Post User Polls

Will NPR's decision to fire Juan Williams affect your decision to donate?

By Abha Bhattarai  |  October 22, 2010; 6:25 PM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Does WikiLeaks put soldiers in danger? | Next: Will early voting help Democrats keep their majorities in Congress?


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Juan Williams is not worthy of this attention. He made a decision to undermine NPR which is becoming increasingly clear from all this attention and his lucrative contract issued almost immediately.

Juan should hang up his career as a journalist since he has now entered the world of sensationalist and opportunist.

Boycott all FOX sponsors.

Posted by: SeekingIntegrityForAmerica | October 23, 2010 1:07 AM

Juan Williams was within his rights to express his feelings, and they happen to be identical to mine. NPR accepts public funding and then tries to bully their employees into liberal politics. Political correctness is a form of violation of civil rights, and protecting muslims (while our soldiers are dieing in the Middle East)strikes me as unamerican as well as downright slimey. My future goal--defund NPR.

Posted by: drzimmern1 | October 23, 2010 3:10 PM

Firing of NPR would have been fair and right if NPR had fired Nina Totenberg as well. But, NPR did not. NPR reporters also appear on liberal network MSNBC. If FOX news is band news for NPR, how do they justify their reporters appearing on MSNBC. Unless of course.. NPR is as left leaning as MSNBC..

Posted by: philly3 | October 23, 2010 7:18 PM

It's obnoxious for NPR to insist that their journalists subscribe to a particular political perspective, or limit their appearances on other networks.

To fire Juan Williams for appearing on Fox is a particular form of censorship, and sends a frightening signal to other NPR employees.

This action is unbecoming a network that enjoys public donations and a tax-free status.

Posted by: postfan1 | October 23, 2010 11:59 PM

Another poorly designed poll. Where is the "I haven't contributed to NPR, but will do so now that they have fired Juan Williams" selection? I got angry with my local NPR station back when Howard Dean was in the Democratic primary, and one of their commentators called him "insane." Haven't given them any money since then. Today my local NPR station (WUNC) got $100 from me.
I've always found Juan Williams to be a vacuous boob of a reporter, a PC hire retained because he couldn't be gotten rid of easily. His fear of Muslims who wear traditional "garb" on airplanes is irrational and plain stupid. Is he scared of all Muslims, all the time, or only those he can identify because they are wearing Muslim "garb?" Someone should tell Juan that the Muslims that he should really fear are those who deliberately try to cover up their ethnic/religious identity, and do not identify themselves with the Moslem many of the hijackers on 9/11 were wearing Muslim "garb"?

Posted by: smeesq | October 24, 2010 12:23 AM

Stupid poll. People contribute to their local station, not NPR.

Posted by: imback | October 24, 2010 12:49 AM

Local stations are supported by advertisers. NPR has always been supported by donations.

Posted by: Maerzie | October 24, 2010 1:22 AM

Maerize: Huh? I've heard countless fund drives from local stations, but I've never been solicited by NPR (or heard them asking for money). Why would anyone punish their local station (that carries tons more than Juan Williams) because a national network did something?

Posted by: rollingwoods | October 24, 2010 1:49 AM

Most of the complaint letters said "I will stop WATCHING".

Posted by: FrankIBC | October 24, 2010 1:50 AM

Willliams got a 2 million deal at fox within less than a day. Think he might have just done this on purpose? It is EXACTLY the kind of cheap stunt fox pulls all the time.

NPR is by far the best news source in teh US. The only one with in depth, unbiased, factual reporting and insightful in depth analysis. Which is PRECISELY why conservative republicons hate it so much.

Stephen COlbert likes to say "everyone knows reality has a well known liberal bias."

And as some posters point out - the phony outrage (fox told them they should be angry about this today) is obviously limited to those who never LISTEN -- how many saying they don't watch NPR? Me either, but I listen every day --- and how many saying it is biased and blah blah blah -- CLEARLY not listeners. ANd a final note - NPR did not deny Williams his free speech rights but they have a legal mandate to be unbiased in their reporting. If their reporters are viewed as bised that undercuts the integrity of the organization. Williams was not fulfilling his obligation as a journalist and a member of that news team and so he was let go.

Posted by: John1263 | October 24, 2010 3:20 AM

That FOX STOOGE should have been fired years ago. Amen and good riddance !!!!

