dive in?
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2024/04/17/1245154523/norditropin-growth-hormone-shortage
My first reaction to the story was to worry about why there is a shortage... is there some kind of fraudulent use going on here? It seems to be a problem in manufacturing - that's the claim. But, get this, when I did a google search on the topic the article you linked there is being advertised on google as titled: "Prior authorizations make growth hormone shortage worse"
This is another example of manipulation and reporting with an agenda - the agenda is about removing barriers to accessing drugs BUT if anything should have "gate keeping" on it, growth hormones certainly should! And how can pre-authorization make a shortage worse? I feel like they have to make a case that there are children not getting their medication because they can't manage the inconvenience of the pre-authorization. It's a shortage, but is it really about pre-authorization? It just feels dishonest.
Here's what I wrote:
When I lived in Boston nearly 25 years ago I was a total NPR junky. My parents proudly supported WHYY when I was growing up and I proudly supported WBUR (Erin Sweeney back then during my time in Boston). In the past six years, I have completely stopped listening or reading any NPR news articles. The last time I supported the stations out of Baltimore or Washington (near me now) was years ago. What is going on? I recently caught the article in the news by Uri Berliner and now I see he's resigned. I am not writing in to condemn NPR or to support Uri. His article served to remind me of a lost love and my yearning to get back together with you is why I am writing. News isn't about ideology and it shouldn't have an agenda. I am still a liberal and, for me, being liberal means analyzing both sides of things, getting at truth, and having compassion for everyone involved. I want to think through the consequences of my actions and do the best I can for ALL the stake holders. I want the same from society, from education, and from research. There is a huge story you are missing right now. There is a medical scandal going on in which young people who are experiencing gender related distress are being exposed to dangerous treatments that do not have the support of a research base that indicates a beneficial outcome. Not only young people and children, but all people are vulnerable in this current situation, and there is a great deal of under reported harm and injustice happening. The Cass Review out of the UK is an in depth piece of work, not ideological in nature, that deserves to be reported on. It isn't all you're missing, though. Ask yourself these questions: Does the removal of healthy body parts sound like a healthy outcome? Is a commitment to life long hormone treatment (poorly studied and well known to be risky) sound like something a child can understand or consent to? Does the blocking of puberty, known to impact brain and body development in dramatic ways, sound like a wise idea? Are young people and children especially susceptible to magical thinking? Do people have a right to protest against another adult taking advantage of them for sexual gratification? Do women and children have a right to specify what they need for privacy? Does it happen that big companies manipulate others to make profits (thinking of big pharm and the porn industry as influencing on transgender policies)? Do female elite athletes deserve fairness in sports? I ask you this, NPR, why aren't you reporting on these stories? Maybe Uri Berliner is onto something here.
You want NPR to do what, now?
If this isn’t proof that what they have been doing, are doing, and plan on continuing to do, biased opinions, then I don’t know what it will take to open people’s eyes and minds
https://x.com/uberliner/status/1780610524411048183?s=46
To be honest, I’m not sure what it ultimately is
Liberal and non Liberal, I for one will be quick to confess I’m a slow reader, but I certainly have entertained various media outlets, including NPR at one point. Then I started to pay attention and being the inquisitive person that I am, had long ago concluded that the best way to educate myself is to do the research myself. Call it indoctrination or laziness or complacency or whatever, but it is awful and apparent and should be obvious to everyone that no singular media outlet is trustworthy. I’m not that old but old enough to have noticed that everything started to go to shit in late 1998. That summer is when I noticed we’ve all taken a turn, and we’ve been on that path At Least since then.
"Doing your own research" has led many a voter to join the Trump train. No thanks.
Not doing your own research has led millions to, among other things:
-voting into the latest presidential seat a mannequin who when its string is pulled rambles off a grandpa Simpson story,
-their own death by jab,
-allow their language be destroyed for the sake of “feelings” at the expense of honesty and truth,
-find themselves wondering how we all got here where it’s considered not insane to allow their children to self-mutilation,
-anxiety, loneliness, and depression
-inability to stay on topic and leaving comments about Trump when the topic is NPR lol
-etc
-etc
-ad nauseam, et cetera
Well, your research has failed you if it led you to the conclusion that Biden is an elderly puppet on a string. Whatever his shortcomings, Biden is a true statesman and a decent human being, but you cannot say the same for Donald Trump. Personally, I’d rather stick with the guy who inherited a botched pandemic, huge deficits (which, along with a destroyed supply chain caused the inflation Biden has been blamed for), who is not in bed with Putin, who restored NATO, who understands what Article 5 is, and who actually did not lose jobs (like the other guy) but has added 14 million jobs, who believes in bipartisanship, and whose successes include the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act.
If your research leads you to vote for a man motivated by anger and a desire for revenge, who engages in childish name-calling and bullying, who even mocked the stutter that President Biden has worked on his whole life, then you need to find new sources of information. Biden represents old-school values of being nice to people. What's so hard about being nice to others?
Bless your heart, Kathryn.
I stopped listening to NPR years ago. Why? I had moved from Washington, D.C. to a rural area of the Northeast. Three times in a row, when I got in my car & turned NPR on, they were talking about "trans" people. The last time it was a sympathetic report on a convicted murderer who wanted a sex change operation, on the taxpayer dime. I said, "That's it! I'm done!" and I never listened to them again.
