Re: Article: At the Center of the Storm Over Bush And Science

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

I am a faithful NPR listener.  The network distinguishes between news 

programs and editorials, and certainly they have every right to air editorials (most 

of which I don't think much of).  I find their news programs much better that 

"news radio" and way much better than TV, because they are not just sound 

bites.  The reports parallel the reports in out local newspaper and in the news 

magaziines and I can't discern much of a bias.  Can you give me an example of a 

biased news story (not an editorial) on NPR?



I often don't think much of their arts reporting (because I really like only 

classical music), and I agree that their reporting on nuclear issues follows 

the "he said/she said" protocol, and I had a discussion on exactly that point 

with a reporter today.  I don't agree with that protocol, but I now understand 

why they do it.  they have done some programs on WIPP-related and Yucca 

Mountain related issues, which I thought were fair and balanced, even though they 

always get an anti-nuke opinion, which i think is unnecessary.  other than that, 

NPR science reporting is fine, as far as I can tell.



I don't think much of the books they choose to showcase, but that is a matter 

of taste.  I like theior movie reviews, but again that is raste.



The one aspect I could do without is interviews with teenagers.



Please don't confuse NPR news programs (Morning Edition and All Things 

Considered) with Pacifica Radio and Democracy Now, which ARE biased, and which I 

turn off.



Ruth  



Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com