You will have to read “NPR’s tweets expose a thin grasp of American history?” See “NewsCut: MPR News Reflections and observations on the news”: http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2017/07/self-evident-truths-our-thin-grasp-of-history/2017-07-01.
It does make me proud to be an MPR member.
Showing posts with label NPR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NPR. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 05, 2017
Monday, January 02, 2017
97 percent of astronomers say Earth orbits Sun
Three percent claim that not enough evidence has been collected.
True Fact has discovered that these "astronomers" are in the employ of the Flat Earth Society. True Fact has also discovered that Flat Earth Society has been primarily funded by John Bigbucks, a billionaire who has been denied contracts with NASA repeatedly.
Although some sites use “True Fact” as part of their name, as far as I know, this pretend news organization is a figment of my imagination
If you would like a primer on separating real news from fake news, see
http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/12/05/503581220/fake-or-real-how-to-self-check-the-news-and-get-the-facts.
True Fact has discovered that these "astronomers" are in the employ of the Flat Earth Society. True Fact has also discovered that Flat Earth Society has been primarily funded by John Bigbucks, a billionaire who has been denied contracts with NASA repeatedly.
Although some sites use “True Fact” as part of their name, as far as I know, this pretend news organization is a figment of my imagination
If you would like a primer on separating real news from fake news, see
http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/12/05/503581220/fake-or-real-how-to-self-check-the-news-and-get-the-facts.
Friday, December 18, 2015
Merry Christmas and other seasonal thoughts
Originally published in Reader Weekly, December 22, 2005
For yet another year, Christmas is controversial. If there isn’t a ruckus about the commercialization of Christmas, there is a ruckus about Christmas not being “inclusive”. Some big box stores have told their “associates” to not wish “guests” “Merry Christmas”; instead the associates are to wish “Happy Holidays”. Some think that this is great because we are a “diverse” nation, others think it is terrible because we are a “Christian” nation, and yet others, possibly the majority, don’t care.
As a freethinker and sentimentalist, I think both sides are expecting too much of other people. I personally don’t believe the Christian overlay to the winter solstice. On the other hand, I love the traditions that have derived from that Christian overlay. It doesn’t bother me to sing “Joy the world, the Lord has come” and other carols because the music is great and it brings back memories of many Christmas celebrations over the years.
Those who want “inclusivity” seem to think that a dominant culture is a dominating culture. Because a larger portion of a society believes one way and acts on it in any fashion, then that portion is dominating all those who don’t believe that way. That is, by saying “Merry Christmas” to everyone, you are making them believe in Christmas.
Some of those who don’t want others to practice such “inclusivity” seem to think that a dominant culture has a right to be a dominating culture. That is, you will say “Merry Christmas” whether you believe it or not.
I think both sides could take a lesson from Irving Berlin, the son of a cantor who fled the anti-Semitic pogroms in Russia. Irving Berlin wrote both “White Christmas” and “Easter Parade”. He didn’t believe in either holiday, but he helped those who did celebrate them with joy.
To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, you can please all of the people some of the time, and you can please some of the people all of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.
Rigidity in viewpoint came up recently in another context. A letter writer to the Star Tribune called Garrison Keillor anti-Christian as well as all of MPR or NPR. That was a surprise to me. Garrison Keillor may pillory hypocrites or gently chide those who have feet of clay, but all the evidence I’ve seen indicates he has the deepest respect for those who are sincere in their beliefs. For as long as I can remember, he has often included hymns and religious singers in his shows. Many MPR programs include religious music, including the annual “Festival of nine lessons and carols” from King’s College in Oxford.
Rigidity is found all across the political spectrum. Many think that Kevin Thompson is hard-nosed and uncharitable. So what do they do; they write hard-nosed and uncharitable letters about Kevin. Hey, he stopped writing for the Reader Weekly; be charitable and let him be.
Speaking of Garrison Keillor, he recently gave an interesting view of Herod’s slaughter of the innocents – it was anti-terrorism. In Herod’s viewpoint, Jesus was a threat to his power; therefore he had to take steps to reduce that threat. Keillor went on to say the message of Christmas is that the weak shall prevail over the powerful.
