NPR's Andrea Seabrook fed up with all the lies quits

[salvorhardin]

Last edited Sat Aug 25, 2012, 11:05 AM - Edit history (1)

This is a story I completely missed this week. NPR's Congressional reporter of a decade, Andrea Seabrook, got tired of repeating politicians' lies every day so she resigned.

‎

"I realized that there is a part of covering Congress, if you’re doing daily coverage, that is actually sort of colluding with the politicians themselves because so much of what I was doing was actually recording and playing what they say or repeating what they say.

...

We need to stop coddling lawmakers, stop buying their red team, blue team narrative and ask harder questions of them."

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79998.html

She left to found DecodeDC, a blog and podcast where she plans to do reporting that, "will decipher Washington's Byzantine language and procedure, sweeping away what doesn't matter so you can focus on what does."

You can also listen to an interview on WNYC's On The Media with Andrea Seabrook about why she quit her job of 14 years at NPR, what's so wrong about political reporting today, and what her hopes are for DecodeDC.





[div style="background-color:#ffa;"]On edit: Here's a lengthy interview with Andrea Seabrook on NPR too:
[div class="excerpt" style="background-color: #ffa !important;"] "Americans, real people, you have bought this line that we are on two teams in this country. There is a red team, and there is a blue team. When we've gotten to the point where your partisan stripe comes before your American citizenship, our shared culture, our shared values in this country, then we have a real problem at the nation — national, federal level. We vote for people who are going in there to fight red or blue instead of put that stuff down at the end of the election cycle and work on real problems that need to be solved."


[div style="text-align:center;"]

[CabCurious]

1. This goes right across every commercial news entity x 1000

[burnsei sensei]

2. The integrity of journalism

has been non-existent for too long.
Journalists who refuse to stand alone, who refuse to frame their work around their own assumptions (as opposed to partisan assumptions) are mouthpieces.
I'm glad she got tired of it.

[Octafish]

3. Godspeed, Andrea!

Thank you!

The media's been owned and operated by War Inc for a long time. Read "On Bended Knee' by Mak Hertzgaard and "The Media Monopoly " by Ben Bagdikian for details. My 3¢:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9327337

[Where was George]

61. Thanks for the link/resources Fish

When it comes to what I thought I really knew about politics after it comes filtered through the media? Well it turns out to be very little.

I will immediately read your link from Carl Bernstein. He I trust, not Bob Woodward.

[NRaleighLiberal]

4. Heroes are hard to find these days - this is one. Well done, Andrea!

[Brewinblue]

5. Kudos to Andrea!

Maybe she and Soledad can save American political journalism.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

6. "stop coddling lawmakers, stop buying their [...] narrative and ask harder questions of them." +1

"We need to stop coddling lawmakers, stop buying their red team, blue team narrative and ask harder questions of them."

Right on.

There is too much of a conveyor belt in the press. The problem is that the media bosses let the candidates control them by controlling access.

Best Wishes, Andrea Seabrook. Bookmarking your blog site.

[salvorhardin]

7. The podcast sounds like it's going to be fantastic

You can listen to a 64 second preview at DecodeDC. I wish SoundCloud embedding worked here, because I wanted to include it in the OP.

[steve2470]

8. Good for her !

My guess is she's taking a pay cut to do this but her ethics are more important. We need more journalists like her !

[salvorhardin]

9. Added NPR interview to OP

[beac]

10. Brava, Ms. Seabrook!

Wish more journalists had your integrity.

[tularetom]

11. Why did she have to quit to say this? She was a "reporter"

All she had to do was report the bullshit through the medium that was available to her.

It would have gotten a good deal more coverage than her quitting did and it may have actually prompted some other so called reporters to come out of the closet and admit that the entire journalistic profession is lazy compromised and corrupt.

There's something vaguely self serving about her actions.

[salvorhardin]

12. Real life journalism jobs don't resemble The Newsroom

Believe me, there's no way she could have said the things she's saying now and remained an employee of NPR. She'd have gotten the Teabagger treatment and been fired within a week as NPR's execs quaked in their $600 shoes at the thought of losing their public sinecure.

[tularetom]

16. I'll agree with you when she points fingers and names names

All I've seen so far are really vague allegations. She hasn't really told us anything we didn't already know or at least suspect. I want to know who are the people dispensing the bullshit and who were the NPR suits pressuring her to repeat it.

Something along the lines of the famous Jon Stewart appearance on CNN's Crossfire would be nice.

[calimary]

48. Kicked for this post alone! Thanks, tularetom!

LOVE the way Jon Stewart cut little tucker carlson into itty bitty pieces. Utterly ruined him - he (and "Crossfire," too) never recovered from this take-down. And, gratefully, this clip will follow him to the end of his days - and beyond. -

Well-deserved! Jon Stewart, YOU ROCK! You didn't just make an on-camera appearance. You performed a public service!

We're not gonna be your monkey either, bowtie-boy.

[JackRiddler]

50. Yes, so far it's high-minded rhetoric.

I mistrust those who conflate truth with "lack of partisanship." The truth is often partisan, and we should all be its partisans.

The same kind of language could be used in promoting a Grand Bargain, for example. Let's get past "partisan" differences and have unity on "solutions," which are objectively given to us by the God of Budgeting who says: Cut entitlements to save the world!

[LuckyLib]

52. This is amazing. Tucker Carlson, clearly backed into a corner, illustrates

exactly the frustration many of us have with television news -- he could not let Jon Stewart finish a thought or a sentence, and STILL Stewart nailed him. What a colossal ass!

The NPR reporter is saying the same thing . . . that MSM has abdicated its responsibility to stand back and call bullshit what it is, to ask hard questions, and to confront politicians who want the media to serve as its spin-doctor.

[snot]

66. Exactly!

[woo me with science]

68. Thank you for posting this.

Wow.

[NoMoreWarNow]

80. yes, I agree

she needs to be a real whistleblower, not just give up because of the lies.

[truedelphi]

41. I don't know if I agree with you or tularetom -both

Of you make good and plausible points.

But the fact of the matter is that NPR does have a total bias. I quit listening to them, except for one or two non-political related shows, way back in the 2004 election cycle.

The reason for my quitting listening to them: I had waited to hear a debate between two Democrats, two Republicans, and one independent - and it turned out that of those five people, only the "indie" refused to trash John Kerry. I couldn't help but wonder how it was the news people at NPR couldn't find any Democrats who supported Kerry.

[Marr]

18. I agree. The time to do something was

when she could actually cut through the bullshit. Instead, she resigns without ruffling any feathers and makes what is really a very PC statement about "bipartisanship".

[mwooldri]

24. That's exactly the problem with being a reporter.

The editor will publish what they think are good reports... if the reporter turns in a b.s. report and the editor decides not to use it, then no matter how truthful that report is it won't get airplay. Editors work by an agenda (yep even all the nice ones that are more balanced) and they pick reports based on that agenda.

Seems like to me she's added "editor" to her role in her new venture. I wish her only but the best.

[avebury]

13. K&R nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

14. W skewed NPR totally to the right and President Obama has done nothing to repair

the damage. I was listening to NPR most of the day yesterday and with each story that came up, the right wing position was presented first and as the default, and the center-left argument was quickly dismissed when it was mentioned at all, maybe half the time.

Foe example, we had an interview with our state education boss (forget the actual title) who went on and on about how class size is irrelevant, and every call that came in was from a teacher (current and former) who tried to call him on his BS. The host brushed the caller off in 10 - 15 seconds, and turned it over to the idiot to restate his BS for as long as he could talk.

Similar on the national show, NPR interviewed every conservative idiot they could find in Wisconsin to talk about the plight of the small business owner, or whatever, with not even the suggestion of a challenge to obvious lies. If NPR was the only source of political news, you have to believe that WI will overwhelmingly support Rmoney.