In fact, there are no trans people around here. I've been here 11 years now and never met a single one. People have other issues. But NPR is in a 'bubble' that imagines whatever their cause du jour is, that the universe must trained to revolve around it. They're like an immature college student who converts to a cult. They can't shut up about how the cult is the most important thing in the world. Then they wonder why their friends start abandoning them.
Wake up bubble-people. Every day Americans face difficulties or tragedies that have nothing to do with "trans." We respect and defend the right of transsexuals to live a productive life in peace.
We don't respect the radicals who insist, in faddish form, that the entire world needs to adopt the language of the TRA subcultures. To do so would be a form of prostrating oneself before imagined 'superiors.' (Why not force everyone to adopt the slang of jazz musicians, skateboarders, etc?) Nor do we respect those who try to indoctrinate and brainwash the young and vulnerable.
N.B.: In another state, I had a primary care physician who was a transsexual. She was the best PCP I ever had, and had I not moved, I'd still be her patient. I was so impressed with her, I looked her up online, and that's when I saw a photo from 'back in the day' that essentially told the story, unintentionally. Isn't it ironic that she's also harmed by the ascent of the radicals and the suffocating, self-absorbed do-goodism of a subset of moronic liberals?
Here's an alternative link besides tne provided that accepts comments directed toward NPR management.
https://help.npr.org/contact/s/contact?request=Contact-NPR-management
Years ago I enjoyed NPR and it certainly features musicians I think are great.
But they need to do their job and give equal time (as much as possible) to different opinions on the topics they address.
I used to be an avid listener until about 10 years ago. It was around that time that *every* *single* story was somehow tied in to race and homosexuality. Then came the constant straw manning of pro-life views. I emailed them quite a bit, never suggesting they stop saying what they were saying, only that they represent the other position. You know, balanced journalism. I can’t imagine how far left they’ve gone in the past four or five years.
Here is what I wrote:
I am the mother of a gender-confused child.
Why are you not covering the Cass report?
You are complicit in the mutilation and sterilization of thousands of children.
I am a Democrat who USED to trust NPR as a news source, but you obviously value your political ideology over your journalistic integrity or protecting our nation's children.
You are on the wrong side of this issue. NPR will go down in history as an instrumental in this horrible medical scandal that will effect generations.
If you do not get on the right side of this, NPR will become synonymous with journalistic cowardice and greed.
You have a journalistic responsibility and you are failing miserably.
How can you sleep at night, knowing that you are DOING THIS?
You cannot keep covering up the truth. Biology will prevail over ideology.
Perhaps if you get on this right side of this right now, and begin DOING YOUR JOB; you MIGHT be lucky enough to be spared the legal ramifications of your actions and deliberate misinformation, but even if you decide to suddenly start performing ACTUAL journalism, you will still have to live with the knowledge that you covered up information that would have protected the lives of children.
You have BETRAYED us.
I really wish I could remember the particulars, but I can remember sitting in my car last year in a parking lot, listening to NPR on the car radio. They were reporting on the story of a hospital receiving threats for performing gender "affirming" surgeries on minors. What hit me is that the person being interviewed was stressing the hospital "only" was performing top surgery (aka chopping off the breasts of young females.) At the very end of the interview, the NPR interviewer lowered her tone of voice, sotto voce, and mentioned almost in passing something like "you hear anecdotal stories of a few young people who've expressed misgivings...." It hit me right then like never before, how incredibly biased NPR had become. Her comment stood out to me because the story of detransitioner Chloe Cole had been in the news at the same time as this report.
Part of me doesn’t even want to give them the opportunity. I quit supporting them. I don’t have confidence they’ll give it the attention it deserves. Almost says more about their integrity if they dismiss it. Their choice, their demise.
Some comments on biased reporting at NPR:
https://carolinacurmudgeon.substack.com/p/bias-at-npr-ii
https://carolinacurmudgeon.substack.com/p/npr-iii-ceo-katherine-maher-responds
Wow! What did I just read?
Also, shouldn’t she be a better writer?
I just sent this note to NPR-All Things Considered
Back in 1975 when I was in college I was interviewed on All Things Considered about a program I created to educate students about terminal illness and end of live care. Back then and for at least the next 35 years I was a regular NPR and ATC listener. Sadly that is no longer the case (although I do still regularly listen to Planet Money) because the lack of objectivity has become a glaring deficiency. A publicly financed news service should encompass the full spectrum of public debate but NPR falls far short of that goal as URI Berliner’s recent essay highlighted and quantified. This brings me to the point of this letter. Last week the much anticipated Cass Report was released in the UK but conspicuously NPR has not covered it. Why not? Could it be because you don’t agree with the findings and recommendations? Is that a reason not to cover such an important and well researched report? If it is then you are failing in your obligation to the people who support your service with their tax dollars. As Berliner pointed out, this would not be the first time your corporation has chosen to ignore a story that didn’t align with your viewpoint.
The BBC have been the same in the UK unfortunately. Their coverage has been minimal and has felt like damage limitation. Very disappointing.
I submitted. But honestly I don't think it's going to make a difference until the lawsuits start happening. Everything is about money sadly. For now I'm speaking out as much as I can and signing petitions. And keeping reality alive in our home, I'm thankful my daughter isn't asking for medical intervention at this point. If she ever does it will be a hard no.