Holiday spirits of another kind abound at this time of the year both in and out of the news. Before I left for an employee party I decided I would have two beers while there. When I left for the party it was snowing heavily; I decided I would have only one beer. As I drove up Thompson Hill I saw either an accident or a disabled truck on the downhill side that had brought traffic to a crawl in one lane; I decided I would have no beers. When I drove down the hill two hours later, the road was in somewhat better shape, but I was glad I held myself to my promise.
Holiday spirits are not the only thing to be wary of at this time of the year. I often approach curves in the winter with the thought, “Somebody coming the other way could skid over the center line.” As expected, my thoughts are usually not realized. Except for twice in recent memory. The second was this past week at Miller Hill Mall. I approached a sharp turn to my left by Northstar Ford. There was a huge pile of snow on the inside of the corner. Would somebody be crossing the center line? Sure enough, a car coming too fast for the conditions started coming into my lane. I was going rather slowly and stopped without a problem. The other driver managed to recover from her error, but she drove by me like I wasn’t even there. I wonder if she even knew how close she came to spoiling both of our evenings, and holidays.
For yet another year, Christmas is controversial. If there isn’t a ruckus about the commercialization of Christmas, there is a ruckus about Christmas not being “inclusive”. Some big box stores have told their “associates” to not wish “guests” “Merry Christmas”; instead the associates are to wish “Happy Holidays”. Some think that this is great because we are a “diverse” nation, others think it is terrible because we are a “Christian” nation, and yet others, possibly the majority, don’t care.
As a freethinker and sentimentalist, I think both sides are expecting too much of other people. I personally don’t believe the Christian overlay to the winter solstice. On the other hand, I love the traditions that have derived from that Christian overlay. It doesn’t bother me to sing “Joy the world, the Lord has come” and other carols because the music is great and it brings back memories of many Christmas celebrations over the years.
Those who want “inclusivity” seem to think that a dominant culture is a dominating culture. Because a larger portion of a society believes one way and acts on it in any fashion, then that portion is dominating all those who don’t believe that way. That is, by saying “Merry Christmas” to everyone, you are making them believe in Christmas.
Some of those who don’t want others to practice such “inclusivity” seem to think that a dominant culture has a right to be a dominating culture. That is, you will say “Merry Christmas” whether you believe it or not.
I think both sides could take a lesson from Irving Berlin, the son of a cantor who fled the anti-Semitic pogroms in Russia. Irving Berlin wrote both “White Christmas” and “Easter Parade”. He didn’t believe in either holiday, but he helped those who did celebrate them with joy.
To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, you can please all of the people some of the time, and you can please some of the people all of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time.
Rigidity in viewpoint came up recently in another context. A letter writer to the Star Tribune called Garrison Keillor anti-Christian as well as all of MPR or NPR. That was a surprise to me. Garrison Keillor may pillory hypocrites or gently chide those who have feet of clay, but all the evidence I’ve seen indicates he has the deepest respect for those who are sincere in their beliefs. For as long as I can remember, he has often included hymns and religious singers in his shows. Many MPR programs include religious music, including the annual “Festival of nine lessons and carols” from King’s College in Oxford.
Rigidity is found all across the political spectrum. Many think that Kevin Thompson is hard-nosed and uncharitable. So what do they do; they write hard-nosed and uncharitable letters about Kevin. Hey, he stopped writing for the Reader Weekly; be charitable and let him be.
Speaking of Garrison Keillor, he recently gave an interesting view of Herod’s slaughter of the innocents – it was anti-terrorism. In Herod’s viewpoint, Jesus was a threat to his power; therefore he had to take steps to reduce that threat. Keillor went on to say the message of Christmas is that the weak shall prevail over the powerful.
