NPR fires Juan Williams for Muslim remarks on Fox

Juan Williams went on FOX news and towed the talking point line.
Juan got $2,000,000 for his trouble.
Juan still has the opportunity to speak his mind on FOX, where he is STILL EMPLOYED.
Juan is no longer subject to the restrictions of opining that were a part of his employment with NPR.

I get it, this is ATS. Soros donated $1.8 Million to NPR. We should follow the money right?
Juan got $2.0 Million from Fox for this fiasco.
Which way do we go?

I have been fired for reasons I thought were unfair. Am I the only one? Out of the others, how many then got 2 Million dollars from their other job?

He said what he wanted to say. He got $2 Million. He still gets to say whatever he wants to say.

I am really sorry that I am having a hard time feeling bad.

NPR Gets Earful From Listeners on Williams Firing

NPR stations nationwide get an earful from listeners over firing of analyst Juan Williams

NPR and its public radio stations around the country got an earful from listeners and angry citizens in the middle of pledge season Friday over its firing of commentator Juan Williams, receiving thousands of complaints and scattered threats to withhold donations.

"We find ourselves kind of caught between NPR and the audience," said Craig Curtis, program director at KPCC in Pasadena, Calif., which won't hold its pledge drive until next month. He said the station had received about 150 comments on the firing, mostly disapproving, and three people asked to cancel their memberships.

And the most bizarre and unexpected thing that I have read in a long time...

Meanwhile, conservative leaders including Sarah Palin are calling on Congress to cut off NPR's federal funding — an idea that was also raised in the 1990s and didn't get very far.

Source

This is just all so surreal to me - and maybe that's an indication that I've allowed myself some delusions about how the world works... But when the words "Sarah Palin" and "Juan Williams" appear together, in an article, and it's not about a disagreement, I find myself cringing.

I know that the reality is that Juan wasn't as liberal as I wanted him to be. But still... this is almost like seeing right into the booth that hides the man who controls the great and powerfull Oz to me...

BTW thank you all so much for your replies... I haven't been home long, this evening, and have scanned over this thread as best I can - as time, and life allow, I will read and respond accordingly!

~Heff

As a rather portly fellow, i would not be in the least bit offended if someone were on TV saying, "You know, people who are wearing plus sized clothing...when i see them go up to the buffet i get nervous."

But that is just me.

It's ok, Juan has a 2 million dollar contract with Fox. Doubt he's complaining or worried about anything really. Also, the guy has gotten facts dead wrong in the past. He's not a Journalist, just a Sensationalist on Fox.

Originally posted by Curiousisall
Juan Williams went on FOX news and towed the talking point line.
Juan got $2,000,000 for his trouble.
Juan still has the opportunity to speak his mind on FOX, where he is STILL EMPLOYED.
Juan is no longer subject to the restrictions of opining that were a part of his employment with NPR.

I get it, this is ATS. Soros donated $1.8 Million to NPR. We should follow the money right?
Juan got $2.0 Million from Fox for this fiasco.
Which way do we go?

I have been fired for reasons I thought were unfair. Am I the only one? Out of the others, how many then got 2 Million dollars from their other job?

He said what he wanted to say. He got $2 Million. He still gets to say whatever he wants to say.

I am really sorry that I am having a hard time feeling bad.

edit on 10/22/10 by Curiousisall because: (no reason given)

Exactly. I'm surprised there are even individuals fighting and arguing about this. Juan is a millionaire for what he said. If only Foxheads woke up and smelled the coffee.

reply to post by Hefficide


I agree, more or less, with your post. I enjoy NPR, and williams in specific. And I think the fact he was honest about his alleged 'fears' is leaps and boundsmore preferable to a PC culture where we all THINK these things, but dont say them.

This could (and may still be) have been a great opportunity for Americans to have a dialogue around the 'fears' we have all been programmed to have about "teh Moslems" Instead, it just smells like more PC nonsense.
---

Also, on a side note to all the NPR bashers-this notion of 'cutting off NPR funding is silly. they recieive something like 2% of their funding from the fed.

Federal grants provide less than 2 percent of NPR's annual budget. It's funded primarily by affiliates, corporate sponsors and major donors

www.9and10news.com...

reply to post by Curiousisall


Nobody is saying that they feel sorry for Juan. The point is that people have become hyper sensitive. Juan said something that a lot of people feel. He also followed it up by saying, it is not a good reason to discriminate.

There was no reason to fire Juan for his statement. People that listen to NPR will notice that their isn't exactly a lack of opinion in their journalism. That is is the way journalism has always worked. Nobody can completely leave behind their bias when writing about or talking about a situation.

Americans have become over sensitive and these organizations like CAIR have become idiotic fiefdoms built on victimhood. They hold back the people they claim to represent by overreacting and playing up supposed differences. They will never admit to any amount of equalization because it means their careers are over. They will overplay even minor slights to enhance their position or advance their agenda. If they have to attack Juan Williams to keep the dollars flowing in they don't care. What is a little blood on the treads or tarnish on an image. As long as they keep their pockets overflowing.

I agree with you that it is idiotic to be scared of the ones in religous garb. People looking to attack others try to blend in. They want to be a a shadow untill it is too late to react.

reply to post by Hefficide



It's truly sad that he was fired but it's just as sad that he will be used as a tool by fox....I've watched him many times on fox and he seemed pretty level headed..what a shame NPR caved and how rude of the person in charge to bring up his psychiatrist or publicist...so friggin caddy...

Originally posted by chrismarco
reply to post by Hefficide

 

It's truly sad that he was fired but it's just as sad that he will be used as a tool by fox....I've watched him many times on fox and he seemed pretty level headed..what a shame NPR caved and how rude of the person in charge to bring up his psychiatrist or publicist...so friggin caddy...

I agree with this. Juan was always the "liberal" foil on my Sunday morning talk shows. Even if it was a just a role that he played, he, at least, voiced some of my own thoughts.

Now I fear that "my voice" will be utterly dictated by Fox in the same manner that they hijacked the Tea Party's voice. What if Fox uses Juan to promote things as a means of implying that he's a liberal spokesperson?

I hope Juan sticks to his own guns. I can put up with him being too forgiving of Obama as long as he squeezes in a bit of the liberal message along with it.

~Heff

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Mak Manto

 

OK then...just to make sure you are clear on what he did say:

...Yesterday NPR fired me for telling the truth. The truth is that I worry when I am getting on an airplane and see people dressed in garb that identifies them first and foremost as Muslims...

...And I made it clear that all Americans have to be careful not to let fears lead to violation of anyone’s constitutional rights, be it to build a mosque, carry the Koran or drive a New York cab without fear having your throat slashed. Bill and I argued after I said he has to take care in the way he talks about the 9/11 attacks so as not to provoke bigotry...

So, you are saying that he is wrong? That we SHOULD allow our fears lead to violating peoples constitutional rights?

That is what you are saying.

Texan, he got FIRED for saying THIS:

Political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don't address reality. I mean, look Bill [O'Reilly], I'm not a bigot, you know the kind of books I've written on the civil rights movement in this country, but when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.

Now, I remember also that when the Times Square bomber was at court, I think this was just last week. He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts. But I think there are people who want to somehow remind us all as President Bush did after 9/11, it's not a war against Islam.

So, if he sees people in "Muslim garb," God, what a horrible reference, he begins to get worried and nervous that they may be terrorists.

Yes, Texan. HE'S DEAD WRONG.

Another update on the story...

NPR’s Schiller Says Juan Williams Was Fired Because of Ethics Guidelines

The reason that we terminated his contract is because of our news ethics guidelines.

The guidelines are based on the same news ethics guidelines of the Society of Professional Journalists, and are very similar to that of The New York Times and many other news organizations.

He had several times in the past violated our news code of ethics with things that he had said on other people’s air. I’m not aware of any problem with any things he has said on our air. In each of those instances, we called him on it; we had a discussion; we asked him not to do it again. It happened several times. What happened a few days ago was the latest in a series of incidents.

Source - NY Times

Now this aspect troubles me greatly...

Opinion / conversation / dialogue within the realm of what is legal should not fall into a category of "ethics". Mr Williams words may not have been loving or even enlightened... but unethical?

~Heff

Juan Williams contract wit NPR was due to expire in April. At that time they would either renegotiate or cut ties. That's just 5 months or so away. All NPR had to do was buy out his contract and say that he's no longer affiliated. It could easily have been done quietly. That would have been the mature way to handle it if NPR - with radical leftie George Soros running the show - insisted on getting rid of him. But CAIR insisted that NPR do something right away .... so they did. They bowed to CAIR .. IMHO.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Juan Williams contract wit NPR was due to expire in April.

So he had been warned several times in the past that his employers felt he violated their policy. Sounds like his contract renewal was on shaky ground. Since his promotion at FOX was so timely, what are the chances that he knew full well that he could only take advantage of what FOX had to offer if he were suddenly more available? Maybe he did not want to wait 5 months to get that petty little $2,000,000? Just thinking out loud here but the more people post about this, the more it looks like he did exactly what he wanted to do. He did get rewarded for it.

I am further confused at people insisting his employer had no business firing him. I do understand the debate as to whether or not this offense was worthy of getting fired but as has been pointed out, this is not he first time he has crossed his employers at NPR.

I find it hard to believe that any of you would actually advocate that I as a business owner should not be allowed to fire one of my employees without publishing their personell records, violation history, and a full and thorough justification.

I just do not get it.

I would think at ATS of all places people would be more interested in following the money and connecting the dots than some poor millionaire losing one of his jobs and getting a promotion at the other.

reply to post by Curiousisall


Following the money is exactly what I am doing - as I have time to do so anyway! Personally I enjoy watching Juan Williams on TV - on the political shows on Sunday morning - but not so much for his commentary as I am simply used to him being a "regular character" there.

I do worry, from more than one point of view, about the implications that this kind of situation has upon free speech and what is socially acceptable for us to discuss though.

When we become unable to discuss our differences for fear of political fallout, we also lose the ability to educate each other about those differences as well as the ability celebrate them.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


I would agree with you wholeheartedly if he were being silenced. That hardly seems to be the case here though. He has a new contract with "the most watched news network on television" and he is still free to go on all the Sunday morning talk shows he wants, isn't he?

reply to post by Curiousisall


If he were being silenced I'd be on my roof with a megaphone!

I just don't like the precedent being set here. It all reminds me a bit of Mcarthy and Murrow in a way. Not just the situation with Mr Williams, but the country in general. We used to see communists in our soup, as the saying goes... Now it's twice as complicated with terrorists on one hand, and anyone who wants to say the least little thing being pigeonholed as xenophobic.

It's a very surreal and dangerous combination of things and I sincerely think that the worst thing we can do now, as a society, is shut down and stop the discussion.

~Heff

The guy said what everybody is held back by draconian PC restrictions from saying. Muslims are all dangerous. OK, some of them may be "moderate", but there is no such thing as moderate Islam. Even if they say they don't support TERRORISM, they often support TERRORISTS by keeping them within their communities and not reporting them to the police. Muslims should be placed under the strictest watch in public, such as extra baggage security searches, bodily searches involving cavity and xray screening, a ban from wearing any garment which prevents identification, a ban on taking aboard a plane any liquids, sharp objects, mobile phones or computers, hand-held games consoles or electronic items that can be used modified or otherwise to project an infra-red or wireless signal, and lighters/matches or any sort of combustible fluid. Simple.

reply to post by Hefficide


Well respectfully, I must disagree. He is still free to go on those Sunday morning talk shows, is he not? I did not hear anything about him being banned from anything. The only job he is no longer going to be doing is the only one where he was not supposed to opine anyway. So now he has more freedom to speak his mind, he has a larger platform to do it from, and a handsome financial reward to boot.

I guess I do not understand why this precedent scares anyone. I would love to have this be the standard. Are you kidding me? If I get fired from one job for doing something I want to do and that only allows me to make more money doing what I want to do more often, where do I sign up?

Seriously though. Was he banned from these Sunday morning talk shows? Are you really going to miss him now that he will be on tv more, expressing his opinion more? Please do not take this as as hostile as some like to think I try to be. I see many of you feel pretty strongly about this and I honestly would like to understand how you all feel the way you do.

The way it looks to me, he got nothing but rewards. It only worked out in his best interest. That seems like a pretty good precedent to set. Going the other way, the precedent would be that a business cannot fire an employee legally without justifying it to the public. As a business owner, I am not fond of that precedent.

I hope you know I respect a great many of your posts and appreciate you offering up a challenge to my idea so that maybe I might reach a better understanding in this.

reply to post by Curiousisall


Thank you Curiousisall! That respect is reciprocated, truly. I enjoy your posts and do not feel you to be hostile in the least!

As the subject pertains to Juan Williams, I totally agree with everything you have said. And as it pertains to employment rights, I further agree!

My concerns are more esoteric in nature. I don't like when things become taboo which shouldn't be taboo. I don't trust the powers that be, as it were, when such things begin to happen. And in my estimation the hubbub about Islam, from both sides of the fence, have pushed this issue into very volatile and difficult straits.

Of course NPR had the right to fire Mr Williams. And, of course, Mr Williams is probably happy as a clam that he is now $2,000,000.00 richer for his trouble - and is now more free to speak his mind.

But having said that, PBS and NPR have always seemed to me to be the most honest and open source of dialogue available to us in media. That they'd now begin to play the PC card is what I find troubling. Once all seats at the dialogue table are labeled "off limits" then we are doomed to go down paths that I'd rather not see us go down.

I hope that helps to shed light upon the gist of my thoughts.

~Heff

Originally posted by Curiousisall
this is not he first time he has crossed his employers at NPR.

That's what NPR claims. They haven't backed it up (not that they have to with the general public) and considering that (far left wing) SOROS is donating huge amounts of money, and that CAIR insisted on immediate action, it is understandable that people aren't buying the NRP story. Lots of people, not just paranoid conspiracists, are seeing this as possibly big money controling a media outlet and/or appeasement of CAIR (which many see as a radical group ... some other islamic groups have come out against CAIR as well).

NPR could have just not bothered to renew him in April. Or they could easily have bought out the last 5 months of his contract and said 'you aren't with us anymore'. They wanted it public and they wanted it to make a statement. I doubt they thought they'd get this kind of scrutiny.

Any alleged misconduct by Juan in the past will have to be proven in a court of law, I'm sure. Dollars to donuts ... Juan WIlliams has probably gotten himself a really great team of lawyers now. It'll get interesting. Wonder if Soros is sitting back relaxing or if he's getting nervous that his agenda is about to be exposed.

I'm not so sure that Juan's free speech rights weren't violated. He was in a venue which called for him to be able to speak how he felt. He was fired and derogatory remarks were made about his mental stability by his former employer. True .. he got to say what he wanted, but the consequences against him could be illegal. It's kinda like saying that people in Iran have freedom of speech. Technically they can come out and say something against the government ... but they'll be arrested, tortured, and put to death within days. Is that real freedom of speech? Is what Juan experienced real freedom of speech? I haven't decided. I'm kinda on the fence about it.