| The announcer encouraged audience members, nationwide, to submit questions. I raced to my computer and eagerly typed my query. As I clicked the button to post, I realized I neglected to do as the instructions advised. I did not include my hometown. Troubled by my error, I telephoned the main National Public Radio switchboard. I was transferred to the person in-the-know. The producer and I discussed what I had done, how I could correct my mistake, and my excitement for the upcoming debate. I was told to resubmit my question and I did as directed.
Expectant as I pondered the possibilities, I wondered. Might this be the debate of my dreams? I hoped this panel discussion would be as the Heartland Presidential Forum. During that event, citizens of the region had an opportunity to hear from each candidate. With the exclusion of one unscripted, unforeseen technical glitch, that allowed Hillary Clinton to speak for moments more, every Presidential hopeful had equal time to address what matters to the common man. Aspirants stood unaccompanied by adversaries. Face-to-face with real people, contenders for the Office of the President heard the tales folks told and answered their questions. It was a beautiful assembly to behold.
Then, on December 3, the day prior to the National Public Radio Democratic Debate, my dreams were shattered. I listen to a lengthy program, where the journalist discussed their plans. My heart sank. As the correspondents described the format, I was certain, this get-together would be as all those seen or heard on "popular" media, slanted towards the supposed front-runners.
I chatted with a friend that was also looking forward to the transmission. We shared our sorrow; yet, we hoped we would be wrong. Indeed, my interpretation for what was to come was accurate.
On December 4, 2007, I scheduled my life around the National Public Radio debate. As I listened, again my heart sank. The speakers were as they have been in each mainstream program. Hillary, Obama, and John were the focus and featured prominently. The powerful three are so well known, Americans recognize and address them by their first names. Joseph Biden was the sometimes foil. Mike Gravel was the candidate not-to-be-taken-seriously, and Dennis Kucinich was to-be avoided-at-any-cost. If the Congressman were allowed to speak, he might connect with the listeners in an authentic manner. Then, what would this nation's powerbrokers do?
What, a listener might say, National Public Radio is pure. It is the people's choice. Are there not studies or polls that state this is the least biased broadcast service. Perhaps there were or are; however, we must consider an image built in the past may linger.
[L]ittle evidence has ever been presented for a left bias at NPR, and FAIR's latest study gives it no support. Looking at partisan sources-including government officials, party officials, campaign workers and consultants-Republicans outnumbered Democrats by more than 3 to 2 (61 percent to 38 percent). A majority of Republican sources when the GOP controls the White House and Congress may not be surprising, but Republicans held a similar though slightly smaller edge (57 percent to 42 percent) in 1993, when Clinton was president and Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. And a lively race for the Democratic presidential nomination was beginning to heat up at the time of the 2003 study.
Partisans from outside the two major parties were almost nowhere to be seen, with the exception of four Libertarian Party representatives who appeared in a single story (Morning Edition , 6/26/03).
Republicans not only had a substantial partisan edge, individual Republicans were NPR 's most popular sources overall, taking the top seven spots in frequency of appearance. George Bush led all sources for the month with 36 appearances, followed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld (8) and Sen. Pat Roberts (6). Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Secretary of State Colin Powell, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer and Iraq proconsul Paul Bremer all tied with five appearances each.
Might we consider another account; NPR Touts Pro-Nuke 'Environmentalists' Network's own nuclear links undisclosed. In August 2007, a likely too scant readership learned of what some sharp listeners surmise.
One factor that is relevant to NPR's cheerleading for nuclear power is its own financial links to the industry. According to NPR's website, between 1993 and 2005, the public radio service received between $250,000 and $500,000 from Constellation Energy, which belongs to Nustart Energy, a 10-company consortium pushing for new nuclear power plant construction. During the same period, another nuclear operator, Sempra Energy, donated between $50,000 and $100,000 to NPR. This potential conflict of interest was not disclosed in the August 15 segment, or in any other of NPR's recent largely industry-friendly reports. (NPR has, in the past, insisted that the corporate "underwriting" money it receives has no bearing on its coverage--a defense that would seem to undercut the rationale for NPR's existence as a noncommercial broadcaster.)
To think, no one, no organization is influenced by those who allow them to survive is an interesting notion, although common sense would tell us this is quite a stretch. Without money to endure, there is no National Public Radio. Do listeners not hear that claim during each fund drive.?
National Public Radio may hope we will believe that the evidence is only circumstantial; however, there is ample reason to believe "Public" radio leans towards monied moguls. Curious souls who search, further discover there is much to call into question. Why might the once six-year Wal-Mart Board member,, Hillary Clinton be allotted so much more time to speak than a less well-connected candidate? Perchance it is because National Public Radio receives major, as in Million Dollars Plus, donations from this corporation. Wal-Mart, a company that more than profits from the National Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA], obviously would not wish for Congressman Dennis Kucinich to speak.
The people's candidate, Dennis Kucinich advocates an end to the "free" trade agreement, just as the American workers do. Representative Kucinich understands the harm this contract caused and the hazards that will befall laborers in this country if the policy continues. However, Dennis, a lifetime Union member was not given an opportunity to speak on the topic, although he tried to.
Inskeep: Candidates, we've just been doing some reporting in the last few days from Marshalltown, Iowa, a city that I know many of you have visited. This is a city with a lot of immigrants, a number of illegal immigrants. There have been immigration raids there. And that raises questions about citizens in places like that all over America.
Some citizens in Marshalltown turn in illegal immigrants, some take them in. There's actually a person who's been indicted for sheltering immigrants, which raises a question that I'd like to put to you: What obligations do American citizens have when it comes to illegal immigrants?
And let's start with Senator Obama. Would you expect Americans, if you're president - January 2009, immigration reform, whatever you want hasn't happened yet. Would you expect Americans to turn in illegal immigrants when they come across them?
Of course, let us begin with Barack Obama. He is in the same league with National Public Radio backers [bankers]. Time Warner is among the corporations that fund the broadcasters and Barack. The Illinois Senator loves their financial support [contributions or backing], as does NPR. Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase & Company, and Morgan Stanley, who contribute to the Obama campaign, certainly, these institutions are sensitive to the immigration situation. Barack Obama takes the expected strong stance against immigration, and then reminds the business brass they need not fear a loss of laborers. The individuals already in the States will realize a pathway towards citizenship.
Corporations are consoled and the candidate confident all will be well. As long as we do what has been done there will be no change, and after all, is that not the truest issue. Profiteers do not wish to relinquish power.
Mister Inskeep understands this idea. What is ideal for the powerbrokers is perfect for his employer. Thus, in the spirit of judicious journalism the moderator moves on to an aspirant not thought a likely nominee; however, Christopher Dodd is not a threat to the system or the status quo. Inskeep inquired.
Inskeep: You interview a number of applicants. They all seem very nice. They seem like they would take care of the kids, but it would appear that their documents may not be in order. What would you want an American to do?
Senator Dodd responded. As he spoke, he dared to include the unthinkable issue. He referred to trade agreements and how as a nation we must consider what we do on both sides of the border. Christopher Dodd offered . . .
Instead of improving the quality of working conditions that would give people in these countries a chance to stay in their own nations, which most of them would prefer to do, we're encouraging people to come here by not having trading agreements that don't insist upon -
Corporate sponsors may not wish to discuss that topic. Low wages, high profits, that seems sensible to those that benefit from such inequitable practices. Aware of the delicate balance between big business interests and that of the immigrant and American worker, moderator Steve Inskeep redirected the discussion.
Inskeep: We're going to talk more about that, those issues, as we go along here.
Unexpectedly, the host dared to turn to Dennis Kucinich; however, he carefully crafted his approach. National Public Radio must broach the discussion of trade with caution, if at all. Inskeep, as he posed his inquiry, reminded Congressman Kucinich of the limits. He was kind enough to acknowledge that Dennis might know of real people.
Inskeep: But sticking with real people, Congressman Kucinich, the real person in that situation, what should they do?
Representative Kucinich: Rely on the Constitution. You know, we don't encourage vigilantism in this country. We have a Constitution, we have due process, we have equal protection, we have habeas corpus. This administration, as - like - you know, would like to shred the Constitution and deny people all those rights. But when we get into that, what we do, we take the path of denying constitutional rights, and we're back to Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and all those other violations of rights that we're ashamed of now. And I'm saying that we have to realize that these are economic refugees from NAFTA.
You know, I've said it over and over. Cancel NAFTA. Negotiate a new trade agreement with Mexico based on workers rights, human rights, [and] environmental quality principles. Give a path to legalization for the people who have been here. You can't send them home willy-nilly. You have to have a way in which our immigration policy resonates with the deeper principles of inclusiveness in America, as symbolized by our Statue of Liberty.
Inskeep: We may get to NAFTA as well, time permitting.
However, astute listeners grasp there are only moments enough for what works well for the corporate sponsors and contributors that offer enough cash to shape the agenda. Perceptive persons acknowledge time is a fascinating construct. Man makes time for what he or she thinks a priority and has not a second for what might cause great concern. Correspondents understand conflicts of interest are ill-advised. Sponsors would not wish to air dirty laundry. Hence, if National Public Radio broadcasters are to direct a question to the one Presidential aspirant that could provide the people with a voice, they must remember, Dennis Kucinich must be silenced swiftly.
Norris: Representative Kucinich, very quickly.
Dennis responds speedily. He reminds the audience that he was not late to realize we are a global community. Every nation is connected to the other. We must understand the effect of every given decision. Our actions cause reactions. Dennis Kucinich helps us understand that we can no longer react belatedly. We must do more than read briefs. Before a President devises a plan, he or she must look at the broader picture.
