#the mueller report russiagate shit was embarrassing and dismissing the lab-leak hypothesis for c19 out of hand was premature

[kawaiimunism]

the second half of Uri Berliner's takedown of NPR contains some of the most loser shit I've read recently (as expected from someone whose problem with NPR is that it's too progressive lol)

gee, if only there was some way to reference existing research on systemic racism in the so-called u.s.

you're right, uri, grassroots employees shouldn't have a say in editorial standards. if you want diversity of viewpoint, editorial standards should be the sole purview of the editorial board. can't believe SAG-AFTRA would advocate for the interests of workers' groups like that

(/s lol)

this dude trying to play dumb about Don't Say Gay "oh but the law doesn't even have 'gay' anywhere in its text you're misrepresenting it!" as though he doesn't know full-well why everyone called it that (hint: the NPR articles you're mad about explain the nickname)

and speaking for myself, the Latine folks I know are actually pretty divided on "Latinx"—some like it, some hate it, others don't care. and didn't you just say NPR has an internal Latinx advocacy group? do you know their position on the topic?? do you know Latine NPR employees who disagree with Mi Gente that you could discuss this with before going straight to the execs? why do you feel comfortable being the arbiter of this issue? what the hell man

Okay, so this one is variously disgusting:

Dude tips his hand right away by calling it the "Israel-Hamas war."

"jumped from the faculty lounge to newsrooms" lmfao universities have been wildly hostile to Palestinian liberation advocates how are you this out of touch?

When I do a site-search of npr.org for "hamas", the first three articles are all about the October 7 attack. NPR's reporting on rising antisemitism has been kind of lopsided in focusing on accusations of antisemitism while keeping fairly quiet about actual incidents/attitudes thereof, but I suspect accurate reporting on the topic (that is, existing antisemites attempting entryism into Palestinian solidarity movements) wouldn't please this guy.

NPR has tried to be neutral about the Gaza genocide in a way that I think is revolting, but Uri and I obviously disagree about why that's revolting.

The bird names piece is an article about the lack of diversity in bird-watching as a hobby. The bulk of the article talks about how the bird-naming convention of "[discoverer's name] [type of bird]" has led to a lot of birds that are named after horrible racists, and the ensuing conversation within birdwatching about whether/how to change those names. That's it. That's all it says. EDIT: I guess "discoverer" should be in a second set of quotes here, because English-language names for "New World" birds are generally going to be derived from the first settler to decide to name it.

The article "justifying looting" is an interview with Vicky Osterweil, the author of In Defense of Looting. The headline of the article literally calls it "One Author's Controversial View."

Fears about crime are racist and NPR was right to report on it lmao

When he says "suggesting that Asian Americans who oppose affirmative action have been manipulated by white conservatives," the way the story in question "suggests" that is quoting Asian-Americans who feel manipulated by white conservatives.

I haven't read the Beatles story he's talking about. It's kinda long and doesn't really interest me, so I won't comment on it.

I think this bit is the most revealing part of the whole piece. It kinda lays bare the exact ways that Uri is full of shit. He spends most of the latter half of the piece talking about how NPR's push for diversity of identity has coincided with a decrease in diversity of opinion, and that more ideas should be given a seat at the table, but he clearly doesn't actually believe that. Sure, bring in the MAGAs, bring in the Republicans, let the right have a say. But defending looting? Shining a light on racism in hobby spaces? Discussing racism in American attitudes towards crime? Well that's obviously beyond the pale! Obviously those ideas don't get a seat at the table.

Berliner clearly believes that some ideas are dangerous or ridiculous and shouldn't be platformed on that basis, but his main criteria for deciding which ideas shouldn't be platformed seem to be (1) how far outside the mainstream they are (e.g. the Defense of Looting piece) and (2) how ~divisive~ they are (e.g. the stuff about racism). Bringing on Republicans to explain why diversity sucks and trans people should be put in camps? Totally fine, I guess.

This little spiel reveals Berliner for what he is: A status quo warrior burned that the future is leaving him behind. NPR isn't alienating American society, it's embracing the vaguely-progressive left-lib attitudes that are becoming increasingly mainstream across the so-called U.S, paying occasional lip-service to more radical ideas while being very careful to avoid endorsing them.