Action Alert: NPR Brings on David Horowitz to Trash Howard Zinn

382 Responses to Action Alert: NPR Brings on David Horowitz to Trash Howard Zinn

1. Eric R Bassey says:

   02/04/2010 at 4:00 pm

   Comments submitted in response to Alicia Shepard's Ombudsman article on this topic:

   Ms. Shepard

   I note that the tone of your commentary on the response to NPR's obituary of Howard Zinn seems to dismiss that response as a political maneuver orchestrated by a third party. I think the comments of Adam Bernstein contain excellent guidance and instruction for NPR staff to consider in future, and I think that your final comments about the value of doing a better obituary rather than a faster one are indicative of a desire to improve (at least I hope), but I am confounded by the lack of even an apologetic tone, much less an actual apology, to accompany the apparent mea culpa those comments communicate.

   Frankly, I thought your article more defensive than pensive, and tellingly, that it reflects a failure to appreciate that legitimate criticism should not be tempered by consideration of the source.

   Don't defend a bad job (even half-heartedly). And don't stop at admitting that it might have been a bad job. Make appropriate amends, make a commitment to doing better, and then get on with it.

   Best regards,

   Eric R Bassey
2. P.T. Manolakos says:

   02/04/2010 at 4:32 pm

   Dear WYSO:

   As you know, Howard Zinn — political activist, historian, teacher and
   playwright — has died of a heart attack.

   â┚¬Ã…“His writings have changed the consciousness of a generation, and
   helped open new paths to understanding and its crucial meaning for our
   lives,â┚¬Ã‚ wrote Noam Chomsky. He was well known for a book entitled "A
   People\'s History of the United States" (1980). In addition, he was
   the author of books such as "Logic of Withdrawal in Vietnam" (1967);
   "Politics of History" (1970); "You Can\'t be Neutral on a Moving Train:
   A Personal History of Our Times" (1995); "Terrorism and War" (2003);
   and, "A People\'s History of the American Empire" (2008). He also
   penned three plays.

   Dr. Zinn was a perceptive critic of imperial adventurism. With respect
   to the election of Mr. Obama, he wrote in January 2010: â┚¬Ã…“I wasn\'t
   terribly disappointed because I didn't expect that much. I expected
   him to be a traditional Democratic president. On foreign policy,
   that's hardly any different from a Republican â┚¬“ as nationalist,
   expansionist, imperial and warlike.â┚¬Ã‚ He was an opponent of aggression
   in Vietnam, often speaking at demonstrations during the 1960s. He
   later wrote that â┚¬Ã…“[w]hen the United States fought in Vietnam, it was
   organized modern technology versus organized human beings, and the
   human beings won.â┚¬Ã‚ As an embodiment of the ethos that the main goal of
   the citizen must be to change the world for the better, his passion
   for sustained political activism never abated.

   Many would not know the extent of historical injustice if not for
   Howard Zinn\'s "A People\'s History of the United States." Thankfully,
   Dr. Zinn overtook the various false witnesses of history. Yet in an
   epoch when American Idol appears to be more important than sustained
   political engagement, his death represents a great loss.

   Alas, instead of properly using the occasion of Dr. Zinn's death to
   reflect on such issues, NPR's All Things Considered (1/28/10) marked
   his passing with contempt. After briefly quoting Noam Chomsky and
   Julian Bond, NPR's Allison Keyes turned to far-right nut David
   Horowitz to symbolically spit on Zinn's grave. He seems to have been
   invited to speak on NPR merely to demonstrate that NPR will not allow
   praise for Zinn to go unaccompanied by conservative contempt. Needless
   to say, it is not the case that NPR has a consistent principle that
   all its obituaries be thus "balanced." Take its coverage of the death
   of William F. Buckley, a figure as admired by the right as much as
   Zinn was on the left. Upon his death in February 2008, NPR aired six
   segments commemorating him, none of which included a non-admiring
   guest. In fact, there was much to criticize about Buckley, who was a
   supporter of, among other things, white supremacism in the U.S. South
   and South Africa, McCarthyism, nuclear war against China and the
   tattooing of AIDS patients' buttocks.