Holiday spirits of another kind abound at this time of the year both in and out of the news. Before I left for an employee party I decided I would have two beers while there. When I left for the party it was snowing heavily; I decided I would have only one beer. As I drove up Thompson Hill I saw either an accident or a disabled truck on the downhill side that had brought traffic to a crawl in one lane; I decided I would have no beers. When I drove down the hill two hours later, the road was in somewhat better shape, but I was glad I held myself to my promise.
Holiday spirits are not the only thing to be wary of at this time of the year. I often approach curves in the winter with the thought, “Somebody coming the other way could skid over the center line.” As expected, my thoughts are usually not realized. Except for twice in recent memory. The second was this past week at Miller Hill Mall. I approached a sharp turn to my left by Northstar Ford. There was a huge pile of snow on the inside of the corner. Would somebody be crossing the center line? Sure enough, a car coming too fast for the conditions started coming into my lane. I was going rather slowly and stopped without a problem. The other driver managed to recover from her error, but she drove by me like I wasn’t even there. I wonder if she even knew how close she came to spoiling both of our evenings, and holidays.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
More info on poll linking knowledge with news source
I sent "Circular search for poll results on what you know and what you watch" to Fairleigh Dickinson University's Public Mind and received a nice reply from Prof. Peter J. Wooley, founding Executive Director of Public Mind.
I am not sure why I only saw one page of the eleven page report last week. Maybe I had fiddled with my preferences in Firefox so that a web page now is automatically opening an associated PDF file.
I have now read the full report. I also read the article that Prof. Wooley wrote with his colleague Dan Cassini, see "Fox News Does Not Make You Dumb: Researchers Respond to Critics", Huffington Post, 2012-05-15. Interestingly, when I read the article for my first post in this series I saw no reference to this rebuttal, and that article was posted a week after Wooley and Cassini's article.
The numbers that Public Mind published were weighted numbers that considered the correct answer and some demographics about the respondents. Thus, the results were all under 2.0, leading rushed readers like me to assume that most people only got at most two answers correctly. You can see all the questions at http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/final.pdf.
I am a bit confused that they mention eight questions in the tables but list nine questions in the text. I answered seven correctly, not remembering who "won" the Presidential Primary in New Hampshire and what the deal was to pass the payroll tax deduction extension.
However, the overall results were dismal. Regardless of political leanings, 62 percent of the respondents answered four or less questions correctly, with 57 percent and 63 percent for Democrats and Republicans, respectively. I wouldn't draw any conclusions from that last difference. But, if the overall sample is representative of our voters, over half the eligible voters not being able to answer half or less of some standard questions about the news does not bear well for our democracy.
We can't attribute these results to TV news. Seventy-two percent of the respondents claim to get some of their news from a local newspaper, and the spread according to political leaning is only four percent to either side. Maybe it is that too many of us filter the news to our own biases.
Oh, well! There's nothing new about biased interpretation of events. It's been going on in this country for over 250 years! We have survived this long, maybe we'll get some leaders now and then who can stand above partisanship and see farther than some narrow interests.
I am not sure why I only saw one page of the eleven page report last week. Maybe I had fiddled with my preferences in Firefox so that a web page now is automatically opening an associated PDF file.
I have now read the full report. I also read the article that Prof. Wooley wrote with his colleague Dan Cassini, see "Fox News Does Not Make You Dumb: Researchers Respond to Critics", Huffington Post, 2012-05-15. Interestingly, when I read the article for my first post in this series I saw no reference to this rebuttal, and that article was posted a week after Wooley and Cassini's article.
The numbers that Public Mind published were weighted numbers that considered the correct answer and some demographics about the respondents. Thus, the results were all under 2.0, leading rushed readers like me to assume that most people only got at most two answers correctly. You can see all the questions at http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/final.pdf.
I am a bit confused that they mention eight questions in the tables but list nine questions in the text. I answered seven correctly, not remembering who "won" the Presidential Primary in New Hampshire and what the deal was to pass the payroll tax deduction extension.
However, the overall results were dismal. Regardless of political leanings, 62 percent of the respondents answered four or less questions correctly, with 57 percent and 63 percent for Democrats and Republicans, respectively. I wouldn't draw any conclusions from that last difference. But, if the overall sample is representative of our voters, over half the eligible voters not being able to answer half or less of some standard questions about the news does not bear well for our democracy.
