The Absurdity of National Public Radio How can one stand behind a story without knowing what the story is?James Freeman
In an age of media abundance, U.S. taxpayers are for some reason being forced to fund a news outlet that’s at least as irresponsible as its private competitors. National Public Radio has spent much of the last week trying to overturn traditional standards of journalism in the service of a politically correct narrative. For the purpose of smearing a conservative Supreme Court Justice, the state-sponsored broadcaster now maintains that anonymous sources trump the subjects of a story speaking on the record—even when the anonymous sources don’t even appear to have witnessed any relevant events.
Last Tuesday, NPR’s Nina Totenberg claimed that Justice Neil Gorsuch was “prickly” in an account that began with the following story:
It was pretty jarring earlier this month when the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court took the bench for the first time since the omicron surge over the holidays. All were now wearing masks. All, that is, except Justice Neil Gorsuch. What’s more, Justice Sonia Sotomayor was not there at all, choosing instead to participate through a microphone setup in her chambers.
Sotomayor has diabetes, a condition that puts her at high risk for serious illness, or even death, from COVID-19. She has been the only justice to wear a mask on the bench since last fall when, amid a marked decline in COVID-19 cases, the justices resumed in-person arguments for the first time since the onset of the pandemic.
Now, though, the situation had changed with the omicron surge, and according to court sources, Sotomayor did not feel safe in close proximity to people who were unmasked. Chief Justice John Roberts, understanding that, in some form asked the other justices to mask up.
They all did. Except Gorsuch, who, as it happens, sits next to Sotomayor on the bench. His continued refusal since then has also meant that Sotomayor has not attended the justices’ weekly conference in person, joining instead by telephone.
On Wednesday Ms. Totenberg provided an update:
Three Supreme Court justices issued statements Wednesday addressing an NPR story about relations among the justices. On Tuesday, NPR reported that Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a longtime diabetic, had indicated to Chief Justice John Roberts that because of the omicron surge, she did not feel safe being in a room with people who are unmasked, and that the chief justice “in some form asked the other justices to mask up.”
On Wednesday, Sotomayor and Gorsuch issued a statement saying that she did not ask him to wear a mask. NPR’s report did not say that she did. Then, the chief justice issued a statement saying he “did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other justice to wear a mask on the bench.” The NPR report said the chief justice’s ask to the justices had come “in some form.”
NPR stands by its reporting.
This was too much even for NPR’s Public Editor Kelly McBride, ostensibly a sort of ombudsman who is not exactly known for blowing the whistle on left-wing bias. Readers will recall Ms. McBride as a willing participant in the disgraceful media blackout of the New York Post’s accurate reporting about Biden family business prior to the 2020 election.
Now Ms. McBride acknowledges that the Totenberg report needs a “clarification.” On Thursday Ms. McBride assessed the Totenberg claims about the Supreme Court:
Here’s the key assertion in the story from Tuesday’s Morning Edition: “The situation had changed, and, according to court sources, Sotomayor did not feel safe in close proximity to people who were unmasked. Chief Justice John Roberts, understanding that, in some form or other, asked the other justices to mask up.”
Later Tuesday on All Things Considered, [Ms. Totenberg] changed the word “asked” to “suggested,” saying, “So Chief Justice John Roberts, understanding that, in some form or other, suggested that the other justices mask up.”
It’s true that Ms. Totenberg used the word “suggested” in a separate NPR appearance last week, but she has not corrected the story in which she claimed the Chief Justice “asked.” Ms. McBride continues:
Exactly how did Roberts, in some form, ask or suggest that his colleagues cover up? Totenberg told me she hedged on this: “If I knew exactly how he communicated this I would say it. Instead I said ‘in some form.’ ”
Ms. Totenberg and NPR are standing behind a story without even knowing what the story is. If listeners weren’t skeptical enough about a story that has been flatly rejected on the record by the Chief Justice, they are now being asked to believe a tale attributed to anonymous sources who can’t or won’t provide either documentary evidence or even the most basic details related to their claims. Once Ms. Totenberg gave NPR’s sources anonymity, why could these sources not share the form and timing of the alleged communication?
Ms. McBride, the NPR public editor, provides some hope that even if the state-sponsored broadcaster is willing to abandon journalistic standards, its listeners are not willing to go along:
The disconnect between the story and Chief Justice Roberts’ statement is concerning to many NPR listeners and readers who wrote to us.
Eric Reed emailed: “When will Nina Totenberg be issuing a retraction or correction to her article, given that it is false and based [on] nothing at all, or at the very least more complicated [than] your article indicates?”
And Jesus Magallanes wrote, “I saw the ‘in some form’ part as a justification for standing by the reporting but there’s no explanation why that is. A request, regardless of the form it came in, is a request, correct? In order for the story to be true as NPR first reported, Roberts would’ve had to have asked ‘in some form,’ but he said he didn’t, full stop.”
Sadly, the network has been ignoring the sound advice offered by its listeners and even the gentle critique from its own public editor. Paul Farhi reports in the Washington Post:
On Friday, NPR spokesperson Isabel Lara reiterated the organization’s support for Totenberg. She said McBride “is independent and doesn’t speak on behalf of NPR.”
Lara added, “Someone can ask without explicitly asking. Someone can say, ‘This person doesn’t feel comfortable being around people who aren’t masked’ or some other permutation of that and the listeners get the message.”
People can ask lots of things. The job of a journalist is to report what they actually say and do. And there’s no reason anonymous sources shouldn’t be able to tell NPR the particulars of the alleged request—unless they’re passing along unverifiable second-hand claims or just making it up. And there’s no reason NPR shouldn’t share such information with listeners.
For now, Ms. Totenberg holds an untenable position—denying Mr. Roberts’ public statement in favor of the claims of anonymous sources who haven’t even told her what happened.
***
Comments are closed.