   On second thought, perhaps, I should thank NPR for including the views
   of David Horowitz in its obituary for Howard Zinn. After all, if you
   hadn't quoted some fringe right-wing crank, it would have suggested
   that Zinn's six decades of teaching might be wrong. But since you did include it,
   you demonstrated once again that Zinn was correct about NPR and the media
   generally: you're enthusiastic handmaidens of the U.S. government at worst, timid
   "liberals" terrified to step one inch out of line at best. Therefore,
   this really was the greatest sendoff you could give Zinn, essentially
   validating his entire life.

   Despite this validation, however, you should rest assured that no
   member of my household will give money to NPR again. Since WYSO is
   the local NPR affiliate, this holds for WYSO as well.

   cc: Alicia Shepard
3. james says:

   02/04/2010 at 7:02 pm

   this was about as "fair and balanced" as a health care "town hall" here in Harrisburg PA. us little people were able to watch and listen as BlueCross and United Health execs spouted sophisticated dismissals of HCR. that and this Zinn head shaker are but a drop in the WTF bucket. when BlueCross billboards on my commute to school are outnumbered by "content made possible by ____" (choose any BigHealth Hut)… 2shame.

   why?… because "viewers like me" don't howl at the moon then tbag our neighbors
4. James Vos says:

   02/04/2010 at 11:01 pm

   Alica Shepard's less than felicitous response is up on her blog:
   http://www.npr.org/ombudsman/2010/02/howard_zinns_obit.html

   She mentions FAIR, of course

   'It was the commentary by Horowitz that led Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a left-leaning media watchdog group, to initiate a campaign that resulted in over 1,600 emails, over 100 phone calls and 108 comments on npr.org. Others complained on air.'

   'Many critics pointed to NPR's even-handed coverage of William F. Buckley, "a figure as admired by the right as much as Zinn was on the left," according to FAIR, which gave its members talking points and urged them to contact the Ombudsman.'

   I'm glad FAIR did the action alert. In my response (above) I didn't use talking points at all and judging from the other commenters who submitted their letters here, they didn't either.

   What is shocking to several commenters on Shepard's post is to read that Keyes refused to comment on it. So she stands by her story after all the complaints? NPR just doesn't get it.
5. Scott says:

   02/05/2010 at 2:42 am

   I cannot believe the insult to the life of Howard Zinn that was perpetrated on NPR in the form of giving a forum for right-wing critic David Horowitz, without challenging his completely unsubstantiated criticisms of Zinn. Given the context of a life remembrance, I did not think it made sense to have him on in the first place. However, to let him disrespect the life's work of Zinn without question?

   I am further incensed upon learning that a similar piece on NPR after the death of William Buckley did not have any critic from the left.

   Despite the right's attempts to attack public broadcasting as having a "liberal bias," I have often felt the opposite is true. The coverage (what little there has been on NPR) of Howard Zinn's death further confirms this impression.
6. Benita Campbell says:

   02/05/2010 at 8:29 pm

   My second letter to NPR:

   Subject: NPR Ombud Alicia Shepard\'s February 5, 2010 response concerning the fact that the critics were right about Howard Zinn\'s death.

   Thank you for responding to FAIR advocates who were disgusted by the horrible treatment of Howard Zinn\'s obituary on All Things Considered. I think the letter fairly implies NPR\'s deeply flawed and biased approach to the treatment of left-wing versus right-wing icons even though the letter neither explicitly admits that fact nor resolves to stop it. This was obvious in the adjectives used to describe left-wing versus right-wing figures, the unnecessary explanation of obituaries not being tributes, and the incorrect claim of FAIR\'s providing talking points.

   As an aside, I hope that realizing the irony of describing David Horowitz as the â┚¬Ã…“founder of Students for Academic Freedom, a national watchdog group that promotes tolerance of conservatives on college campuses,â┚¬Ã‚ wasn\'t lost on NPR considering the extremely intolerant comments Mr. Horowitz spewed to unsuccessfully defame Professor Zinn. I say â┚¬Ã…“unsuccessfullyâ┚¬Ã‚ because Professor Zinn\'s body of work is much too great to be negatively impacted by the likes of Mr. Horowitz\'s psychotic ramblings. Yes, that is a biased comment on my part, and I can explicitly admit it. However, I do not have a megaphone to either express my bias as NPR has to express its biases.