Representative Kucinich: Yes. And I may be the only one up here who actually voted against China trade because of the concerns I had that the U.S. was not going to be able to maintain its manufacturing base, which is central to maintaining a middle class. What we've seen is that without solid trade policies, we're undermined. Without a strength-through-peace doctrine of rejecting war as an instrument of policy, we're going to keep borrowing money from China. Let us not forget we're borrowing money from China to finance the war in Iraq. And in addition to that, the speculation on Wall Street has weakened our economy.
We need a policy of constructive engagement with China, stop the arms race with them, work to make sure we have a global climate change treaty with China, get them to transition out of nuclear and coal and oil. You know, I'm talking about a whole new direction that's based on a doctrine of strength through peace, and I have a voting record up here to back it up, unlike some of my esteemed colleagues.
The hosts listened without much enthusiasm or interest. Each knows which side of the bread holds the butter. Without any caution or concern for the minutes the Senator from New York might need to make her point, moderator Michele Norris offered Hillary Clinton more than enough moments to explore as she might.
Norris: Senator Clinton, do we need them more than they need us?
Apparently, in the hearts, minds, and pocketbooks of National Public Radio and its corporate sponsors, America needs the Former First Lady Clinton more than we need, [or want] Dennis Kucinich. Regardless of The Nation Magazine Poll, the Democracy for America (DFA) survey, or the Progressive Democrats of America sample each of which places Dennis Kucinich as America's first choice among those that gather information from more than mainstream sources, citizens of this country are told Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards are the only candidates of note.
Indeed, Dennis Kucinich is not a recognized name. Many Americans ask, "Who?" We need not wonder why. When the media does mention Presidential hopeful Kucinich, they frequently misrepresent the Congressman. Rarely, was our possible President, Dennis Kucinich, given an opportunity to speak during this skewed NPR Democratic Debate. In truth, there were very few occasions in which Presidential hopeful, Kucinich, was granted a chance to speak. Once more, we might muse, do the Journalists at National Public Radio think America might wish to hear from Congressman Kucinich, or will these broadcasters tell us what the Representative believes, that is, if they have the time. Perchance, the former Senator Edwards will articulate for Dennis Kucinich, or ensure that the Congressman cannot express himself.
Mister Edwards: Well, everyone - everyone at the table would acknowledge that Iran represents a serious issue for the Middle East and for us -
Representative Kucinich: No, I do not acknowledge -
Inskeep: Congressman Kucinich does not, but -
Mister Edwards: Let me finish, if I can.
Representative Kucinich: Let me characterize my own remarks.
Mister Edwards: If I can just finish, Dennis, for just a second . . .
Siegel: And I'm Robert Siegel. We're discussing Iran, the lessons learned from the war in Iraq.
A moment ago when Congressman Kucinich objected to or interrupted the statement from Senator Edwards that everybody agrees Iran is a threat, you say, Congressman Kucinich, I misinterpreted your earlier remarks that Iran is not a threat.
Representative Kucinich: All I did was raise my hand. I wanted a chance to respond.
Siegel: Yes.
Representative Kucinich: Thank you.
The point that Senator Clinton made was a valid point with respect to the comments of Senator Obama and also the comments of Senator Edwards at the Herzliya conference. See, when people say all options are on the table, as the three senators have, they actually encouraged President Bush and licensed his rhetoric. And what I'm saying is that I'm the only one here who in Congress repeatedly challenge, in every chance and every legislation, repeatedly challenge this mind-set that said all options are on the table and that Iran had nuclear weapons programs.
Siegel: OK. Cleared up.
Representative Kucinich: I'm the only one who can make that claim.
Siegel: Clarified . . .
What is clear to me is Americans are not able to hear an open, honest discussion between the candidates, not even on National Public Radio. If the people are to truly know of the one and only candidate for change, they will have to find a source of information that is truly fair and accurate, one that is not sponsored by corporate bigwigs [Archer Daniels Midland Company, Wal-Mart, AT&T], insurers [Farmers Insurance Group of Companies, Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America Allstate Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company], financial institutions [Prudential Financial, T. Rowe Price, The Hartford Financial Services Group], energy companies [Sempra, Constellation Energy], car manufacturers [Acura, Honda, Ford Motor Company, Saturn Corporation], petroleum interests [ConocoPhillips Company] all of which have an interest to serve, other than the American people.
Oh dear, National Public Radio I had such hopes. I still do, although I realize the media giants and the conglomerates that give them life have substantial clout.
Nevertheless, I continue to believe as Dennis Kucinich espouses when he quotes Spanish Philosopher and Writer, Miguel de Unamuno . . .
"Only he who attempts the absurd is capable of achieving the impossible."
Thankfully, Progressives such as I, and Presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich will continue to create opportunities. We will challenge conventions and accomplish what many think not viable. National Public Radio perchance, we might meet again at the Kucinich inauguration. I look forward to your interview with President Dennis Kucinich. I will tune in on January 20, 2009. My hope is then, you will have the time to speak with the people's President.
References and Reasons for this Reaction . . .
|
Subscribe to Site [RSS]