We can't attribute these results to TV news. Seventy-two percent of the respondents claim to get some of their news from a local newspaper, and the spread according to political leaning is only four percent to either side. Maybe it is that too many of us filter the news to our own biases.
Oh, well! There's nothing new about biased interpretation of events. It's been going on in this country for over 250 years! We have survived this long, maybe we'll get some leaders now and then who can stand above partisanship and see farther than some narrow interests.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Circular search for poll results on what you know and what you watch
I followed up on my suspicions of the poll results in "Quote of the day - Fox 'news'" by clicking the link from "No News Is Better Than Fox News, Finds Mean Old Science", Don Hamel, Addicting Info, 2012-05-23, to "updated study from Fairleigh Dickinson University". That page gave only two of the questions: “Which party has the greatest number of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives?” and a question about the deal linking the payroll tax cut and the Keystone XL pipeline.
At the bottom of the page is a box containing "Methodology, questions, and tables always on the web at http://publicmind.fdu.edu." That takes me to the home page of Public Mind. The links for each reference to the "What you know depends on what you watch" study take me back to the same PDF file. My suspicions are still unsatisfied.
I'll send links to this blog to publicmind@fdu.edu. If I get in additional information, I'll post it as soon as I can. Then we may see how well we fare on this poll.
Update: I received a reply from Public Mind. See "More info on poll linking knowledge with news source".
At the bottom of the page is a box containing "Methodology, questions, and tables always on the web at http://publicmind.fdu.edu." That takes me to the home page of Public Mind. The links for each reference to the "What you know depends on what you watch" study take me back to the same PDF file. My suspicions are still unsatisfied.
I'll send links to this blog to publicmind@fdu.edu. If I get in additional information, I'll post it as soon as I can. Then we may see how well we fare on this poll.
Update: I received a reply from Public Mind. See "More info on poll linking knowledge with news source".
Tuesday, May 01, 2012
Republicans are not republicans
The current Republican party is in no way republican. The word "republican" comes from the Latin "res publica" meaning public thing. In the Eighteenth Century Anglo-American world, it meant considering the public good over private gain. In the Twenty-First Century United States too many Republicans consider the private good of large corporations over the public good of a well-governed nation.
So many Republicans do the bidding of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and take big bags of campaign donations from the member companies to promote these companies' private gain, I wonder if the Republicans shouldn't be called ALEC's Bag-Time Band.
Fortunately, we do still have a republic with a democratic foundation. Some of the people are getting fed up with a narrow-minded party that many movements have begun to get us back to some semblance of civility and interest in the public good.
There is the Coffee Party that calls for "civility and reason". Although many of its stances might be considered on the left, it is more for people rather than corporations.
It has a "community" called Coffee Party Conservatives: The Conservative Side of the Coffee Party USA, but it is a aggregator of news that generally finds fault with the current Republican Party, though Obama and the Democratic Party do get a bit of criticism.
One of the interesting articles referenced is "A Phoenix Rising: Common-Good Conservatism" by Michael Stafford and D.R. Tucker, Truthout, 2012-04-27. Stafford and Tucker are or were Republicans.
Even a member of the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute, Norman Ornstein, along with Thomas E. Mann has written a critique of the current Republicans: "It's Even Worse Than It Looks: How The American Constitutional System Collided With The New Politics Of Extremism"
by Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein. You can listen to an interview of them on NPR and read a summary of the interview at "Extremism In Congress: 'Even Worse Than It Looks'?", 2012-04-30.
So many Republicans do the bidding of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and take big bags of campaign donations from the member companies to promote these companies' private gain, I wonder if the Republicans shouldn't be called ALEC's Bag-Time Band.
Fortunately, we do still have a republic with a democratic foundation. Some of the people are getting fed up with a narrow-minded party that many movements have begun to get us back to some semblance of civility and interest in the public good.