[truedelphi]

42. That was my experience with NPR and exactly why I left

Their spot on the dial.

When a Republican was introduced, you could "hear" the smile in their voices. When it was a Democrat, or gawd forbid someone like Bernie Sanders, you could hear the cold chill that came across their faces while they dealt with the person.

NPR was not fair and balanced. It was very much to the right.

[Romulox]

15. NPR was the mouthpiece of the culture of the upper middle class, before it turned right.

It has never taken its mission to serve the American people seriously.

Compare its editorial stance to that of the BBC, for example, and it becomes clear...

[leveymg]

29. NPR/PBS is Exxon Mobil Corporation.

Anyone who seriously thinks that NPR can and will deliver a clear, critical analysis of the propaganda line of U.S. Congress, Inc. (another wholly-owned subsidiary) is incredibly naive.

[tilsammans]

62. I call NPR National PHARMA Radio

It's fully in the pocket of Big Pharma in much of its reporting on healthcare topics.

And it's often the same with Big Food, as with this recent pro-aspartame drivel:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/08/22/159840484/kids-ditching-full-sugar-soda-for-diet-drinks-just-like-mom-and-dad

[leveymg]

76. Aspartame - have a Coke with Sarin nerve gas.

A slightly befuddled consumer is our best consumer.

[tilsammans]

83. Yep, that's about right

The stuff tastes crappy anyway.

[AlbertCat]

33. NPR was the mouthpiece of the culture of the upper middle class

What.... you don't like classical music?

[snot]

67. On that point: are you aware of the changes to BBC governance?

A couple of years ago, the rules were changed to allow the PM to be the person to select people for its Board (i.e., total conflict of interest), and also to allow outsourcing to private contractors.

I'm concerned that I'm starting to see a deterioration in their news coverage . . .

[samsingh]

17. that's imperative

[spooky3]

19. Sounds like more false equivalence BS to me. I hope I turn out to be wrong.

The problem is with the red team's choice to do everything possible to thwart Obama, and with the corporate money that is influencing players on both teams. She should be focused on reporting the truth, and let the chips fall, even if that means they don't fall evenly on "both sides."

[Bernardo de La Paz]

22. Her point is what you want her to do, not your post title.

I don't get why you accuse her of false equivalence BS. Her point is that reporters need to stop being a conveyor belt for both sides talking points.

[tularetom]

23. Nope, both sides do not have talking points

On may issues there are two points of view but one is factual and the other is not. Only one of these two points of view can be labeled as "talking points". The other side is simply "the truth" and her job as a reporter was not to whine about "both sides" but simply to report the truth and point out the BS.

Her actions were a publicity stunt nothing more.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

30. You equate talking points = truth. That's bogus. You are shooting the wrong messenger.

You seem to think that there is always one truth and that one side or the other always states it; presumably you think the blue team is always a truth-teller.

It is a fallacy to see things in black & white, as being purely true or simple or that simple lines can be drawn. There are many truths on any issue, many facts, and many valid points. There are shades of gray and usually no simple line can be drawn. It is bogus to say one "side is simply 'the truth'".

Often both sides will make valid points, and even more often one side will have more valid points than the other. They are all talking points, valid or invalid. You can try to redefine the meaning of the phrase "talking point" to your own private language, but that doesn't work so well.

What Seaborn is advocating is for media in general and reporters in particular to stop only repeating talking points without asking hard questions that might get them denied access. When politicians become evasive and answer a touchy question with a talking point -- say answering an abortion question with a jobs point as Akin does -- then the questions can become harder and blunter.

If you don't want hard questions asked, if you want reporters to report talking points, if you want them to simply be a conveyor belt for spin from both sides, ... then you can get it by knocking down people like Seaborn who rebel against it.

[RC]

34. Their are none so blind as those that cannot/will not see...

Two points of view? Only 2? Really? Not any more. There is usually three (3) points of view. The wing-nutz Republicans, their enablers, the Democrats and the truth backed up with facts.

If all you see is an 'US, vs Them', you are part of the problem. She did what she though she needed to do. Her reputation is still intact. If she had tried to do this while still employed with NPR, she very well could have been Dan Rathered and her reputation would then be questionable or even discredited.

[Plucketeer]

47. Thanx for saving me the keystrokes

Two distinct parties? Yes. But listen to each one - objectively (if you can keep from laughing at one of them) - and tell me which one tells more (or ANY) truths. I can guarantee you, there'll be NO comparison.

I DO agree with her that reporters are just paid "mic checks" for the politicians they interview. The internet may be where the fourth estate makes it's final stand.

[tomp]

73. only three points of view? wow!

according to how i read your post, democrats are the truth. I don't think i'm stretching here--that's seems to be clearly what you are saying. and, that you accuse the poster you're responding to of "us-vs them" mentality is not just a little hypocritical. i can only suggest that you review american history a bit. it will not be hard to find democratic falseness.

at the very least, a large part of the truth is situated well to the left of the democratic party (which would make at least four points of view). and, there is an aspect of true conservatism that both parties have abandoned--the part where we actually "conserve," which could probably thought of as a fifth point of view. There are, trust me, more.

[RC]

77. Try re-reading my post again.

Two points of view? Only 2? Really? Not any more. There is usually three (3) points of view. The wing-nutz Republicans, their enablers, the Democrats and the truth backed up with facts.

[xxenderwigginxx]

20. We now return you to our regularly scheduled red team, blue team narrative already in progress

[spooky3]

21. exactly

[salvorhardin]

25. For those who think this is just more bipartisan BS...

Give a listen to the 64 second promo for her show. Does this sound like she's going the David Brooks route? http://soundcloud.com/decodedc/decodedc-e1-intro

You may be right. I hope you're wrong. However, to condemn her before you've even heard the product is asinine.

[rrneck]

26. Smart woman. mt

[elbloggoZY27]

27. No Real Surprise

Covering politics and especially Congress must really be an ugly and smelly assignment. "What we sow is what we reap" and the extremely low respect we have for those we send to Washington would make anybody cringe.

Personally I place most of the blame on lower voter turn outs and votes for an inferior product. There are really very few quality candidates in our society that even want to run. Ugliness has taken over and mostly it is from the GOP.

Good luck to you Andrea and I wish you future success.

[alfredo]

28. Give me hell

[RagAss]

31. Another one who's watching "The Newsroom".

[progressoid]

32. Hey, Jon Stewart. Have Andrea on your show!

She needs a little more exposure.

[lunasun]

35. Ironically I think this story needs more press

Hope she doesn'i jam us all later though

[xxqqqzme]

38. Will be interesting to see

which program she is invited to first....if any.




It is a shame NPR has allowed its reputation to be tarnished. I was glued to NPR during Watergate and Nixon's impeachment trial. It was once the first place I'd turn to for news.

[99Forever]

36. Wonderful to see a real reporter for a change.

I suspect they'll find a way to discredit and smear her, just like they have others.

[JNelson6563]

37. Red Team/Blue Team = Media Goldmine

While the R's have pushed to polarize for decades, the media has lapped it up and perpetuated it in a big way. Glad she realized her job was part of the problem. It will be interesting to see what they decide matters most to us.

Julie

[blm]

39. Great find - this is one of the most important posts I've seen in a while.

.

[GoCubsGo]

40. I hope Al Gore gives her a job.

I think she'd fit right in at Current TV.

[HiPointDem]

43. kr

[Lucky Luciano]

44. Impressive and gutsy stand. Hope she retains access and does not get blackballed by congress.

[xtraxritical]

45. Thank Reagan for destroying the objective quality programing that used to be NPR.

He tried to kill PBS too. Republicans and conservatives suck.

