New e-mail address

As explained in our roundtable this week, our new e-mail address is  thethiirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.  If you need to contact us, please use that address.

Dick Gregory stands with political prisoner Lynne Stewart (WW)

Repost from Workers World:

Activist Dick Gregory on hunger strike to demand freedom for Lynne Stewart

By Workers World staff on April 5, 2013 » Add more comments.

6

The legendary African-American comedian and longtime civil rights activist, Dick Gregory — now 80 years old — released the following statement on April 4, 2013, the 45th anniversary of the assassination of his friend, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Dick Gregory and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at Chicago meeting in October, 1967.

I hereby declare on this day commemorating the life and sacrifice of my friend and brother in struggle, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., that in the spirit of his moral legacy, I demand the immediate release from prison of the legendary lawyer, Lynne Stewart, who devoted her entire professional life to the poor, the oppressed and those targeted by the police and a vindictive State.
I further declare that from this day forth, I shall refuse all solid food until Lynne Stewart is freed and receives medical treatment in the care of her family and with physicians of her choice without which she will die.
There is no time to lose as cancer, which had been in remission, has metastasized since her imprisonment. It has spread to her lymph nodes, her shoulder and appears in her bones and in her lungs.
A criminal defense attorney in New York for over 30 years, Lynne Stewart’s unwavering dedication as a selfless advocate was acknowledged by the community as well as judges, prosecutors and the entire legal profession. Such has been her reputation as a fearless lawyer, ready to challenge those in power, that judges assigned her routinely to act for defendants whom no attorney was willing to represent.
In 2002, Lynne Stewart was targeted by then President George Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft for providing a vigorous defense of her client, the blind Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. She was charged with conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist activity after she exercised both her and her client’s First Amendment rights by presenting a press release to a Reuters journalist. She did nothing more than other attorneys, such as her co-counsel, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, have done on behalf of their clients.
The reason for the prosecution and persecution of Lynne Stewart is evident to us all. It was designed to intimidate the entire legal community so that few would dare to defend political clients whom the State demonizes and none would provide a vigorous defense. It also was designed to narrow the meaning of our cherished First Amendment right to free speech, which the people of this country struggled to have added to the Constitution as the Bill of Rights.
The prosecution and imprisonment of Lynne Stewart is an ominous threat to the freedom, rights and dignity of each and every American. It is the agenda of a police state.
I ask you to join with me to demand freedom for Lynne Stewart. An international campaign has been launched with a petition that supports her application for compassionate release. Under the 1984 Sentencing Act, the Bureau of Prisons can file a motion with the Court to reduce sentences “for extraordinary and compelling reasons.” Life-threatening illness is foremost among these and Lynne Stewart meets every rational and humane criterion for compassionate release.
Join with me, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Pete Seeger and 6,000 other people of conscience throughout the world who have signed this petition to compel the Warden of the Federal Medical Center Carswell and the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to act. Act now. There is no time to lose.
Go to iacenter.org/LynneStewartPetition to demand her immediate release.

Articles copyright 1995-2013 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Highlights

This piece is written by Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Kat of Kat's Korner, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Ruth of Ruth's Report, Marcia of SICKOFITRADLZ, Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends, Ann of Ann's Mega Dub, Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Wally of The Daily Jot. Unless otherwise noted, we picked all highlights.

"Shinseki, the VA and resignation" -- most requested highlight of the week by readers of this site.

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "It's The Lack of Sincerity" -- Isaiah on the Drone Warrior. 

"Support Labor, Not Liars" -- Trina lays it on the line.

"scandal 'molly, you in danger, girl',"  "Arrow," "Nikita: 'Tipping Point',"  "Ellen Barken killed The New Normal,"  "Smash,"  "TV thoughts," "Best episode of Revolution ever," "Body of Proof," "revenge," "The Client List," "Revolution," "The Good Wife" and "Isaiah, TV movies, Hedges" -- Rebecca, Stan, Mike, Elaine, Ann, Marcia and Ruth cover TV.

