94-yr old CFI

NPR continued its above-the-rest quality aviation reporting this morning
with this story:
http://www.npr.org/display_pages/fea...e_1545986.html
Nice of them to include flying links on the page, too.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

I took my private checkride with Ms. Johnson in 1991.

--
Ken Martin
N5888Q '65 M20C
Kingsport, TN KTRI
"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
NPR continued its above-the-rest quality aviation reporting this morning
with this story:
http://www.npr.org/display_pages/fea...e_1545986.html
Nice of them to include flying links on the page, too.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Nice of them to include flying links on the page, too.

They even have a link to the "$100 Hamburger" page!

Ya just gotta love NPR... ;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Ya just gotta love NPR... ;-)

Pleased to hear you say that, Jay. Most of my conservative friends
hate it, won't listen to it, because (they say) it's "liberal."

vince norris

Ya just gotta love NPR... ;-)

Pleased to hear you say that, Jay. Most of my conservative friends
hate it, won't listen to it, because (they say) it's "liberal."

Not for nothing is it known as National Partisan Radio.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

"Cub Driver" wrote:
Ya just gotta love NPR... ;-)

Pleased to hear you say that, Jay. Most of my
conservative friends hate it, won't listen to it,
because (they say) it's "liberal."

Not for nothing is it known as National Partisan Radio.

As a person who considers himself neither conservative nor liberal, by
the current American definitions of the words, I find that NPR makes
more effort than any other news source to provide balanced, in-depth
coverage. It certainly takes more care to be accurate than the shrieking
sensation-mongers at CNN, Fox, NBC, etc.

Right wing charges of partisanship are hard to support in light of the
fact that NPR frequently uses commentary from sources to the right of
center, e.g. The Wall Street Journal, U. S. News and World Report, The
American Enterprise Institute and The Cato Institute, just to name a
few.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 07:46:47 -0600, "Dan Luke"
wrote:

Right wing charges of partisanship are hard to support in light of the
fact that NPR frequently uses commentary from sources to the right of
center, e.g. The Wall Street Journal, U. S. News and World Report, The
American Enterprise Institute and The Cato Institute, just to name a
few.

In the hourly news summaries, the form of an NPR story during the
Clinton years seemed to start with some exposition, usually something
the Republican Congress was starting up, followed by some in-depth
analysis why whatever it was was desperately wrong. I've spot-checked
them since 2000; they appear to not have changed their approach to
reporting.

The in-depth reporting, if it's human interest or pure exposition, is
usually excellent. In-depth political reporting suffers from the same
stuff that has plagued some newspapers: The slant is in the way the
piece is organized and edited, not in the material the reporter
gathered. The right gets its say, but is made to look the fool anyway.

Like all news media outlets, they too have unquestioned premises. One
of them is that Democrats are Better.

Rob

"Rob Perkins" wrote:
The right gets its say, but is made to look the fool anyway.

I simply don't hear that, and I listen for it.

Like all news media outlets, they too have unquestioned premises. One
of them is that Democrats are Better.

Might that not be in the ear of the listener?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

(Ken Martin) wrote in
:

http://www.npr.org/display_pages/fea...e_1545986.html

She's amazing ... I took my PPL checkride with her in 1982 ... in a C152
and even then she got in and out better than me and I was 40 years her
junior! It's good to know she's still there and putting more of us in the
air.

I've spot-checked them since 2000;

What that probably means is that you've noticed things that support
your belief and overlooked those that don't.

Students learning to do research are cautioned about the necessity of
carefully recording every bit of evidence that contradicts their
hypothesis because of the all-too-human tendency to overlook or forget
that stuff. It's known as "selective retention."

The slant is in the way the piece is organized and edited, not in the material
the reporter gathered. The right gets its say, but is made to look the fool anyway.

As an Independent who voted for more Republicans than Democrats in the
recent election, I think that's your perception, not reality.

I suggest that you would consider NPR to be "absolutely unbiased" if
it agreed with you 100 percent of the time. That's human nature.

vince norris