There is the Coffee Party that calls for "civility and reason". Although many of its stances might be considered on the left, it is more for people rather than corporations.
It has a "community" called Coffee Party Conservatives: The Conservative Side of the Coffee Party USA, but it is a aggregator of news that generally finds fault with the current Republican Party, though Obama and the Democratic Party do get a bit of criticism.
One of the interesting articles referenced is "A Phoenix Rising: Common-Good Conservatism" by Michael Stafford and D.R. Tucker, Truthout, 2012-04-27. Stafford and Tucker are or were Republicans.
Even a member of the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute, Norman Ornstein, along with Thomas E. Mann has written a critique of the current Republicans: "It's Even Worse Than It Looks: How The American Constitutional System Collided With The New Politics Of Extremism"
by Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein. You can listen to an interview of them on NPR and read a summary of the interview at "Extremism In Congress: 'Even Worse Than It Looks'?", 2012-04-30.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Republicans again oppose true free markets
We listen to Minnesota Public Radio regularly and are Sustaining Members, but we find tiresome the frequent announcements by MPR President Bill Kling about needing to get federal funding.
I often wonder why federal funding is needed but I don't think the bill to cut federal funding of public broadcasting, H.R. 1076, is really based on budget concerns.
It is really an attack on a source of news and commentary that doesn't follow the current Republican line. One could say that it wants to whip the boy who said the emperor has no clothes.
What is really interesting that H.R. 1076 also prohibits federal funds being used to purchase NPR content. This doesn't sound very free market to me. It looks like it's OK to purchase Fox News content with federal funds but not NPR content. And Fox News gets far more federal subsidies than NPR.
One, News Corp paid taxes at a six percent rate while Disney paid 31 percent. The mickey mouse network paid less tax than the real Mickey Mouse company!!
Two, bailout money for the likes of GM has been used to buy ads on Fox. Where's the bill to prohibit this?
See "End the Federal Funding of Fox News", The Daily Kos, 2011-03-21.
I often wonder why federal funding is needed but I don't think the bill to cut federal funding of public broadcasting, H.R. 1076, is really based on budget concerns.
It is really an attack on a source of news and commentary that doesn't follow the current Republican line. One could say that it wants to whip the boy who said the emperor has no clothes.
What is really interesting that H.R. 1076 also prohibits federal funds being used to purchase NPR content. This doesn't sound very free market to me. It looks like it's OK to purchase Fox News content with federal funds but not NPR content. And Fox News gets far more federal subsidies than NPR.
One, News Corp paid taxes at a six percent rate while Disney paid 31 percent. The mickey mouse network paid less tax than the real Mickey Mouse company!!
Two, bailout money for the likes of GM has been used to buy ads on Fox. Where's the bill to prohibit this?
See "End the Federal Funding of Fox News", The Daily Kos, 2011-03-21.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Our way is good; your way is bad
There is a guy going around with a video camera, setting up crazy situations, and getting people to say silly things. He then publishes his videos and the right jumps over the follies of the few as indicative of how bad the whole organization is. He did it against ACORN and now he has done it against NPR. ACORN has closed its doors; NPR will probably survive because it has many well-heeled supporters.
However, if somebody entraps a Republican like Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, it's called unfair and brushed off as inconsequential.
Subsidies for green energy are bad; energy costs should be determined by free market forces.
But the same people who say this want to supply subsidies to the oil and nuclear industries.
Interestingly, the nuclear industry is not supported by the free market; banks and investors think they are too risky. See "Japan disaster may mean setback for U.S. nuclear energy", Washington Post, Jia Lynn Yang, 2011-03-13.
However, if somebody entraps a Republican like Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, it's called unfair and brushed off as inconsequential.
Subsidies for green energy are bad; energy costs should be determined by free market forces.
But the same people who say this want to supply subsidies to the oil and nuclear industries.
Interestingly, the nuclear industry is not supported by the free market; banks and investors think they are too risky. See "Japan disaster may mean setback for U.S. nuclear energy", Washington Post, Jia Lynn Yang, 2011-03-13.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)