I turned on my radio, spun the dial, thought I’d listen to some news for a while
Grabbed the knob, spun it around, got NPR, here’s what I found.
Real news? Hardly a trace
Just one damn marathon marketplace
The nasdaq is up the dow’s in the cellar
And NPR sold out to Rockefeller.
-Utah Phillips
I've been listening to NPR all of my life. When I hear it I have an autonomic response akin to a feeling of safety or security, like a suckling baby lying trustingly in the arms of my nurturing, adoring mother. The soothing, familiar voices of sensible, moral people placate my anxiety. I crave the sound of those disembodied voices: teaching me, offering me a path of clarity, protecting me from ignorance. NPR has been such a large influence in my life, in fact, that they have contributed to my development as a human being arguably more than my actual parents who, in contrast, basically tossed me to the wolves.
In the last few years, however, I've noticed a significant change in my relationship with NPR. I'm not sure exactly when it began since it was a gradual, insidious change, but lately, instead of the above described reaction that previously characterized my feelings towards it, I've become aware of a creeping hostility and distrust: a feeling of betrayal. It is as though my omniscient trackers of the truth who I rely upon to bring me back fat fruits of wisdom are instead returning from their journey with a product that might look tempting on the surface, but upon further investigation is flavorless and even full of rot.
Whether this bait and switch was always present and I was simply too seduced to notice, or whether it can be traced to the increase in corporate underwriters is a job for a much less lazy person, but there is no doubt that when I turn on NPR I am more likely to hear a piece on a cocktail recipe than I am an in depth analysis of the root causes of rainforest destruction. Rarely, do I hear any real criticism of American imperialism or any serious investigation into the perils of global capitalism. In fact, it appears to me that most reporting on NPR rests upon the a priori notion that the U.S. imperialist agenda and the principles of capitalism are essentially "good". Though there may be some attempt to explore the symptoms, the effects are rarely traced back to the root causes. The honest facade makes the obvious corporate bias even more sinister.
Of course, even if one takes issue with my use of the word imperialism or with my assertion that capitalism is the root cause of many of the world's woes, it should be widely agreed that it is the job of an organization that markets itself as a serious "news source" to perform the important public service of a thorough investigation into all of the forces that shape our world. It is not enough, for instance, to do a quick story on the destruction of the Amazon Rainforest without asking questions about the role of western companies meeting western demands for meat products, metal and lumber.
Let's look at a few concrete examples. A reading of the 2007 Morning Edition story entitled "Unlikely Allies Battle Deforestation in the Amazon" gives the impression that in general, global corporations with just a little bit of pressure from environmentalists are working towards a solution and that the ultimate cause of deforestation in Brazil is entirely the fault of local forces. Another similar example, "Electronics Fuel Congo Conflict" discussing coltan mining in the Congo sounds promising but ultimately barely touches upon the role of western forces and concentrates mainly on local corruption. Furthermore, the searches that I did on these topics did not turn up any more coverage. Each of these transcripts left me feeling hungry; and, damnit, if NPR has done its job I should feel satiated.
Speaking of not feeling satiated, in further defense of my thesis, I have examined NPR's coverage of the icon of American domination and capitalism: McDonald's Restaurants. Though there is no lack of potential material for criticism that includes the negative impact of fast food on health and the environment, the scourge of the low-wage job, the disgusting human/animal/environmental abuses of the meat industry, the presence of heavy metals in fertilizer, marketing drugs (fat and sugar) to children, etc. I find it difficult to find any NPR coverage in which any of these themes is even casually mentioned let alone pursued. Instead, NPR has squandered its coverage of McDonalds upon their attempts to make menu changes to satisfy cultural differences globally, their attempts to improve their image by complying with nutrition labeling and offering healthy choices, or, of course, the incredibly newsworthy adventures of the McRib Sandwich.
In each of these examples, I am not making the case that farmers, warlords, miners, purveyors of corruption, law enforcement, parents, overweight people etc. should not share the blame for the bad things that happen; I'm simply arguing that they don't deserve all of the blame. NPR does not utilize a broad enough lens and doesn't ask the really tough questions or even deign to put America or capitalism under the interrogation light. In all of the above cases, the damages done by global corporations and "first world" life-style demands are either omitted entirely or drastically downplayed. It's as though the NPR position is to sit back behind a glass divider and point out the terrible things in the world but not examine America's complicity or hypocrisy.
A few years back I read John Perkins' wonderful book Confessions of an Economic Hit man. In it, he makes some incredible allegations about the direct involvement of the US government and global corporations in the destruction of the economies of "developing" nations. Either John Perkins is a deranged compulsive liar or a messenger for an extraordinarily disturbing truth, or he's somewhere in the middle, but I couldn't count on NPR to investigate. They'd rather fill me in on Janet Jackson's nipples getting exposed during the half time show at the Super bowl.
Okay, I know there are other sources of news, such as Z magazine, Democracy Now! and Counterpunch, that I rely upon and wish had a broader audience. But NPR is "main stream" and there is absolutely no reason why they can't be just as intrepid. NPR promotes itself as "thorough" and "sincere" and "objective" and claims to provide a "broad perspective"; it should live up to its own description. Besides, even if the American imperialist agenda and global capitalism are forces for good then at least prove it to me by giving me the evidence. NPR simply leaves the question off of the table.
No comments:
Post a Comment