Dozens Of NPR Employees Write Letter Proving Uri Berliner Was Right About Everything | Eastern NC Now

    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the The Daily Wire. The author of this post is Virginia Kruta.

    Dozens of National Public Radio (NPR) employees signed on to a letter suggesting that their now-former senior business editor Uri Berliner was spot on in his assessment of the liberal bias that has taken over the network.

    New York Times media reporter Ben Mullin shared screenshots of the letter, addressed to CEO Katherine Maher and Editor in Chief Edith Chapin, which claimed that Berliner's essay in The Free Press had left many of them feeling as though they'd been personally attacked.

    "About 50 NPR employees sign a letter to CEO Katherine Maher and top editor Edith Chapin calling for, among other things, a public rebuke of the 'factual inaccuracies and elisions' in Uri Berliner's Free Press essay," Mullin's caption read.

    "We're writing to urge stronger support for staff who have had their journalistic expertise called into question by one of their own in a public forum," the letter read. "We also urge more transparency regarding the consequences of making unauthorized public comments that seek to change NPR's editorial direction."

    The letter went on to say that while both Chapin and Maher had shared their objections to Berliner's claims - namely that the outlet been wholly disinterested in presenting stories that might hurt President Joe Biden or help former President Donald Trump - the employees were concerned that their efforts to spur policy changes through Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives were being undermined by Berliner's public comments.

    "Staff, many from marginalized backgrounds, have pushed for internal policy changes through mechanisms like the DEI accountability committee, sharing of affinity group guidelines, and an ad-hoc content review group," they wrote, complaining that Berliner was getting more attention and apparent change from a short essay than they had after years of work.


    Their concern on that point, they said, was that others within the network might get the idea that a pointed editorial was more effective at forcing change than going through proper channels.

    They also complained that Berliner's essay had "made their jobs harder" and called on Maher and Chapin to clearly "offer public support and defense of those individuals whose work was directly undermined by the opinion piece."

poll#128

Where do you stand on the wanton censorship by Big Tech Platforms, while retaining their Section 230 carveout indemnifying them for Slander /Defamation lawsuits and Copyright infringements?

  Big Tech Platforms have the right to Censor all speech providing they voluntarily relinquish their Section 230 Carveout.

  Big Tech Platforms DO NOT have the right to Censor any speech, while retaining multiple indemnifications by virtue of the Section 230 Carveout.

  I know nothing of this 230 talk, but "I do love me some social media".

476 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?

poll#201

Considering what real news is available for all to witness, and in great specificity, should one pursue what is true outside of the channeled realm of the corrupt corporate /legacy media, and: Is Institutionalized Corruption real, and is it a hindrance to sustaining our Constitutional Republic now, and for future generations of American citizens?

  Yes

  No

  Not sure

508 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?