   The letter to FAIR demonstrates that NPR still has the knee-jerk need to â┚¬Ã…“balanceâ┚¬Ã‚ â┚¬Ã…“controversial,â┚¬Ã‚ â┚¬Ã…“leftist radicals.â┚¬Ã‚ Please contrast those adjectives with merely â┚¬Ã…“right-wing figure(s) admired by those on the right â┚¬Ã‚¦Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ NPR did not label the late Misters Buckley, Roberts, and Novak as â┚¬Ã…“controversialâ┚¬Ã‚ as it did Professor Zinn. I checked the Merriam-Webster dictionary, and â┚¬Ã…“controversialâ┚¬Ã‚ does not apply only to left-wing figures. That\'s precisely a right-wing bias that NPR has adopted.

   Moreover, I know that I did not ask for a tribute, and I highly doubt that the vast majority of people who admired Professor Zinn and were outraged by NPR\'s shabby treatment of his memory expected NPR to pay tribute to him. I can safely assert that we are quite accustomed to unfair treatment by the media and its overcompensation to prove that it is not liberal. In fact I can safely assert that we would have been shocked if NPR had paid tribute to Professor Zinn! So your statement that â┚¬Ã…“obituaries are news stories that place a person in time and history — not tributesâ┚¬Ã‚ is not only unnecessary but schoolmarmish, reflecting a need to treat us like children. On the other hand your letter admits that â┚¬Ã…“NPR was complimentary and respectful in memorializing Buckley.â┚¬Ã‚ May I remind you that Buckley supported white supremacy, McCarthyism, warmongering with China, and tattooing people with AIDS. Those are facts, not opinion. That makes him a controversial, right-wing radical.

   Lastly, I checked FAIR\'s website for the Action Alert concerning NPR\'s shameful treatment of Professor Zinn\'s obituary. The alert was a narrative of what transpired with quotes from the horrible obituary of Professor Zinn while explaining how NPR celebrated Mr. Buckley\'s life along with controversial facts about Buckley. A summary thesis in the action requested at the end of the alert (ACTION: Please ask the NPR ombud why All Things Considered brought on David Horowitz to trash the late Howard Zinn when NPR's extensive coverage of William F. Buckley included no critical guests.) can hardly be described as â┚¬Ã…“talking points.â┚¬Ã‚ When asked to generate original letters of complaint, we don\'t need bulleted talking points. Surely you have heard the simile we use to describe ourselves: Organizing liberals is like herding cats. Yes, liberals are self-critical. If you do not know that, rest assured that you are not one of us.

   Your letter was a sincere apology. I especially appreciated the quotes from those who, while complaining about your unfair reporting, expressed an important impression of Professor Zinn (e.g., "I was one of those young people Zinn influenced; he didn't expect people to blindly accept his version of history. Rather, he taught us to question, probe, seek out alternative perspectives and to always be fair.")

   Yet I have the impression that NPR is still very eager to prove that it is not liberalâ┚¬”an ironic but obtuse canard perpetuated by thousands of right-wing figures and activist voices on air, in print, and on the net. The Ombud was incapable of explicitly stating that NPR would resolve to treat left- and right-wing figures (both living and deceased) equitably. Are liberals and progressives supposed to merely be grateful that NPR will continue to be â┚¬Ã…“complimentary and respectfulâ┚¬Ã‚ to â┚¬Ã…“right-wing figuresâ┚¬Ã‚ but find a â┚¬Ã…“more nuanced criticâ┚¬Ã‚ for â┚¬Ã…“controversial, leftist radicalsâ┚¬Ã‚? If NPR is unwilling to state that resolution, I would gladly accept the practice of it. Either admit this bias as a warning to your listeners at the beginning of your broadcasts or stop expressing it.

   Sincerely,
   Benita J. Campbell
7. Dan Greenfeld says:

   02/05/2010 at 10:50 pm

   Why did All Things Considered bring on David Horowitz to trash the late Howard Zinn when NPR's extensive coverage of William F. Buckley included no critical guests.

   Having David Horowitz on air to spit on Howard Zinn's grave was deplorable. Using public radio to broadcast Horowitz's substance free venomous diatribe is unconscionable.

   NPR was once a breath of fresh air in a swamp of corporate media. Can we now group NPR with Fox. Has the Bush effort to contaminate NPR been so successful that fairness and decency are no longer important to you.
8. Pete Simon says:

   02/06/2010 at 12:55 am

   David Horowitz "surfaced" as the cynical right wing frothing-at-the-mouth-"expert" at about the same time the audience building extremist crowd surfaced to "save" public radio, with programming homogenization and a scorched earth mentality for those who questioned (any of) their direction. In both instances it was fashionable with Reagan in charge; a bunch of white guys just following the march of the day.

   Howard Zinn flew bombing missions over Germany in World War II. He proved himself as a patriot. If some of his critics since then were really honest, showing their true colors, they'd be crying about how Zinn "crippled the fatherland" with his bombing runs. No? I think some people on the right are only a step away from saying something like that, but instead they hide behind "patriotism", calling out their adversaries as unpatriotic, or something worse.

   REPUBLICANS WITHOUT DIXIECRATS !!!!!!!!

   Republicans Without Dixiecrats !!!!
9. Dartanyan Brown says:

   02/06/2010 at 6:56 am

   I was all set to download the NPR app to my iPhone….Not now. Not.Ever.
   R.I.P. Howard.
10. Maureen O'Connell says:

    02/06/2010 at 11:48 am

    Here is the reply to my email to NPR and a reproduction of my email below that:

    From: "NPR – Listener Care"
    Date: February 5, 2010 10:49:31 AM PST
    To: "mloc@earthlink.net"
    Subject: Howard Zinn obituary w/ Allison Keyes – Message #5607-10102699
    Reply-To: NPR_Response@npr.org

    Dear Maureen,

    I want to thank you for your recent letter about an obituary for Howard Zinn that aired on All Things Considered on January 28. Following its broadcast, listeners contacted NPR to express their perspectives on it, and in particular the inclusion of comments made by David Horowitz. Some of those letters were included in All Things Considered's "letters" segment on January 29, which you can hear here.

    NPR News management has concluded that the quote from David Horowitz is harsh in tone, but that doesn't undermine the legitimacy of using his point of view. Obituaries are news stories that place a person in time and history; for this reason, NPR needed to mention the controversy about his work. However, News management did determine that the statement was missing supporting evidence.

    In addition to the All Things Considered piece, NPR discussed Howard Zinn's legacy on Talk of the Nation in this piece; as well as on NPR's Tell Me More; on our website with The Nation; and in blogs. I encourage you to review these additional materials.

    Everything that airs on NPR needs to rise to the same high standards — from news reports to multimedia features to interviews to obituaries. It is always a disappointment to hear when a listener feels we have not met those standards. The goal of our reporting is not to take sides in an issue, but to bring diverse perspectives to our listeners.

    The NPR Ombudsman has written a column about the obituary which aired on All Things Considered. Our Ombudsman believes that piece could have been better, while recognizing the constraints under which the reporter was working.

    I regret that you feel disappointed, and I thank you for letting us know. It's important for us to hear from listeners when they feel we've done something well, and when they feel we have not.

    Thank you for writing.

    Sincerely,

    Dana Davis Rehm
    Senior Vice President for Marketing, Communications, and External Relations

    Message Summary:
    Date Created: 1/29/2010 7:04:17 PM
    Subject Howard Zinn obituary w/ Allison Keyes:
    Body: I have no idea why NPR felt it necessary to have David Horowitz comment on the death, life, work, influence or in fact any aspect or angle of the career of the amazing and brilliant writer and historian Howard Zinn. I am constantly astounded by your need to feature a "rebuttal" type of response from The Standard, The Washington Times, and similar organs of the Right whenever you have any story that might possibly be construed as concerning someone or something not to the right of dead center, politically. Did Rupert Murdock purchase NPR? Are you competing with Fox News for the "Fair & Balanced" Misnomer Award? Howard Zinn deserved an obituary free of this kind of pandering to the Right. I am ashamed of NPR. I won't dignify Horowitz's remarks by even quoting his nastiness. Suffice it to say, odd happenings at NPR stations, like firing Sandra Tsing Loh, more programming featuring religion and "spirituality", and various other acts of moving toward the irrational and engaging in knee-jerk self-censorship seem much more in context now.
11. Marco Cano says:

    02/06/2010 at 8:29 pm

    letter to NPR:

    What you did to Howard Zinn was unfair and a low blow. You did a disservice to your program and yourself. I would please like you to listen to Howard Zinn's speech "The Three Holy Wars." This will help you to know this great humanitarian.
12. John McMahon says:

    02/07/2010 at 2:31 am

    We have now received a response from NPR's ombudsperson and about all that I can agree with is her contention that the obituary of Mr. Zinn was "flawed." I thought the rest of her response was inadequate, evasive and unremarkable. Let's not pat ourselves on the back so hard that we knock ourselves down on our face.

    Thank you, Maura, for posting the email you received from NPR's Dana Davis Rehm. I thought Rehms's comments were evasive and kind of patronizing. Rehm said nothing about the shocking difference in the way Zinn was treated when compared to Buckley or other conservatives and is apparently so far gone that she actually believes that the piece rose to the same (allegedly) high standards as the obituaries of conservatives.

    Furthermore, a proper apology never uses phrases along the lines of "I regret you feel that…" Using those terms is dismissive, offensive, indicative of a lack of personal responsibility and infers that while she feels badly that you feel badly, she really doesn't think she did anything wrong and that if you feel bad, it's your own fault. It is always better to dmit it when you make mistakes and take responsibility for those mistakes by acknowleding those mistakes. The people at NPR don't seem to be morally big enough to take responsibility for their mistakes. They also don't seem to be capable of learning from them.

    NPR seems to have figured out that they offended a large number of their listeners, but they still don't seem to think they did anything wrong, they haven't taken any responsibility, and are unwilling set the record straight.
13. Benita Campbell says:

    02/07/2010 at 5:07 pm

    Advisory: The following is a satirically annotated response of NRR\'s Dana D. Rehm to Maureen\'s email. My annotations, in brackets, are in Mr./Ms. Rehm\'s â┚¬Ã…“voice.â┚¬Ã‚

    After all the complaints NPR received, it continues to ignore legitimate grievances in its double standard treatment of left-wing views and people versus right-wing ones. The only thing left to do is to mock NPR\'s glaring omission to first acknowledge this fact and then move to correct it.

    Dear [Little] Maureen,

    I want to thank you for your recent letter [surprisingly not written in crayon] about an obituary for [Controversial] Howard Zinn [Isn\'t that his first, middle, and last name?] that aired on All Things Considered on January 28. [BTW, directly addressing your silly claim that NPR has a need to balance only left-wing views and personalities serves no purpose because to do so would be controversial and some things are just not addressed in polite company. Besides this is standard modus operandi. Almost all media organs do this, other than the few controversial ones. Treating right-wing views and the people who hold them to the same balancing standards would upset our corporate masters. Everyone knows that conservatives are special. Didn\'t you receive that memo? See if your mother has it.] Following its broadcast, listeners contacted NPR to express their perspectives on it, and in particular the inclusion of comments made by David Horowitz. Some of those letters were included in All Things Considered's "letters" segment on January 29, which you can hear here.

    NPR News management has concluded that the quote from David Horowitz is harsh in tone, but that doesn't undermine the legitimacy of using his point of view [We must not offend Mr. Horowitz. His mission, insuring tolerance for conservatives on campuses, is especially special when he expresses extremely intolerant opinions of controversial progressives â┚¬“ always a legitimate goal of balance.] Obituaries are news stories that place a person in time and history; for this reason, NPR needed to mention the controversy about his work [because special conservatives are never ever controversial and their glutei maximi must be kissed. (Note to self: Send Little Maureen a copy of that old memo.)] However, News management did determine that the statement was missing supporting evidence. [Doesn\'t that sound fair that we need supporting evidence for opinions?]

    In addition to the All Things Considered piece, NPR discussed Howard Zinn's legacy on Talk of the Nation in this piece; as well as on NPR's Tell Me More; on our website with The Nation; and in blogs. I encourage you to review these additional materials. [Don\'t look at that man behind the curtain!]

    Everything that airs on NPR needs to rise to the same high standards [according to that memo about double standards] â┚¬” from news reports to multimedia features to interviews to obituaries. It is always a disappointment to hear when a listener feels we have not met those standards. The goal of our reporting is not to take sides in an issue, but to bring diverse perspectives to our listeners. [Please note that we have diverse people praising special conservative figures when they pass, and we have people with diverse and balancing, offensive opinions when controversial progressives pass. Isn\'t NPR merciful and fair?]