"So another Kennedy" -- Mike notes how money buys another appointment.

"Debbie Reynolds is a singer" -- Kat offers a look at Debbie.

"He really is lousy" and "THIS JUST IN! HE BOMBS!" -- Cedric and Wally take on The Drone Warrior. 

"Iraq snapshot" and "Shame on Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists" -- C.I. and Elaine call out the shameful silence of Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists for their silence on the Monday evening attacks on 4 Baghdad newspapers.  Saturday, Reporters Without Borders finally called it out.

"The ghetto of race roles,"  "films" and "Suspense films" -- Stan, Rebecca and Kat go to the movies.

"Barack Listens" -- Isaiah dips into the archives. 

"Barack calls this 'science'?" and "More on Barack's 'science'" -- Ruth calls out Barack's 'science.'

"F**k Kevin Gosztola" -- Mike calls out the nonsense.

"Catfood Meat Loaf in the Kitchen?," "Down here, it's our time," "At my age, I just do not have time for press whores," and "THIS JUST IN! LOOK WHAT THE BITCH DRAGGED IN!" and "Even Helen Keller could have seen it coming" -- Trina, Betty, Ruth and Wally and Cedric cover Barack's attempt to gut Social Security. 

"On the assassination of MLK," "What he did?," "MLK" and "45 years ago today . . ." -- Betty, Ruth, Marcia and Mike cover the anniversary of the assassination of MLK.

Truest statement of the week

The celebrity trolls who currently reign on commercial television, who bill themselves as liberal or conservative, read from the same corporate script. They spin the same court gossip. They ignore what the corporate state wants ignored. They champion what the corporate state wants championed. They do not challenge or acknowledge the structures of corporate power. Their role is to funnel viewer energy back into our dead political system -- to make us believe that Democrats or Republicans are not corporate pawns. The cable shows, whose hyperbolic hosts work to make us afraid of self-identified liberals or self-identified conservatives, are part of a rigged political system, one in which it is impossible to vote against the interests of Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, General Electric or ExxonMobil. These corporations, in return for the fear-based propaganda, pay the lavish salaries of celebrity news people, usually in the millions of dollars. They make their shows profitable. And when there is war these news personalities assume their “patriotic” roles as cheerleaders, as Chris Matthews-- who makes an estimated $5 million a year -- did, along with the other MSNBC and Fox hosts.


-- Chris Hedges, "The Day That TV News Died" (Truthdig).

A note to our readers

Hey --

Another Sunday.



First up, we thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:



The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.

And what did we come up with?

• Truest statement of the week

Chris Hedges.  Not only did we all agree but because we all thought so, he was the only one we brought to the table.  So we only offer one truest this week.

• 
  
• Editorial: The Drone War

The Drone War.  The video alone made it appropriate for today's editorial (it's Easter).   This ended up being easier to write than expected.

• TV: The Death of the TV Movie

This did not.  I (Jim) gave the topic to Ava and C.I. Sunday morning (around two) and my point was that we had a lot of e-mails asking why, since they've done great pieces on the genres of sitcoms and variety shows over the years, they've never tackled the TV movie genre.  Ava and C.I. looked at me like I was crazy.  And I well may be.  They said (a) that topic is too huge to drop on them, (b) that topic is too huge for one article, (c) the only reason they might do it is there is nothing at all "trendy" or "Water Cooler" about it, (d) let them make some calls to any friends who might be up and they'll get back to me.  They still weren't sold on it when they finished their phone calls but figured they could give it a try since we were hoping to be done before seven a.m.  They roughed out a draft that they hated.  But did so to make the deadline.  Then we didn't make the deadline.  And since some have young kids, that meant regrouping later in the night.  Which we did.  At that time, Ava and C.I. took a second pass on the piece.  I thought it was a solid piece with the first attempt.  I realize now why they didn't.  With minor tweeking and removing a sentence here, adding a few words there, they turned into an Ava and C.I. piece -- as opposed to staid academia.

• A sure sign that NPR is out of touch with listener...