Posted by: jp43551 | October 24, 2010 4:17 AM

What is "Muslim garb" anyway? Is there "Christian garb"? "Hindu garb"? This is a tempest in a teapot. Juan needed to be fired for stupidity; so going to Fox suits him. This is another in a series of "The Know Nothings" winning.

Posted by: DrBones721 | October 24, 2010 6:16 AM

National Proletarian Radio entertains a diversity of opinions as long as they are all the same. If you want news without opinion or character we might as well let machines read the news, uh, newspeak.

Posted by: werowe1 | October 24, 2010 8:02 AM

The fundamental problem here is the way in which people perceive Muslims. If we were to place "Muslim" with a class that is perceived to be victimized -- currently or in the recent past -- Williams' remarks would have caused even more people to cringe. If "Muslim" were replaced with a class that is not perceived as victimized, such as "white male" or "dog catchers," his remarks would only have seemed odd.

Sadly, Williams' remarks sat just fine with a large number of Americans, which tells us Muslims are in a grey area, perceived as victims by some (by Islamophobes) and as a class deserving no special attention, which is equally ridiculous in this day.

Prejudice, which Williams admitted un-bravely in the company of people he perceived to be receptive to it, is reprehensible, and unacceptable, particularly where journalists are concerned. Williams occasionally comments on matters that involve Muslim Americans -- how can he possibly do so with objectivity when he is afraid of many of them?

End the hate and prejudice.

Posted by: brickerd | October 24, 2010 8:50 AM

NPR and the Center for Public Braodcasting have made several bad personnel deecisions. They fired Bob Edwards just because he was too old. Ditto for Lou Rukyser.

When Gwen Ifel came up for the TV show, they hesitated too long, looking for someone, anyone else, before appointing her.

They need to get their act together.

Posted by: LeeH1 | October 24, 2010 9:26 AM

Anyone who is already contributing to NPR is the type of person who is glad they fired Juan Williams. I'm one of those. Any station should dump one of their analysts if he made those kind of comments on Fox "News". He has every right to make the statements. No one disputes that. But his employer also has the right to fire him. I'm glad they did.

Posted by: bgormley1 | October 24, 2010 10:32 AM

The Right getting upset about this firing is very hypocritical since they were fine with Helen Thomas being fired for her similar comments. Juan said something they happen to agree with so they're defending him. That's all it is.

Posted by: bgormley1 | October 24, 2010 10:36 AM


You're completely wrong.
Helen Thomas made despicable hate-filled comments and reaffirmed them when asked.
Juan Williams simply admitted to feeling a twinge of nervousness, and then counseled how it's one's duty to overcome such prejudice with reason and tolerance.
For his honesty he was labelled a bigot by the leftist idealogues who've gained complete control of NPR & the CPB.

Posted by: OttoDog | October 24, 2010 10:54 AM

NPR posted it's rules, conditions, for employees appearing in other venues and clearly states they will not present themselves or their positions in contrast to what, who they are on NPR. Williams did not adhere. He was terminated. He chose, instead, to go from a respected analyst on NPR to another personality on Fox. He's making more money. As long as he delivers what Fox wants, he'll have a job there, too. If he does not, he will be let go. Simple as that. Happens to all of us.

Posted by: nana4 | October 24, 2010 11:27 AM

I have switched from CNN and MSNBC to FOX because people like Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews & CO are infantile leftists who mislead people. NPR is just the tip of the red iceberg. We do want our country back.

Posted by: ravitchn | October 24, 2010 11:30 AM

I wrote NPR that I was going to discontinue support when they discarded Bob Edwards. Never sent them money since, and don't listen as much as I once did; occasionally turn on classical music from the local station, but haven't listened to news/opinion for a long time.

Posted by: grandmajoan | October 24, 2010 11:31 AM

NPR is funded by tax dollars. Therefore it should represent the opinions and views of all Americans not just the left wing Socialist-Communist Democratic Party.

Williams was fired for exercising Free Speech.

The real question is: "Why does the Democratic Party hate Free Speech?"

Posted by: krankyman | October 24, 2010 11:45 AM

Juan Williams was the best thing on NPR.

When he did All Things Considered, it was the most interesting program on radio.

NPR screwed up

Posted by: rcubedkc | October 24, 2010 12:17 PM

It's a personnel decision. They made it, let's move on. I've always liked them for being a very calm, seemingly very unbiased network (yes, America, unbiased can mean they don't spout hateful ideology from either side), and I'm cool with them dumping someone who said something a little iffy.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | October 24, 2010 12:43 PM

NPR, though publicly funded, isn't required to represent anyone, that is the job of our elected officials. Their job is to inform. I don't agree with everything they cover but it gives me information I can't get anywhere else. You can listen without believing everything they say, that is always an option. Mr. Williams knew the rules, he broke the rules and the more I reflect the more suspicious I am of the whole thing. Rachael Maddow, as much as I want to like her, is a left-wing kook in my book, just as her opponent is a right-wing kook. Maddow is NOT an NPR employee, Beck IS a FOX employee, as Williams is now. A REAL newsman's job is reporting facts without inserting himself in any way into the story. That takes a special kind of person who can keep the wall intact. Just the perception that a personal opinion is flavoring a reporter's work discredits the whole body of their work. That is why he was fired. If it had been any other station this would have been a non-event. NPR stepped in it and I'll bet they wish they had done it differently but this will pass too. PS: I wish they hadn't fired Col. Bob, I miss him.

Posted by: jspinner2 | October 24, 2010 12:57 PM

I was ambivalent about Juan Willials and NPR firing him. But the moment he accepted a lucrative Fox contract, I immediately knew what he was about. Good riddance, Juan. You just sold your soul.

Posted by: fmamstyle | October 24, 2010 1:53 PM

WHEN has NPR been anything BUT a far left organ?! What's the big deal about their banishment of Williams? They have a right to organize themselves any way they chose. Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal, Soros bought NPR. What is patently not constitutional is that NPR sucks at the public trough. No government dollars to NPR: that means that they not get a tax free ride on property tax, as well.

Posted by: craigslsst | October 24, 2010 2:39 PM

Wow--that's 700 people out of about 2100 who now won't donate because of the flare-up. If this is indicative of the entire population, NPR could really take a hit.

Posted by: KBurchfiel | October 24, 2010 3:17 PM

There is no room for moderates in the political debate any more. Our media will not tolerate it. You must choose which side you wish to be on - and then you must pretend the other side is contagious.

Posted by: skir | October 24, 2010 3:44 PM

I was a student at The Newhouse School at Syracuse University in 2001. Williams was brought in after 911 to speak on the subject. He ranted and raved about terrorism, when at that point there was little really known. I challenged him, stating that if I were to rant on somebody's guilt without stating any evidence I'd be thrown out of my newswriting class. He started screaming that he'd seen plenty of evidence, blah, blah, blah. My question to NPR: What took you so long to fire this jerk? He was a bigot in 2001 and he's still a bigot. Good riddance. Let him join the rest of the Fox degenerates.

Posted by: dca_123 | October 24, 2010 4:08 PM

And here's another example of NPR buckling under pressure:

Posted by: dca_123 | October 24, 2010 4:13 PM

NPR should be cut off from government money. We are guaranteed freedom of speech. I hope Juan Williams sues them and wins all the stupid liberal's money.

Posted by: COOLCHILLY | October 24, 2010 5:04 PM

Juan is supposed to be a pro, but he is no match for O'Reilly. Juan allowed himself to be goaded into expressing his "feelings" about Muslims on airplanes - much to the delight of Fox and its henchmen. Good riddance! Juan is no pro. It showed. But Fox will overpay him just to rattle NPR. After the furor dies down, Fox having milked this story for its own reasons, will put Juan in a lonely time slot and forget about him.

Posted by: lifestory | October 24, 2010 5:27 PM

Only in a country as ignorant, bigoted and plain old stupid as ours can we have a poll like this.
How come we never saw a poll like this the last 348 times that someone got ffucked for saying something about Jews?

With the kind of idiots who are Americans, politicians get votes by saying: "Vote for me! I'm not educated!"

This is our problem: Here is a list of the most educated countries in the world. We are #50!!!

Georgia 100.0
Cuba 99.8
Estonia 99.8
Latvia 99.8
Barbados 99.7 [j]
Slovenia 99.7 [l]
Belarus 99.7
Lithuania 99.7
Ukraine 99.7
Armenia 99.7
Kazakhstan 99.6
Tajikistan 99.6
Azerbaijan 99.5
Turkmenistan 99.5
Russia 99.5
Hungary 99.4 [j]
Kyrgyzstan 99.3
Poland 99.3 [j]
Moldova 99.2 [l]
Tonga 99.2
Albania 99.0
Antigua and Barbuda 99.0 [q]
Australia 99.0 [d]
Austria 99.0 [d]
Belgium 99.0 [d]
Canada 99.0 [d]
Czech Republic 99.0 [d]
North Korea 99.0 [d]
Denmark 99.0 [d]
Finland 99.0 [d]
France 99.0 [d]
Germany 99.0 [d]
Guyana 99.0 [j]
Iceland 99.0 [d]
Ireland 99.0 [d]
Japan 99.0 [d]
South Korea 99.0 [d]
Luxembourg 99.0 [d]
Netherlands 99.0 [d]
New Zealand 99.0 [d]
Norway 99.0 [d]
Slovakia 99.0 [d]
Sweden 99.0 [d]
Switzerland 99.0 [d]
United Kingdom

Posted by: jewishmother | October 24, 2010 5:41 PM

The government has no business borrowing money from the Chinese on the taxpayers' credit card to donate it to any cause period much less an elitist, Marxist, highly-partisan, money-losing broadcasting service.

Posted by: LePauvrePapillon | October 24, 2010 5:52 PM

The government has no business borrowing money from the Chinese on the taxpayers' credit card to donate it to any cause period much less an elitist, Marxist, highly-partisan, money-losing broadcasting service.

Posted by: LePauvrePapillon | October 24, 2010 5:53 PM

After elections (actually in January) NPR will have its funding pulled.

Posted by: shred11 | October 24, 2010 7:21 PM

Liberals expect negroes to toe the line. Juan didn't and won't.

Posted by: ravitchn | October 24, 2010 7:24 PM

You pledge to your local stations not to NPR. NPR gets about 2% of it's funding directly from the Federal Gov't. Conservatives have been trying to pull NPR funding for years. Why didn't they do it in the 2000s when they had control of both houses of Congress and the White House? As a Negro, I think that if Juan Williams had couched this in terms of an irrational fear that he needs to overcome instead of a legitimate fear, we all wouldn't be having this conversation! Also, as a Negro, to me what he said doesn't sound any different than that White person who says he/she crosses the street whenever they can to avoid walking by that black man. Shame on him for spewing this garbage! And what is "Muslim garb" anyway. A turban? Well, Sikhs aren't Muslim and they wear a turban! Besides from the photos I've seen of the 9/11 terrorists and the shoe-bomber, they were dressed in Western-stlye clothing! As for NPR, I hear more viewpoints from the left and the right on it's news and commentary programs than on FOX or MSNBC combined! However, they blew this one PR-wise. They should have quietly failed to renew his contract when it was over.

Posted by: cabterp | October 24, 2010 7:52 PM

//Will NPR's decision to fire Juan Williams affect your decision to donate?//

It depends on...whether Williams is a non-vegetarian...

Posted by: SalvatorePante | October 24, 2010 8:39 PM

I wonder how the folks supporting Juan would feel if he had said that he "feels uncomfortable" every time he sees a Catholic priest dressed in his preistly clothing?

Posted by: Freethotlib | October 24, 2010 8:47 PM

Juan's comments were the same directed at blacks not too long ago and probably still are. Just in case he didn't know it those who hijacked planes on 9/11 were not dressed in Muslim Garb and none since. His remarks were racists pure and simple..

Posted by: october30 | October 24, 2010 9:17 PM

NPR is as unbiased as they come. Juan Williams had turned to FOX long before his being fired. I support NPR because it is the one place where the news is not bent to a agenda. If you listen to NPR you know that opinions of all colors and bends. That cannot be said of FOX. FOX is paying Juan Williams over $2 Million dollars to feel sorry for himself. He was not hurt so I find it hard to feel sorry for him.

Posted by: cdlumpkin | October 24, 2010 9:56 PM

"by Islamophobes"

There's no such word that you're using. The concept is even wrong.

Its such a politically correct term. It's like calling a "Janitor" a "Maintenance Engineer".

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | October 24, 2010 10:49 PM

Eric Cantor accused NPR of "overreacting", so he wants to kill Elmo and Car Talk.

Posted by: AxelDC | October 25, 2010 2:13 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company