Letters to the Editor

• Elephantman...

  [Read the article: Cokie Roberts speaks out on the war on behalf of the American people]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  Although I don't have a link handy to buttress my point, I've listened to enough NPR to recognize the invalidity of your claim that the air time provided to think-tank spokespeople is handily balanced by the "liberal college professors" whose comments they feature.

  For one thing, many of the think-tank spokespeople are, simultaneously, college professors. That's the case with the "conservative" think-tanks as well as the "liberal" ones. I'm not sure whether such dual affiliations are always disclosed on NPR, but that's often made clear by introductions or other referential remarks on the air.

  Secondly, you're asserting that as a group, college professors are so "Left/liberal" that they comprise the "Left contingent" that counterweights the contributions of the think-tank spokespeople, the lobbyists, and official government spokespeople. I'd like to see some direct, germane reference that supports that contention. My personally recollected experience as an NPR listener contradicts this- I've had abundant exposure to academics who hold pro-Bush views on NPR.

  I also often find that the comments of college professors are more often found in stories that don't relate directly to issues at the forefront of US foreign policy. It's my impression that stories about nations like Burma or Sierra Leone rely more heavily on college professors than stories about Iraq or Iran, which are largely the domain of military and government spokespeople and the think-tankers.

  I don't think that anyone can seriously argue that NPR's coverage of the Iraq war or the tensions with Iran are dominated by the comments of college professors who are highly critical of Bush administration Mideast policy. I've heard both William Beeman and Juan Cole on NPR on occasion, and they've both been scathingly articulate in their criticisms of the Bush administration's policies and actions in the region. But professors like Beeman and Cole bring more to the table than simply "anti-Bush bias." They're both familiar with the history and culture of the region to an extent that completely outclasses the general run of International Relations types at the think-tanks. Both Beeman and Cole actually speak and read Middle Eastern languages. Their focus on the region pre-dates Spetember 11, 2001. They don't comprise the voices of a political faction nearly as much as they do the voices of informed expertise- a fact which has been borne out time and again, often in the aftermath of having their advice ignored.

  http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Anthropology/Beeman.html

  http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/jcpers.htm

  But, oh no, they're "liberals"...

  Not to worry. They're rarely heard on NPR, or any other major broadcast media outlet.

  As to your reference to the opposition to Bush represented by "the Clinton Administration", Elephantman- I challenge you to produce a list of luminaries in the Clinton administration, from the former president on down, speaking out or offering opposition in any manner whatsoever to the post-9/11 policy blitzkrieg of Bush administration "counter-terrorism" initiatives prior to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq- on any related matter- whether it be the jingoistic hysteria whipped up by the Bush administration to finesse Congressional approval of the invasion of Iraq; that monstrous 132-page document known as USA-PATRIOT that appeared seemingly out of nowhere in a matter of days following 9-11; the relentless push for increased surveillance powers; the advocacy of summary detention on sole order of the President or his deputized minons in the Justice Department; the advocacy of "total information awareness" by the Bush Executive branch; the support for kidnapping and "rendition" of foreign nationals on hearsay evidence; the Bush administration campaign to legitimize torture and cloak it in loathsome euphemisms; or any of the other power grabs that George W. Bush and his followers attempted or achieved in that time period.

  Find me a list of former members of the Clinton administration standing up in opposition to any of that, when the chips were down and it mattered the most. Tell me what constituted the opposition stands that they took, that leads you to count them as adversaries of George W. Bush.

  You brought it up, Elephantman- go on and show me. It ought to be easy legwork, with a few search terms.

  Permalink Monday, April 7, 2008 09:45 PM