This has been brewing as a topic for some time.  The decision to ignore listeners and axe Talk of the Nation made it a must do piece this week.

• Video of the Week

A friend of C.I.'s asked us if we could work in a link to this group.  My response was, "I'm sure Ava and C.I. can if we can't" -- meaning they could do a link in their TV article.  Then, days later, when we're doing the edition, Ava and C.I. are singing along to this amazing song.  What is that song?  It's Chic Gamine's "Closer."  Oh.  Oh!  We quickly made this video of the week.  They are amazing in this video.  

• Photo of the Week

Our Iraq piece.  

• Bad Move of the Week

We didn't set out to call out Black Agenda Report.  We honestly only visited today looking for a second truest but instead we found a problem.

• The Death of the Media (C.I.)

This piece has a lengthy intro from me so I'll let that stand.  C.I. did some great writing in this piece be sure to read it.

• More species die out (Socialist Worker)

Repost from England's Socialist Worker.

• The Tour de Peace

Repost on Cindy Sheehan's Tour de Peace action.

• Rallying to save the post office (Workers World)

Workers World repost.

• Highlights

Mike and the gang wrote this and we thank them for it. 

Peace.




-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.

Editorial: The Drone War

That's the new video from Brave New Foundation.


For years now, The Drone War has taken place and with little objection.


People have been killed.  Innocents?  All are innocent.  None were convicted of anything.  But, yes, children have been killed (as many as 197 in Pakistan alone),  an eight-year-old girl has watched as a drone killed her mother.  The Drone War is US terror inflicted upon innocents, especially children, who watch these attacks from the sky on their family, on their friends, on their neighbors.

And you better believe, these attacks will not be forgotten as the children grow into adults.


The Drone War takes place in Somalia, Yemen and, especially, Pakistan.  In Pakistan alone, US President Barack Obama has launched 366 strikes.





The Bureau of Investigative Journalism has compiled various data on The Drone War and you're big question there should be where is the US press equivalent?


In the United States, we only get garbage.  Today, NPR aired their most recent 'report' on The Drone War.  It was the usual garbage one can expect from NPR, from Weekend Edition and from Rachel Martin (link is text and audio).


RACHEL MARTIN:   This is WEEKEND EDITION from NPR News. I'm Rachel Martin. The drone attacks carried out under the Obama administration have for years been one of the biggest open secrets in Washington. It was only last year that the president's then-counterterrorism chief, John Brennan, acknowledge the program publicly for the first time. In recent months, there have been calls from both Democrats and Republicans to make the program more transparent. One suggestion floating around Capitol Hill is the idea of something called a drone court, which would examine the legality of a drone attack. Gregory McNeal has been writing about accountability and oversight of the drone program for Lawfare. It's a blog covering national security law. He also teaches that same subject at Pepperdine University's School of Law. We asked him to explain the different ways a court like this could work.


GREGORY MCNEAL: A drone strike happens against an individual. It turns out, based on journalist reports, whatever, that it was wrong or a family member says, you know, this person was not involved in terrorism at all. You've taken his life, you've destroyed our property - that could be part of the suit as well - you owe us some compensation for what you've done. This one is the least controversial in my mind because it's the type of thing that courts are able to do; review facts after the fact and it's not second-guessing the judgment of the commander in chief, at least it's not second-guessing it before a strike happens.


MARTIN: So, let's walk through another option that you outline. It would be a court modeled after what are called FISA courts. These are the courts formed out of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, essentially a secret group of judges who can hear very highly classified cases and decide, for example, whether or not the government can open a wiretap or otherwise monitor a person of interest.



The Drone War is a problem, Rachel Martin and NPR apparently believe, but the only possible solution is to create a court of some kind to be over it?

The notion of eliminating, of ending The Drone War doesn't occur to NPR or Rachel Martin?


That's just how limited the thinking and the discourse is on NPR.  They should be ashamed of themselves.

Brave New Foundation notes:

Brave New Foundation has the honor of releasing a video to accompany a seminal report by human rights law experts at Stanford and New York University law schools. The report, entitled Living Under Drones presents chilling first-hand testimony from Pakistani civilians on the humanitarian and security costs of escalating drone attacks by the United States. The report uncovers civilian deaths, and shocking psychological and social damage to whole families and communities – where people are literally scared to leave their homes because of drones flying overhead 24 hours a day.

The report is based on nine months of research, including two investigations in Pakistan. The Stanford-NYU research team interviewed over 130 individuals, including civilians who traveled out of the largely inaccessible region of North Waziristan to meet with the researchers. They also interviewed medical doctors who treated strike victims, and humanitarian and journalist professionals who worked in drone impacted areas.

As U.S. citizens, we feel a responsibility to know the real impact of the policies of our government. We hope you will join us at www.WarCosts.com to be part of this fight for a more humane and just world.

CNN's Dan Merica did cover Brave New Foundation and the new video.  If you're wondering how often NPR has covered them, the answer is zero.


If you're wondering how much NPR cares about those killed in The Drone War, the answer is zero.

TV: The Death of the TV Movie

Donato:  That ring and that watch were hot stuff.  Hector kept them in a safe and they were stolen by his boyfriend Larry Gaines. 

Jessie Lee Stubbs:   Hector was gay?

Donato:   He was gay, yes, and, Larry Gaines, he was anything.  Hector was sore at Larry because Larry quit him.  Hector knew he could bring the cops down on Larry by using the nurse.


The above is from a scene between Farrah Fawcett (Jessie Lee Stubbs) and Steve Artiaga (Donato) in Criminal Behavior (written by Wendell Mayes, directed by Michael Miller) a 1992 TV movie.  In the 80s and 90s, network television re-discovered that they could get strong ratings with TV movies starring women.




ABC didn't create TV movies but they did air ABC's Movie of the Week from 1969 to 1976.  Sometimes these films were pilots for TV shows (Lee Majors' The Six Million Dollar Man, for example).  Sometimes they were remakes (Tuesday Weld starred with Joan Hackett and Sam Waterson in Reflections of Murder, a November 24, 2974 Movie of the Week that was a remake of Diabolique).  Sometimes they were based on other material (F. Scott Fitzgerald in Hollywood was a 1976 Movie of the Week starring Tuesday Weld, Jason Miller and a then emerging James Woods).

Tuesday Weld, in fact, can be considered one of the original strong actresses doing TV movie work.  In 1978's A Question of Guilt, she plays a mother accused of murdering her children.  In 1980, she did ABC's Mother and Daughter: The Loving Wars. In 1981, she starred in a remake of Madame X playing the Lana Turner role.  In 1982, she starred with Tommy Lee Jones in HBO's remake of The Rainmaker. 1983 found her starring in CBS' Hallmark Hall of Fame production of Winter of Our Discontent in an Emmy nominated performance.  1984 found her teamed with Keith Carradine and Peter Coyote for Scorned and Swindled (CBS) and, in 1986, she finished off her TV movie cycle with two tele-films, Circle of Violence: A Family Drama (where she physically abuses her mother; River Phoenix is among her co-stars) and, with Ellen Burstyn, she starred in Something in Common (which also featured Eli Wallach).

During this period, many actresses took so-so roles in splashy premises that were a form of stunt casting resulting in attention if not applause.  See Shirley Jones play a gambling addict in 1975's Winner Take All!  See Sally Struthers survive spousal abuse at the hands of Dennis Weaver in 1977's Intimate Strangers!  See Eve Plumb play a prostitute in 1976's Dawn: Portrait of a Teenage Runaway!  However, except for Elizabeth Montgomery, few of the TV stars were really up for creating full blown characters.


Montgomery was a natural whether playing Belle Starr or Lizzie Borden, whether doing something heavy like Amos (abuse in a nursing home -- Kirk Douglas also starred in the TV movie) or something lighter like Mrs. Sundance.  But she was the exception in the 70s.   For the most part, it was left to film actresses Tuesday Weld and Lee Remick to do the strongest work in the TV movies of that time period.

If the genre itself had a layer of cheese over it, that stemmed from too many generic performances and too many superficial victim roles.  There's not a problem with playing a victim, per se.  Michelle Pfieffer rightly called out rewrites on the film Wolf that tried to turn her character into 'career gal' because the writers didn't know what to do with her -- not knowing what to do with her was the character.  And playing a character like that with awareness can be a strong statement.

But the TV movies fell into the trap of being nothing but statements.  Well, exploitation hidden under the guise of 'we are making a strong statement.'  So you weren't supposed to be critical of the TV actress playing the mother hitting the child, you were supposed to be thrilled that abuse was being tackled.  (We're not referring to Cheryl Ladd who starred in the TV movie When She Was Bad.  Cheryl was actually very moving in that film.)  All these 'social issues' TV movies were supposed to be applauded for intent.  Apparently because if you didn't applaud at the start for the intent, no one would ever applaud when the end credits rolled and you realized just how bad a production that movie was.

The demise of the TV movies was hidden in part by some major successes in the TV mini-series genre.  A movie usually lasted one night (some lasted two and were billed as "movies" and not a "mini-series").  A mini-series lasted two or more nights.  There were the prestige ones like Roots and The Winds of War there were the entertaining ones like Scruples and Hollywood Wives.  The networks preferred a semi-successful mini-series to a successful TV movie.

Thornbirds, for example, was huge (second only to Roots as the highest rated mini-series) and the network could and did spend months promoting this mini-series that would take up multiple nights in the schedule.  By contrast, 1975's Trilogy of Terror was but one Movie of the Week ABC had to try to drum up enthusiasm for while also promoting the other TV movies that would be airing.

So more attention was paid to the mini-series format and the TV movies got weaker and weaker.  Is there really a point, for example, to The Best Little Girl in the World other than seeing how much weight Jennifer Jason Leigh could lose?  We're not panning her performance -- she's one of the greatest actresses working today -- but we are panning the TV movie and the same goes for Something About Amelia which may have been about incest but really doesn't work as a movie.  The scripts are threadbare in those and other 'social issue' movies of that time.  Noble cause may look good on a resume but it usually translates on screen to self-celebration.


In the 80s,  Ann-Margret, Farrah Fawcett and others would bring new life and new layers to the genre.  With 1983's Who Will Love My Children? and 1984's The Burning Bed, the two women set a new standard for performances and for quality of material.   They didn't settle for 'good cause,' they wanted characterization and they wanted story.  They fought for it and those are two of the finest TV movies of that decade.

Ann-Margret would follow up Who Will Love My Children?, with 1984's A Streetcar Named Desire.  Though she would continue to give strong performances in 8 more TV movies and 2 mini-series, only 1998's Life of the Party was worthy of her.

That goes to the level of the material out there.  By the 90s, TV movies were something of a joke.  "You're so Markie Post in every single Lifetime movie," Will tells Grace in the second episode of Will and Grace.  Substitute Michelle Lee, Nancy McKeon and Merdith Baxter and you have summed up many a bad TV film starring many an actress giving the exact same performance she gave in everything else she ever did.

Ann-Margaret's available choices may also have suffered from the fact that the type of TV movie she favored -- quality versions of those types of TV movies -- usually had leads already snapped up by Lindsay Wagner who tackled strong topics and delivered incredible performances (see especially Evil In Clear River).  Equally true, TV movies were going for young actresses as well.  The battle there was basically between one-note performer Melissa Gilbert versus the very talented Valerie Bertinelli (see especially Rockabye).  (They were both following in the footsteps of Mare Winningham who starred in 7 TV movies or mini-series from 1979 to 1981 alone -- the best being Freedom, The Women's Room and Off The Minnesota Strip.)

Farrah Fawcett was fierce in hunting down strong material (and in fighting on the set to keep it strong and to make it stronger) which is how she and Colleen Dewhurst created such magic in 1986's Between Two Women, the same year Farrah delivered an amazing performance as the lead in Nazi Hunter: The Beate Klarsfeld Story.  She'd finish out the eighties with Poor Little Rich Girl: The Barbara Hutton Story (1987) and 1989's Double Exposure: The Story of Margaret Bourke-White and Small Sacrifices.

As she finished up the 80s, she noticed the roles were getting more victimized while the scripts became more superficial.  That's why she went with Criminal Behavior.  As she explained to Harvey Solomon (Los Angeles Times),  "That's why this character was so interesting, why she was allowed to do the things she did.  She moves the story along--she wasn't victimized, she wasn't beaten up or beaten down."

In the film, she's an attorney with a low opinion of the police due to her family's experiences ("My family tree is recorded on police blotters") and due to her job.  A. Martinez plays police officer Pike Grenada.

Jessie Lee Stubbs:   If you'd let my client out, maybe he'd just come right to her.  There'd be Larry Gaines, right at her door.  I don't get the way that you guys think.

Pike laughs.

Jessie Lee Stubbs:   What is so funny?

Pike:  You are.

Jessie Lee Stubbs:  No, I'm not.


She wanted strong characters but found weak characters who suffered for the bulk of the movie and then the writers justified the suffering by allowing the women to turn into Charles Bronson and the movie into a revenge fantasy.

So she went with roles like The Substitute Wife that she hoped had larger truths.

That was 1994.  After TV movies especially changed.  In 1992, Amy Fisher shot the wife of her lover.  That year and the following year saw four TV movies about the shooting and affair.  The rush to get the tawdry topic to the small screen led to Drew Barrymore's The Amy Fisher Story airing opposite Alyssa Milano's Casualties of Love: The Long Island Lolita Story (January 3, 1993).   With the source material and the rush, there was little doubt that both would be little more than Trash TV (fortunately Barrymore and Milano have given stronger performances in many worthy projects).

And that's what really destroyed the TV movie.  Cheap and tacky, cheap and tacky.

1990's A Killing In A Small Town starring Barbara Hershey, 1986's Nobody's Child starring Marlo Thomas, TV movies like that were no more.

The Substitute Wife is a good TV movie.  It's also, surprisingly, a Lifetime TV movie.  The TV movie largely exists today due to Lifetime and no one's done more to destroy the TV movie then the Lifetime.  Vengeance fantasies dominate with more time being spent on get-even twists than on characterizations.  Not every TV movie needs to be life or death.

They do need to capture the viewer's attention.  Lifetime's succeeded, for example, with the TV movie The Client List which was entertaining.  The Cartier Affair, starring Joan Collins, was a caper TV film but it was also a satisfying TV movie.


Lifetime movies became a joke in the same way that people snicker when they watch Jennifer Lopez in Enough (not a TV movie, though it feels like one): They don't resemble life.  They can slap "based on a true story" at the front of every one of those TV movies, but there's nothing lifelike about it, nothing relatable, nothing truly frightening.  But as big a joke as Lifetime can be, the bigger joke is HBO which seems to think their centrist-left applauding, right-wing demonizing films provide entertainment or art.  We're back to the period of nobility only these days noble is being a corporatist whose hue and cry is "My Democratic Party, right or wrong!"  In other words, somebody grab the grater, another layer of cheese has formed.

A sure sign that NPR is out of touch with listeners

More and more, NPR is about taking the "Public" out of National Public Radio.  That's why, for example, they're ending Talk of the Nation which they bill as "a call-in show."  That's the real reason.

You can always count on David Folkenflick to lie and he did so on Morning Edition Friday (link is text and audio):

You know, if you think about NPR's show - it distributes THE DIANE REHM SHOW out of Washington, ON POINT out of WBUR itself, that TALK OF THE NATION is no longer quite as distinctive and they wanted a show that could bridge the gap in those hours between the end of the last run of MORNING EDITION and the first run of ALL THINGS CONSIDERED in the afternoon that could respond perhaps more quickly to developing news. They thought this format (unintelligible) the new show out of BUR might help do that.

Check out this illustration.

First off, as NPR listener Anne Pancella observed about the claim that NPR has so many call-in shows, "Diane Rehm is the only one that comes to mind, and how much longer can she keep going?"  Or, as Trina would ask, how much longer should she be allowed to stay on air?  She'll turn 77 this year.  Secondly, most stations either carry Diane Rehm's show or On Point -- few carry both.  But guess what all carry?  That's right.  Morning Edition and All Things Considered.

The magazine format with the giggly hosts dumbing down news and thinking they're cute?  It's already done to death and Tell Me More struggles to add stations (their most recent stab at another magazine show).

Plus, as Betty points out, "They just killed off science."

In a nation where science regularly is ignored despite all the proclamations that America needs to increase its science skills, that the future will depend upon it, NPR's taking the axe to the only program that provides science every week: Talk of the Nation Science Friday.

NPR maintains Science Friday will live on in another form.  Really?

With the egos of these on-airs and none really prone to science we're supposed to believe another show will make a serious commitment to including science and keep it for more than six months?

Keep dreaming.

This is part of the general sneering at the public that's taking place at NPR.  

You can catch it all over.  We caught it March 22nd on the first hour of The Diane Rehm Show as 

Tom Gjelten, Julie Hirschfeld Davis (Bloomberg News), Michael Scherer (Time) and Jerry Seib (Wall St. Journal) pretended to provide a public affairs discussion about sequestration . . . while ignoring the public.  How bad was it? 

Half way in, guest host Gjelten had to clear the air:

Welcome back. I'm Tom Gjelten, sitting in today for Diane Rehm. By the way, Diane Rehm is at East Tennessee State University, not East Tennessee University as we mistakenly said at the top of the show -- East Tennessee State University. She will be back on Monday. Meanwhile, we're holding down the fort here: Jerry Seib from The Wall Street Journal, Julie Hirschfeld Davis from Bloomberg News and Michael Scherer from Time magazine, and we're discussing the domestic news of the week. We have a number of emails. You know, the Diane Rehm show is a national show, but we obviously have a lot of listeners in the D.C. metropolitan area. And many of our listeners would be affected by the sequestration cuts that would hurt the -- cut into the employment roles, the -- in federal agencies. And I want to read, "It was exasperating."  This is from A. Leonard, "It was exasperating to hear folks in "The Diane Rehm Show" discuss sequestration from such an impersonal view. Would you be so calm if your salary were going to get a 20 percent cut as DOD," that'd be Pentagon, "civilian workers are facing?" "Why is no one," this is a note from Ed, "Why is no one talking about the 800,000 people who are about to have their salaries slashed by 20 percent?"  Another one from Brian, who says, "I'm a government employee and planning for a minimum 20 percent pay cut." All right. So there's a whole stack of emails here from people who are going to see their pay cut -- going to possibly see pay cut although, Julie, we don't know yet, for example, whether or -- when or maybe even whether those cuts are going to take effect. Is that right? Well, that's right. I mean, that's right to some extent. I think some of the furlough notices haven't gone out yet. But certainly there will be furloughs, there will be people who'll see their salaries cut. There will be people who see their unemployment payments cut as well if this continues. And so, you know, we shouldn't downplay the impact of that for people who will feel it.


And the mop up above?  Pretty bad.  One of the e-mails?  From a federal worker but he doesn't work in DC.  Tom Gjelten is such an idiot that he fails to grasp there are federal jobs all over America -- not just in DC.


What a moron.


To be clear, there are times to remove shows and good reasons too.  If this were a Pacifica Radio show, we'd probably be less concerned.  While both are public radio, NPR is a different model.  Meaning NPR does not broadcast, it makes programming that it offers to radio stations who then pay for it.  Point being, there's no reason to discontinue Talk of the Nation right now.

If you think that what NPR listeners want is another magazine show, offer them Here and Now for a year and Talk of the Nation for a year.  After 12 months, see which one is being carried by more stations and reaching more listeners and then you make the decision to take the axe to one.

But that would be allowing the public a say in National Public Radio and, let's face it, that's the last thing NPR wants to do.