News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Well, they were partially funded by the US government and corporate sponsorships. That introduces some pro-US and pro-corporate bias.
As opposed to the other news sources in the country which are pure pro-corporate bias.
A lot of funding is from the fossil fuel industry (some call it National Petroleum Radio).
I have listened to dozens of stories on climate change, pollution, etc. over the years. I mean look up "NPR fossil fuels" and you'll see pages upon pages of critical, factual reporting. I'm not sure they're beholden to the fossil fuel industry - have any more info?
Sure they cover climate change, just like other commercial outlets -- but the coverage is extremely milquetoast ("stressed about climate change? Write a letter to the Earth!"). That is what their sponsorship dollars are buying.
And in matters of foreign policy especially, public broadcasting has been extremely supportive of military mis-adventures in oil-rich countries. NPR lost a lot of support among totebaggers over their Iraq war coverage.
It’s not the understood perspective. Its the descriptions. Their subtext is always “it’s fine, let them [insert horror action here]”
So they’ll say “Critics say climate nearing point-of-no-return”.
I actually remember the first time I ever heard the news refer to “an environmentalist”. Like - . . . We all live in the environment, so why single out people for . . why are they singling them out?
NPR is highly critical of [insert atrocity here]. I doubt you can find an example where they're not.
That's just how headlines work. "Experts say X," "Politician says Y" -- that's inoffensive.
Environmentalist is a well-understood term with meaning. There are people who are not environmentalists. Yeah it is ridiculous that anyone isn't
Everyone was an environmentalist until they coined the term.
They could have coined something to mean anti-environment before that but they didn’t. I wonder why.
(Not that NPR coined it. That’s too bold for them)
I mean, I agree that it's stupid to not be an environmentalist, but it sounds like you're criticizing NPR for correctly using the english language and adhering to journalistic practices
The way they do those things is, to the point, centrist at best.
Not once did they run a report about “enhanced interrogation” using the actual word for what it is. Not once.
So, I left.
Eh? https://www.npr.org/2023/03/21/1164916991/looking-back-on-shocking-revelations-u-s-forces-tortured-iraqis-at-abu-ghraib
Im not old enough to remember any reporting at the time, but I have found NPR to be one of the best mainstream sources of news. These critiques are valid, but feel the typical leftist purity test
Oh in 2023? Well that’s useful.
I get it! For those like me who are lacking context, here's a decent article:
https://fair.org/home/update-npr-doesnt-ban-torture-but-offers-euphemisms-to-use-in-its-place/
Nice find!
Yep. Thats it. Don’t pick a side between the fascist rapist and the progressive. No no no!