    The NPR Ombudsman has written a column about the obituary which aired on All Things Considered. Our Ombudsman believes that piece could have been better, while recognizing the constraints under which the reporter was working. [If that reporter had offered offensive balancing opinions of a special conservative who had passed, these constraints would not be considered because all our reporters have received the memo.]

    I regret that you feel disappointed [there there, little girl], and I thank you for letting us know. [We adults have a duty to help children with disappointed feelings.] It's important for us to hear from listeners when they feel we've done something well, and when they feel we have not. [Here are some cookies and milk. Now go to bed, dammit!]

    Thank you for writing.

    REMINDER: I annotated this memo with my own satirical musings in Ms./Mr. Rhem's "voice."
14. Michael Rzemieniecki says:

    02/07/2010 at 7:19 pm

    Howard Zinn was a great man that inspired me and countless others of my generation to stand up to injustice and speak out for what we know is right. That fact that you had David Horowitz present to criticize Zinn while William F. Buckley, an ignorant bigot, was met with nothing but the highest praise is shocking and disheartening. I've lost all respect for NPR after this.

    Why did All Things Considered bring Horowitz to criticize Howard Zinn when NPR's extensive coverage of William F. Buckley include no critical guest?
15. David Eccles says:

    02/08/2010 at 7:23 pm

    My email to NPR:

    Alicia Shepard. I would like to know why NPR felt it appropriate to trash the lifes work of Howard Zinn by bringing on David Horowitz, a political hack.

    Howard Zinn was always honest, fair, level-headed and hard-working. His work has emboldened millions of people around the world to take action and work to make our world a better place.

    Bringing in David Horowitz, who predictably trashed Howard, is a direct assault on the hard work and effort of eveyone of those millions of people who have fought and sacrificed so much.

    How dare you. You should be ashamed of yourselves and whoever the producer was should be fired immediately and NPR should issue and immediate and thorough apology.

    You disgust me.
16. Dan B. says:

    02/12/2010 at 3:25 am

    HOROWITZ MAKES ME SICK IT IS ILL TO DISRESPECT THE DEAD ESP. VERY RESPECTABLE ONES ,WHEN I HEARD OF ZINNS PASSING I WAS DEEPLY SADDENED, WHEN I HEARD HOROWITZS WORD I WAS JUST PISSED
17. Chris Rahe says:

    02/12/2010 at 7:44 am

    My belated letter to NPR:

    I just found out about your shameful bashing of Howard Zinn in your so-called remembrance a while back.

    I used to listen to NPR all day long and was always a contributor to my local station. That is no longer the case, precisely because of this kind of shamefully biased reporting.

    I've seen your excuses for how the quotes by Horowitz were included in your on-air remembrance, but that doesn't excuse it.

    And it doesn't cover up the fact that equally controversial figures on the right do not receive the same treatment from NPR. That's just a sad fact.

    NPR used to be the last source of real journalism in broadcast media. It lost that status years ago. And it lost me as a member and a listener.
18. Bruce Kittilson says:

    02/13/2010 at 2:07 pm

    I, too, came late to this event but am very familiar with the issues. NPR, like nearly everyone else, gets weak knees when dealing with tough-guy/person blowhards from the right. NPR's public funding makes it even more timid than most, but it needs to toughen up. It's time we start calling most of these right-wing hammerers fascists. They are ideologues, heavily engaged in a serious and coordinated propaganda war.
19. RLE says:

    02/14/2010 at 6:48 pm

    Conservative viewpoints are incredibly rare on NPR. Get over yourselves you Zinn sycophants. As long as there is one penny of government funding for NPR there should be some sort of offsetting view of the progressive line. Wouldn't that only be FAIR? That is what Howard would want right? Fairness?
20. Dani Lake says:

    02/15/2010 at 2:12 pm

    Clean the wax outta your ears, so full-of-yourself-you-wouldn\'t-know-who-needs-to-get-over-themselves, history-deficient-anal-crevice. You wouldn\'t know fairness if came up and slapped both sides of your face. Conservative viewpoints are always viewed on NPR. You are so full of right-wing idiotology that Faux No-News is your idea of fairness. Look, David Horowitz sycophant, NPR never balances remembrances of right-wing nuts like William F. Buckley, Robert Novak, and Oral Roberts but is compelled to balance left-wing activist like Professor Zinn because the milk-toast-to-con managers of NPR are so afraid of being accused of being liberal by the blinded idiotlogue likes of you. Your unfairness and wacked-out imbalanced views precede your ability to see that, so you have already proved that you don\'t know what fairness means. Cons aren\'t the only people who pay taxes; liberals, and moderates do too. Therefore, NPR needs to balance your right-wing nutty heroes. Of course, in your crazed mind, only cons' taxes matter. Go play with yourself on fake media criticism sites like AIM where you can relish in your repeated lies that the media are liberal. If you repeat a lie enough, it is believed by willfully ignorant people. That's propaganda. GOP means Grouchy Old Propagandists.
21. B.R. says:

    02/15/2010 at 7:19 pm

    So what's the remedy for burned buns? RLE needs to sit in a bucket of ice water because he's a liar, liar pants on fire vicitm.
22. karen says:

    02/16/2010 at 8:51 am

    Howard Zinn would wear RLE's churlish remarks as a badge of honour. I'll always remember him for his keen intellect, passionate activism, and steely resolve. His work and influence will remain for generations. From beyond Howard is chuckling at NPR's cowardly compulsion to balance anything progressive.
23. David Lindberg says:

    02/21/2010 at 4:25 am

    I must admit that I'm a little late to the party, but apparently, you still do not understand why NPR's Howard Zinn obituary was so horrible.

    If it is true that:

    1. Obituaries are news stories that place a person in time and history — not tributes.

    and

    2. Obituaries need to mention controversy and represent those who are "dismissive of [the work of the deceased]."

    ..then how do you explain your obituaries of Robert Novak, Oral Roberts and William F. Buckley? The "warts and all" standard was completely absent in the obits for these three men. I couldn't imagine more controversial figures.

    It is profoundly disturbing to me that you would allow this kind, gentle advocate for the disenfranchised to be trashed during his obituary on your airwaves.

    Think about it this way: you allowed Pol Pot to pass with platitudes and when Mr. Rogers died, you punched his corpse and pissed on his grave.

    When Mr. Horowitz dies, give me a call. I'd love to provide the counterpoint to his life of accomplishment.
24. Rev. Bill Beardslee says:

    02/22/2010 at 6:55 am

    Dear NPR,

    I know this will come as "old news" to you. I was listening to NPR on the morning of Jan 27, actually my 30th anniversary, when I learned that a much admired mentor, Howard Zinn, had died. This was more than a shock. Zinn was a thoughtful, committed, "don't couch your bias in bull" historian. His meticulous research, his compassion for the powerless and voiceless on the "undersdie" of the dominate paradigmn and powers of history never ceased to riase the flag for freedom and justice for ALL.
    This extraordinary man and historian was no ivory tower intellectual. His incisive intellect was accompanied by the experiential, a life lived by what he believed.

    Then, even more shocking and horrifying that morning, NPR chose to "balance" an obituary in the person of fringe, far right activist David Horowitz, with a statement essentially attesting to Zinn's worthless, deceptive work and lack of contribution to history and the body politic. I could not beleive that NPR would be so crass and thoughtless as to include such slander and drivel in a piece honoring the life and testifying to the death of a patriot historian. Seldom, if ever, have I heard NPR do this for anyone else.

    Howard held strong convictions and conclusions from his study and experience of history. There certainly is much to debate. Horowitz's comments have NOTHING to do with debate however or balance. They are dismissive and inflamatory, lacking respect and honor toward a man who gave his life to our country and betterment in more ways than one. To include a slanderous, malicious comment like that of Horowitz was insulting to the Zinn family and all those who experienced profound grief over Zinn's death. You could have at least waited until such time as you did a retrospective of Zinn's life and work and its "controversial nature."

    I write now after listening to a tribute to Zinn and recalling the NPR report. I always expect more from NPR than the news that is bent as entertainment and bias.

    Sincerely,

    Rev. Bill Beardslee
25. Benita Campbell says:

    02/22/2010 at 6:18 pm

    The following is a response to a letter I posted 19 entries previous to this one:

    Dear Benita,

    Thank you for taking time to write the Office of the Ombudsman. Alicia Shepard is currently on medical leave. She had surgery on her shoulder and is unable to type.

