Re: NPR fires Williams over Muslim fears » GetReligion

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Lance McLain <lance-X3DuywwxauBWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:
> Sure, but the freedom to ignore political correctness doesn't grant one the
> right to make ignorant statements.

He's completely "free" to discuss anything he wants openly, but not
without repercussions.  And his employer should free him up for other
employment opportunities if he shows himself unsuitable for the job
they're paying him for (in his employer's estimation).  If, as I
understand it, NPR hired him as a news analyst and has a policy
against their reporters or analysts publicly airing controversial
opinions or encouraging punditry, then I'd be shocked if they *hadn't*
fired him.

By my understanding, that he was fired by NPR (and subsequently hired
by Fox) is a non-issue.  A foregone conclusion.  Uninteresting,
mundane, and barely worth discussion.  The only thing that could have
reasonably happened, given the actions and stated policies of the
actors.  The interesting debates (to me) are about whether what he
said was actually right or wrong to say in the way he said it, and
whether or not NPR's code of ethics is a reasonable one for their
employees to abide by.

On the first point, I completely agree with Lance, and adding my own
words would likely benefit no one.

As for NPR's code of ethics, while I think it's important for
journalistic enterprises to have a set of rules about how they will
comport themselves and then stick to those rules, I do think their
particular rule set goes a bit farther than is strictly necessary or
helpful (e.g. their staff aren't allowed to attend political rallies
of any sort).  But it has its reasons, and even if I were to relax
their editorial standards to my own liking he would still have run
afoul.  He undermined his own credibility as a news analyst.  But I
think that it's helpful to have multiple sources with different
expectations of each, from journalists to analysts to pundits to
bloggers to debaters on discussion lists.  This is not a value
judgement, but a pragmatic one.  Journalists are not "better" than
bloggers or pundits.  But it's useful to have organizations which at
least attempt to be rigorous in fact-checking and avoiding
speculation, just as it is useful to have people who work outside of
said organizations to challenge institutional biases, etc.

-- 
Nick

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot