Juan Williams was trying to do two things — one, in a personal way reflect the very human and emotional response that many have when they see those distinctively identifiable as Muslims on airplanes in a post-9/11 climate; and two, having said that, then explain why and how we should not in stereotypical fashion simply give in to those fears. His firing, of course, was manifestly unfair and he is now in the Orwellian position of having to explain why he is not a “bigot.” What he said was clearly different from what, for example, Helen Thomas said when she crudely called for Jews to “get the hell out of Palestine, go back to Poland and Germany.” Shortly after those remarks, she was given a lifetime award from CAIR — the same Islamic advocacy group that has now asked NPR to go after Williams.
Nor were Williams’s efforts as offensive as the president’s own snap judgment that police, in general, “stereotype” and, in particular, acted “stupidly” in the case of his friend Professor Gates — much less his infamous 2008 quip that his grandmother was a “typical white person.” I am sure someone is going to collate all the controversial remarks of NPR journalists and discover (a) that some were far more controversial than anything Williams said, and (b) they were not only not fired but not reprimanded, given the politically correct ideological profile of their particular targets.
I don’t agree with a lot of what Williams argues, but I like and respect him a great deal because he is intellectually honest, judicious, and logical, and always brings a certain dignity and calm to his opinions. NPR should know that by now. In sum, I wager that if Williams had had a second job at MSNBC or PBS, this would not be an issue. His Fox affiliation clearly is the subtext of the entire controversy.
NPR have said that this was not due to solely the O'Reilly appearance but a number of things over the last couple of years.
It would be interesting to know if they had raised concerns directly to him at the time, or if this is the first he has heard about it.
Having said that he actually hasn't been "fired". My understanding is that he is not on a contract with NPR but is, in fact, paid per appearance. They're just not using him again.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRight on, Dr. Hanson.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's been jumping around the blogosphere today, but the artist who created the "how to speak teabag" cartoon editorial for NPR.org certainly crossed that line of controversy. Not only was he not reprimanded, he was vigorously defended by NPR and the video is posted at their site to this day.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes indeed. Now that we know the "standards" at NPR unemployed Americans with plenty of time on their hands are going to scour the archives and reveal all kinds of wacky, offensive, bizarre utterances from analysts, commentators and reporters at NPR. The guys who do the NPR podcast It's All Politics have used the term 'teabaggers' to refer to Tea Party members, for instance. Not a peep out of the suits at NPR.
What I suspect the unearthing of the old quotes will reveal is that there is no defined standard at NPR. The only standard is that one shouldn't offend the delicate, sensitive pin-heads who run the place.
To me the ultimate irony is that if NPR were unionized Williams could not have been fired in this manner (over the phone!). There would be various reviews and investigations, appeals, and administrative leave (with pay) before Williams would be formally reprimanded, in person alongside his union rep. Maybe NPR should do a story on the benefits of running a non-union shop. ;-)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere is precedent. In April 2009, Ben Stein was fired by the New York Times, purportedly for making TV ads for a credit score agency. He had been writing columns for The American Spectator and was also doing conservative commentary on FoxNews. My guess is that the NYT & NPR were both looking for excuses to sack Mssrs. Stein & Williams for daring to appear on FoxNews. Quelle horreur!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA line in the sand has been more clearly drawn by making a very public example of Juan Williams. Despite his lifetime of achievements in identifying and defining real bigotry, he has been sacked for expressing publicly the tension in his own life dealing with fear and reason. In my view, he clearly modeled what reasonable people do with their prejudices: Identify feelings and their source, and then make choices about their behavior that reflect their deepest held values. Juan expressed the normalcy of fear when experiencing certain kinds of images (in this case, I believe certain kind of clothing was mentioned), but then identified his deeper value and expressed the way that he filters these feelings and makes a choice. He chooses to believe that not everyone who dresses in a fashion reflecting Islamic sentiments represents danger to non-Islamic people. Now the message has been sent out that because it is wrong to even feel this fear (as if the feeling of fear can have an ethical component?) it is an offense to admit to it, regardless of what actions you may choose. Even un-PC feelings aren’t allowed, and will get you fired if you voice them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExcellent post Dr. Hanson. Isn't it amazing how similar this is to the Shirley Sherrod incident? In that case, you had someone who was fired for a controversial and bigoted line about not helping a white farmer because he was white, but when the full context of the statement was revealed, it was apparent that she was using that incident to illustrate how she overcame her bigotry and ended up saving the man's farm. The calls for her immediate re-enstatement and for apologies from the USDA as well as Fox News were all over the liberal press.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNow, you have essentially the same situation. Juan Williams was making a larger point that although he personally feels some trepidation at flying alongside practicing Muslims, he feels that people need to try and get over their prejudices. By itself, his statement about fearing Muslims could be construed as bigoted, but you can't single out that one statement and have to include his entire statement to understand his point.
So, where are the NAACP and Revs. Jackson/Sharpton/Farrakhan/Wright and the rest of the Liberal Democrats to defend another person of color being unfairly fired for comments taken out of context? Where is our President in condemning NPR for "acting stupidly"? The silence is, and will continue to be, deafening; Juan Williams plays with Fox News and therefore can't be trusted by the Left.
Liberal Democrats, thy name is Hypocrite...
Juan Williams is an honest man of the left and an excellent journalist. He should shake the dust of NPR off his shoes and get on with his career. (I suspect that Fox News pays a lot better than NPR!)
As for NPR, its news programming is a well known joke. The only thing that keeps this "network' going is taxpayer funding and the interested charity of people desperate for classical music radio. Let us hope that a Republican Congress will kick one leg of their stool out from under them and Internet radio will kick out the other!
Ray In Hawaii
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo need for the wager or supposition about the Fox connection being the motivation for NPR's action - just check out their website, where this is posted:
Rather than terminating news analyst Juan Williams' contract, "probably the better thing for NPR to have done is to have said 'Juan the situation is not working,' " NPR ombudsman Alicia Shepherd just said on Talk of the Nation.
Then, she continued, Williams could have been given a choice: If he wanted to stay at NPR, he would have to stop doing commentary on Fox News Channel. Or, if he preferred to continue with Fox, he and NPR could part ways.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNPR is a taxpayer ripoff. No more taxpayer money to fund left wing tripe.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHeadline: NPR enforces dreary political orthodoxy. In other breaking news, Lee surrenders to Grant at Appomattox.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse