I mentioned yesterday that I would post about the PBS series NOW last night, but I totally forgot to do so. Thus, I'm doing it now...I haven't posted but once today (well, I guess this is now the 19th, so either way.)
Anyhow...on to NOW.
I hear Bill Moyers attack the CPB Chairman Ken Tomlinson, and Moyers calls Tomlinson's move to find balance in PBS, troubling and dangerous, and all matters of evil. Moyers is an avowed leftist who spent years on NOW spouting his hatred of Bush, Republicans, and conservatives (socially and economically.) This is not news to most of us- well, it might be news to those who blindly support Moyers in his seemingly neverending attacks.
So, we know Moyers who started NOW is a leftist (he freely admits his ideological leanings.), and that the show itself probably falls in line with his thinking. The new host, David Brancaccio is a softball interviewer, never asking a tough question of anyone I have seen so far, but it's mainly only liberal minded folks he has as guests on the show.
Let's take a look at the past few weeks of episodes for PBS' NOW. If you go to the PBS NOW site, you can find selected video and detailed info. from the archive.
So, from memory- last week's episode of NOW featured soldiers who talked about the horror of war in Iraq and how we have a high number of soldiers suffering from PTSS (post traumatic stress syndrome), where the soldiers can't sleep, have nightmares, dillusions, see things, etc. One soldier said that while driving the freeway in Los Angeles, he suddenly thought a landmine was in the road set to exlode, so he quickly veered over and nearly wrecked.
They talked to many soldiers dealing with mental and physical scars.
This is reporting that seems fair, but at the same time- if you watched the show, you couldn't help but feel it was an attack on the US government and the Veterans Administration. You kept hearing how not enough money was given to take care of these returning soldiers who are wounded in some manner, that all of these wounds are the result of a war that maybe shouldn't have been fought at all.
This isn't screaming liberal mindset as is normal for NOW most of the time, and that's a good thing in my mind.
They had a second segment that featured a woman who is publishing a book of wounded soldiers, and you also got the sense that they were trying to show nothing but the negative aspect to the military action- look, all these young people are now scarred for life, this is the cost of war.
Of course, there is always a cost to any war, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't a worthy action. A noble action. Operation Iraqi Freedom was a noble endeavour that freed tens of millions of Iraqis from bondage they had lived under for decades. Taking the UN argument in this regard- the UN charter demands member states to protect basic human rights for all people in every nation, tho clearly the UN has refused to live up to this demand.
I mention the UN charter, because those out there who attack the war as a move by the US and other nations, and those who claim such actions make it an illegal war. Even UN SecGen Kofi Annan called the war illegal, which shows all of us just what we were dealing with- Americans were once a nation that would be united under the banner of bringing freedom to the oppressed, but those days seem to be long gone, and it's really a shame.
Back to NOW...the show before this last one featured 2 segments. Approximately 12 mins each with Janeane Garofalo and former Republican Congressman Bob Barr.
You look at that and say- hey, there's balance right there. Loony leftist Janeane Garofalo with a Republican to balance it out. But, Barr used most of his time to talk about provisions of the Patriot Act that he says will kill privacy and limit freedom and liberty.
He doesn't want the government to have any power to try to catch terrorists or possible plotters without having some case established beforehand. So, this would have limited the government's ability to search the laptop of Zacarias Moussaoui, teh "20th hijacker" with the Sept 11 plot. He says that the government shouldn't be allowed to check into computer records without a case built, or to gather info. on possible terrorists by getting at their "private information" such as medical records, library records, etc.
So, tho on one hand, there is balance, in the end- he spent much of his segment attacking many parts of the Patriot Act, and I believe his objections will lead to better safety, not reduced liberties as he seems to think.
Janeane Garofalo's segment was just unhinged. I posted all about her segment before, and you can read that piece here. She was ranting so insanely, it was scary. The host never challenged any of her absurd claims, and maybe that shows bias itself. One could easily make that argument, especially when he did question some of the more conservative-positive things Barr said.
The week before this episode, NOW aired a special episode that was all about prisoner torture and abuse...including the events at Abu Ghraib and accusations of abuse by prisoners at Gitmo in Cuba.
In this show they actually interviewed one of the prisoners in Iraq, and took his claims along with those of the ACLU (as if that group os an unbiased source) as proof of systematic abuse by US military officials, all the way up the line.
They also attacked the Bush administrations proclamation that these terror suspects aren't protected under the Geneva Conventions, because they never wore a uniform and never served under a nation, only terror groups like al qaeda. They also asked the question- is Bush guilty of war crimes, by distorting the memos of Alberto Gonzales into proof that the administration was worried they would be guilty of these war crimes, when no reasonable evidence exists to suggest this was at all a worry.
They discussed the efforts of the ACLU to find prisoner abuse stories they could announce and expose to the world, and interviewed many ACLU members, as well as heads of the group.
NOW questioned whether civil liberties were going down the drain after 9/11.
