Just as NPR refused to correct false reporting when I wrote them to say that Republican policies were not responsible for the spike in gas prices in 2006; that it was a natural market spike predicted by economist King Hubbert decades before, based on supply curves, NPR defends its Dan Rather - ish philosophy that even if it isn’t fact, they believe it true. Recall Dan Rather producing 7 “eye witnesses” to American atrocities, which proved later to never have been in VietNam during that time.

What does it take to understand that they have for decades been violating their public trust and support by broadcasting subversive Leftist propaganda?

US NEWS
‘Unseemly’: NPR Refuses to Correct Story After Supreme Court Deems It False
By Zachary Stieber
January 22, 2022 Updated: January 22, 2022

National Public Radio (NPR) is refusing to correct a story that was challenged by a trio of Supreme Court justices, triggering a flood of criticism.

Citing anonymous sources, reporter Nina Totenberg said Chief Justice John Roberts “asked the other justices to mask up,” or wear masks, because Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed concerns for her safety amid the recent surge in COVID-19 cases.

Totenberg said that because Justice Neil Gorsuch refused the request—Gorsuch has not worn a mask on the bench recently—Sotomayor began attending oral arguments from her chambers.

In rare public statements a day later, all three justices responded to the report.

Sotomayor and Gorsuch said Sotomayor did not ask Gorsuch to wear a mask, adding that “while we may sometimes disagree about the law, we are warm colleagues and friends.”

Even worse for NPR, which is partially funded by taxpayer money, Roberts said separately that “I did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other Justice to wear a mask on the bench.”

Experience the best way to read The Epoch Times online. Try our free app for a limited time.

Despite the direct challenges to the story, NPR has not issued a correction.

MOST READ
‘Unseemly’: NPR Refuses to Correct Story After Supreme Court Deems It False
Biden’s COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Federal Workers Blocked Nationwide
“The chief justice issued a statement saying he ‘did not request Justice Gorsuch or any other justice to wear a mask on the bench.” The NPR report said the chief justice’s ask to the justices had come ‘in some form.’ NPR stands by its reporting,” Totenberg wrote in a follow-up story.

Ask and request are synonyms that mean essentially the same thing.

The only change to the initial piece was hyperlinking to the new one.

RELATED
Misinformation About Kyle Rittenhouse Case Floods Social Media, TV Networks
Misinformation About Kyle Rittenhouse Case Floods Social Media, TV Networks
An NPR spokesman told The Epoch Times via email that the outlet “continues to stand by Nina Totenberg’s reporting.”

Jeffrey McCall, a communications professor at DePauw University, said that the decision not to correct the story means NPR is calling the justices liars, “which, frankly, comes off as unseemly.”

“The justices have made a public statement and, if NPR wants to dispute it, they need to do more to provide context and even identify their source. The general public knows NPR is a largely agenda-driven news outlet, and they will lose in a credibility contest with Supreme Court justices,” he added.

Epoch Times Photo
Members of the Supreme Court pose for a group photograph at the Supreme Court in Washington on April 23, 2021. (Erin Schaff/Pool/Getty Images)
The NPR spokesman and Totenberg declined to answer or did not respond to several sets of questions, including whether any other NPR employees verified the sources cited by Totenberg, who was fired from the National Observer for plagiarism.

While Totenberg said Roberts “asked” other justices to wear masks in her story, during an appearance on NPR’s “All Things Considered,” prior to the justices’ statements, she said Roberts “suggested” that the other justices don face coverings.

NPR’s public editor, Kelly McBride, said that the different descriptions mean the story “merits a clarification, but not a correction.”

“After talking to Totenberg and reading all justices’ statements, I believe her reporting was solid, but her word choice was misleading,” she wrote.

The reporter told McBride that she did not know how Roberts allegedly conveyed what she claimed he did.

“In the absence of a clarification, NPR risks losing credibility with audience members who see the plainly worded statement from Roberts and are forced to go back to NPR’s story and reconcile the nuances of the verb ‘asked’ when in fact, it’s not a nuanced word,” McBride said.

Readers and listeners have apparently contacted the outlet expressing concern over what happened.

“In order for the story to be true as NPR first reported, Roberts would’ve had to have asked ‘in some form,’ but he said he didn’t, full stop,” one said.

Joe Concha, a media critic at The Hill, wrote on Twitter that “NPR couldn’t have handled this any worse,” linking to McBride’s piece.

The Society of Professional Journalists says ethical journalism should be “accurate and fair” and recommends reporters largely stick to sources that are clearly identified. Reporters should also “respond quickly to questions about accuracy, clarity, and fairness,” the group said, adding that mistakes should be acknowledged and corrected promptly and corrections and clarifications should be explained, “carefully and clearly.”

Totenberg later spoke to the Daily Beast, criticizing McBride for the column.

“She can write any [expletive] thing she wants, whether or not I think it’s true. She’s not clarifying anything!” the reporter said. “I haven’t even looked at it, and I don’t care to look at it because I report to the news division, she does not report to the news division.”

Responding to Justice Roberts’ direct challenge to her reporting, she claimed that “I did not say that he requested that people do anything, but ‘in some form’ did.”