    She did, however, read your email and requested that I contact you to thank you for your thoughts and taking the time to write. You submitted a very thoughtful email and your concerns will be taken into consideration.

    Best,
    Lori Grisham
    ==================

    The following is my response to Ms. Grisham:

    Dear Lori,

    Please send Alicia my wishes for a complete and speedy shoulder recovery.

    My first wish, however, still stands: Please stop balancing progressive ideas and the people who hold them with conservative ideas or comments, or start balancing conservative ideas and the people who hold them too.

    Having said that, please do not believe that balancing controversial conservative views with polite, measured progressive opinions while continuing to balance controversial progressive views with over-the-top, disrespectful opinions from someone like David Horowitz, someone who is viscerally obsessed with destroying liberalism (as if that were possible), is reasonable or would go unnoticed. If you want a list of "muscular" liberals who can deliver firm critiques, I can supply you with it.

    My second wish would be for NPR to stop liberally using the adjective â┚¬Ã…“controversialâ┚¬Ã‚ when describing mostly progressive values, ideas, or people while regarding equally controversial conservative values, ideas, or people as if they are benign and normal.

    Lastly, people from all political persuasions want to be treated fairly on all NPR programs, but fairness on NPR\'s Morning Edition and All Things Considered carries more weight than the other broadcasts.

    Fairness is subjective and a high ideal for which to strive, but NPR is surely qualified for this worthy task.

    Thank you for your response.

    Sincerely,
    Benita J. Campbell

26. Pingback: TheMillerCircle.org » Blog Archive » The fault line in America revealed by Howard Zinn

27. Mohloaka Tubman says:

    02/28/2010 at 1:12 pm

    OBSCENE demonstration of the rabid rightWinfNut bias of NPR-'All Things Considered,' – especially given the over-the-top slobbering coverage over the RACIST William f. buckley some years ago – without any kind of commentary from Progressives.
28. princetrumpet says:

    08/01/2010 at 7:47 am

    I really enjoyed the nonsensical defenses of the left on this page, Time for a reality check, folks. Your hero was nothing more than a communist who wrote history from that perspective:

    http://theothermccain.com/2010/07/31/fbi-files-reveal-historian-howard-zinn-lied-to-hide-cpusa-membership/#comments

    Being on the left, you probably won't read this. Why should edification be a part of being on the left. Horowitz was correct and you guys can't stand it. Fine. See you in November. You're done and it begins then.

29. Pingback: January 2010 « Questionable Content

30. Jack Adler says:

    10/21/2010 at 9:56 pm

    The folks at NPR should be ashamed to have allowed the substanceless abuse of Howard Zinn to take place by a "man" who chooses to use the cheap rhetoric to run down the life work of this great American on the eve of his passing. Case in point is the troll-like threats of "princetrumpet" who like Horowitz, can only use cheap threats, smears and low brow innuendo to make his schoolyard bully case. God Bless Howard Zinn.
31. Seeker says:

    05/02/2011 at 5:46 pm

    So Howard Zinn, as one commentator above put it, was "a gentle advocate for the disenfranchised?" My foot. Professor Zinn's America was one in which a tiny, money-hungry plutocracy perpetually lords it over vast multitudes of virtuous, helpless victims of capitalism, colonialism and racism — as if we hadn't heard that tune enough. Wake me up when it's over. Yes, I have read a lot of Zinn's work. It's not all bad, but it is highly skewed and usually wrong-headed. Put simply, he just wasn't that good.

    I will allow that some of David Horowitz's comments had an unpleasant tone. And NPR should have brought aboard a supporter of Zinn as a counterweight. But in substance Horowitz overall was right about Zinn's legacy. Horowitz knows all about being a "good Leftist" — he spent the first 40 years of his life in that territory. He moved away not for the money, but for the integrity. He knew all too well what happens to a society when its Howard Zinns seize the apparatus of state power to create Social Justice.

    As for "right-wingers" — I guess there are no "left-wingers" — they most certainly do have a right to be represented on NPR. Their tax dollars, as much as anyone else's, help support the network. If our noble progressive revolutionaries don't like it, tough luck. They should tune into Amy Goodman's show and give generously. Problem solved.

32. Pingback: Recover HYIP Money