This special was biased from the start. They had a bunch of lefties talking about how bad the US is at violating the conventions of war, that these terrorists aren't even protected by, and how the US is systematically abusing prisoners in Iraq AND Gitmo on a regular basis. When they had military officials speak on the issue, they quickly inserted ridiculous statements like this from the ACLU and other like-minded groups:
NOW is granted a tour of the Guantanamo Bay prison, which for the past year has been under the command of Brig. Gen. Jay Hood.
"The detainees under our charge are well cared for, physically and mentally," Hood tells Brancaccio, who notes that it's unclear whether any abuses alleged in the e-mails occurred during Hood's watch.But attorney Tom Wilner, who has filed suit on behalf of several detainees, argues they "are being held in conditions that are worse than the worst convicted murderer or rapist in the United States. Charles Manson lives in much better conditions than these people, and they haven't even been charged with a crime."
So, we treat terror suspects worse than rapists and Charles Manson. That's unbiased reporting on an issue if I ever heard unbiased reporting in my life!
Some of their stories came from NEWSWEEK, and we've been made aware that that magazine's reporting on so-called abuse is not to be trusted with the bogus koran story and quick retraction. Isikoff's pieces are actually linked from the NOW webpage to bolster the claims made in the special.
The show before this was all about global warming, a topic the liberals love to talk about. I didn't see any of it myself, but there's indepth info and video at the PBS NOW site.
If you go back into the archive, the episode titles themselves give you a hint of bias-- EPA emissions standards, disappearing retiree health benefits, Iraq war evidence review, tactics to keep troops in Iraq longer, etc.
I admittedly haven't included much information in this piece, but one not need search very far to see that NOW is now, and has always been, a show that leans to the left...and that the show's original host not only leans to the left, but he leans to the far, fringe left.
Moyers only left the show at the end of 2004, and since then, the new host hasn't much of a difference in the overall tone of the show and which ideological viewpoint it takes.
CPB Chariman Ken Tomlinson's point was that, for some time now, it's been thought by some at CPB and other organizations that deal with Public TV, that Moyers and his show itself need to be balanced with another view. Tomlinson never once said he wanted NOW off of PBS, but that he merely wanted another show to balance NOW out.
I see nothing wrong with that. A network that is funded, in part, by the American people needs to find balance in its view of the news and its editorials on current events. The left is trying to make Tomlinson out to be a villian, attempting to make PBS a bastion for conservative thought- tho, the facts show just the opposite.
He has said, time and time again, keep NOW on and let's find a program to counterbalance the views expressed on that show- which is why PBS started airing The Journal Editoral Report, which is hosted by the Wall Street Journal's editorial board. It's a good show, and a step in the right direction if you ask me. Those who are trying to demonize Tomlinson are out of line...it's clear they want a bias to exist at PBS and they want to make sure it sticks around.
No matter if the perceived bias is real or imagined...an attempt to merely balance news programming and documentaries for a diverse audience is a noble idea, and it doesn't make any rational sense to fight more diversity of thought on the network.
As for Moyers, himself...
You can read his own words to see what he thinks of Republicans and conservatives, and you can't read the many quotes out there without being convinced of his radical sway to the left. It goes to reason that the show he started, that has the same format and same reporters that reported along side him every week would follow suit...
“The entire federal government — the Congress, the executive, the courts — is united behind a right-wing agenda for which George W. Bush believes he now has a mandate. That agenda includes the power of the state to force pregnant women to surrender control over their own lives. It includes using the taxing power to transfer wealth from working people to the rich. It includes giving corporations a free hand to eviscerate the environment and control the regulatory agencies meant to hold them accountable. And it includes secrecy on a scale you cannot imagine. “Above all, it means judges with a political agenda appointed for life. If you like the Supreme Court that put George W. Bush in the White House, you will swoon over what's coming. And if you like God in government, get ready for the Rapture....” “So it's a heady time in Washington, a heady time for piety, profits and military power, all joined at the hip by ideology and money. Don't forget the money....” “Republicans out-raised Democrats by $184 million and they came up with the big prize: monopoly control of the American government and the power of the state to turn their radical ideology into the law of the land. Quite a bargain at any price.” — Bill Moyers' commentary on PBS's Now, November 8.
Next week, over 100 heads of state will meet in Johannesburg, South Africa. Their goal is to search for ways to save the Earth's life support system – our water, air and soil. Ten years ago they gathered in Rio de Janeiro for the same purpose, but United Nations studies reveal the Earth's environment is still in decline. So the leaders of every major industrial country will be in Johannesburg next week, except for George W. Bush. That makes his core constituents quite happy: Representatives of the religious right, conservative activists and big companies like ExxonMobil wrote the President this week praising him for not going to the summit. They also asked him to make sure American officials...keep the issue of global warming off the table. It's all part of a pattern. The Bush administration is carrying on what the Los Angeles Times this week called ‘the most concerted exploitation of the public's land, air and water since fundamental protection laws went into effect three decades ago.'” – Moyers on Now with Bill Moyers, August 23.