[defacto7]

46. Her words ring true...

but I'll be listening. It's still to be seen if she actually can deliver the goods or not. I am all for her if she can make a clean break and actually offer the facts. She could have enemies that would set her up or cut her off, or she could create something powerful and useful. We need such, but I can't just put her on a pedestal before I see the product.

I am a cynic, but that's the world in which we live.

Go get'm Andrea. I'll be watching.

[uponit7771]

49. I listen to NPR every morning on habbit, I can hear it getting LESS 99%

[Bainbridge Bear]

51. Well, that makes all of ONE of the NPR reporters

who is tired of being a stenographer to power. I don't expect too many others to join her. NPR lost credibility with me a long time ago. However, kudos to to Ms. Seabrook for her integrity.

[bvar22]

53. "partisan stripe comes before your American citizenship,"

Testify, Sister!



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their rhetoric, promises, or excuses.
[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[NashvilleLefty]

54. On a side note,

is that Isaac Asimov in your Avatar? My favorite author of all time!

and thanks for the info - I'm definitely going to be reading her blog!

[salvorhardin]

57. Yes, it's old Isaac

I'm pretty fond of him too.

[barbtries]

55. maybe her leaving

will inspire NPRR (national public republican radio) to clean up their act. i will go to her page and share because i think this is important.

[salvorhardin]

59. Not at all

The problem is systemic, and with NPR that's even more so. It's the result of a deal NPR cut with the devil after their first leader nearly bankrupted them. Give the book Listener Supported a read sometime. http://www.amazon.com/Listener-Supported-Culture-History-Public/dp/0275983528

[barbtries]

71. thanks for the heads up

i'll check it out. i am really really tired of their political coverage. they give so much unearned validity to the republicans it just makes me sick.

[salvorhardin]

75. Slight correction...

It was NPR's second president, Frank Mankiewicz, that cut that deal with the devil. From the very start, NRP pissed off Congress and Republicans by reporting from the left on Watergate and the Senate's hearings on Vietnam. However, they were tiny. But then Mankiewicz tried to aggressively grow NPR into an international news organization. He had good motivations, but he very nearly bankrupted NPR. So in 1983 there was a huge Congressional investigation, and in exchange for the CPB lending NPR enough money to keep it alive, Mankiewicz was forced to resign. NPR also lost direct funding, and the current f'd up arrangement where the money was given to member stations directly. The member stations would have to buy their programming from NPR.

Mankiewicz is a really interesting person. Here's a 1982 People profile of him. One thing not mentioned is that he hated the metric system and is one of the people who convinced Reagan to kill metrication efforts in the US.
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20082222,00.html

Anyway, that's why I keep reminding people that their local public radio system is not NPR, no matter how much effort they put into blurring the distinction. Your local public radio station is an independent entity controlled by [em]you[/em]. If you don't like their programming, then get involved. It's an amazingly open process and most stations -- not all -- welcome volunteers.

IMHO, the biggest threat to public radio these days is consolidation and NPR itself. More and more independent stations are forced to sell out to larger regional networks like Minnesota Public Radio or Northeast Public Radio because they can't get enough monetary support from listeners. The result is that there's less diversity of programming. Don't get me wrong -- both MPR and Northeast Public Radio produce some fantastic programs. However, when the public radio for an entire state, or parts of several states, is conceived, produced, and distributed from a central location, it sort of defeats the whole idea of public radio in the first place.

Then there's NPR. NPR is dead set on becoming a multimedia company, and killing the radio part of their name. They give away their programming for free online, so why should people support their local stations to hear the NPR programming?

[Iggo]

56. Me t'ink me love she!

[RufusTFirefly]

58. Story played up by right-wing Politico. Color me skeptical

Last edited Sat Aug 25, 2012, 08:04 PM - Edit history (1)

The president and CEO of Politico is also the Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation.

Politico is part of Allbritton Communications. Do yourself a favor and Google "Allbritton" and "Pinochet" or "Allbritton" and "Riggs Bank"

[Canuckistanian]

60. Her blog looks interesting

She obviously knows DC politics. I'd be interested in what she has to say.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

63. K & R

[LovingA2andMI]

64. Double K & R for its' TRUTH!

[patrice]

65. Kicking for sharing frequently!

[woo me with science]

69. K&R

[alp227]

70. examples of Seabrook's own RW bias

NPR wrongly suggested Reid, Stabenow face "ethics allegations" over Abramoff contributions

Many media outlets report Snow's defense of Pelosi without noting simultaneous RNC attack

apparently she announced her decision to quit on Talk of the Nation last month.

[Crunchy Frog]

72. Good for her. NPR is no place for people who want to do real journalism.

[Iggy]

74. This is Mostly NPR's and MSM's Fault

let's back up a bit--

years ago the CEO, Dwayne Andreas of Archer Daniels Midland.. a huge agribusiness giant located in IL, got busted by
the federal government for price fixing of a major food additive (Andreas was a big supporter of Nixon, and
once gave Nixon's secretary a bag of $1,000 dollar bills to assist him with his Watergate problem). The federal
indictment/fine handed down by the gov't was at the time the largest in US history.

when Andreas sat before the senate committee investigating ADM, he flat our stated, "when it comes to
agriculture, there is no free market system". this honesty caused nary an eye to blink among the
committee members. I suspect that's because these senators knew how big business is done in the U.S.-- it's
more about monoplization of commodities than the "free market".

not long after this ADM paid NPR (I believe it was around $250,000) to assist ADM with a PR, damage repair campaign.
I was listening to NPR at the time and note several times a day they ran positive, feel good sort of general
info ads-- regarding ADM.

this is when I stopped believing in NPR as "alternative media". in my opinion, their moniker should be NPRR, "National
Public Relations Radio".

re: Seabrook leaving the station-- no surprise.. the surprise is NPR has anyone of any quality working for them.

"We need to stop coddling lawmakers, stop buying their red team, blue team narrative and ask harder questions of them."

The lame excuse NPR officials invariably drag out is, "it's all about access.. we can't get politicians to come on our show
if we ask questions that are too hard.. or that are on their list of questions not to ask".

WTF? really? then why exactly should I listen to NPR? how is NPR different from mainstream media?

they aren't, that's the point.

In 1993, ADM was the subject of a lysine price fixing investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. Senior ADM executives were indicted on criminal charges for engaging in price-fixing within the international lysine market. Three of ADM's top officials, including vice chairman Michael Andreas were eventually sentenced to federal prison in 1999. Moreover, in 1997, the company was fined $100 million, the largest antitrust fine in U.S. history at the time.[9] Mark Whitacre, FBI informant and whistleblower of the lysine price-fixing conspiracy, would also find himself in legal trouble for embezzling money from ADM during his time as an informant for the FBI. In addition, according to ADM's 2005 annual report a settlement was reached under which ADM paid $400 million in 2005 to settle a class action antitrust suit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_Daniels_Midland

[HughBeaumont]

78. I'd sure like to hear how a progressive's economic plan is as equally damaging as a Republican's.

I'd sure like to find a point in recent history where a progressive economic plan has even been ATTEMPTED.

I'd sure like to hear how our human-rights-centered social policies are as equally damaging and equally as unreasonable as the corporate-favoring Right-Wing's.

[xxenderwigginxx]

82. You know when i talk to people I notice a common phenomenon...

the average person has no idea what a progressive economic plan is. How can they push for, or support something that they dont know anything about? I'm not sure I myself could really say what the progressive economic plan is.

[Why Syzygy]

81. .marking for later reference nt

[Kablooie]

84. Decode DC has released it's first episode!

Using this to kick this thread back to life.