Why would NPR bring a global warming expert on and just?

Question

agree with him for a whole hour? They took one question from a caller who disagreed with the guy and then took no more questions from callers. The host said that all of the callers had called in to disagree, so she took no more calls.She said she would get back to the calls but never did. Why?

Answer 1

They are promoting gw propaganda because it is PC that is what liberals do, never let facts get in the way of the truth.

Answer 2

Because NPR is hopelessly liberal and can't stand to listen to other points of view. And to think that our taxes help support it!

Answer 3

It's not a journalist's job to disagree with a scientific expert.  And it's also not a journalist's job to waste the expert's time with laymen who think "Mars is warming" is some brilliant argument that scientists haven't considered.

If you don't like it, turn off NPR and switch to Rush Limbaugh or something.  He may be a drug addicted college dropout, but that never stopped him from believing he knows more than the experts!

Answer 4

I actually agree with Dana on this on.  A journalist is supposed to report, not to form opinions although that tenant of journalism is largely gone.  I don't believe in AWG, but I do believe in the right of others to speak about their beliefs.  Opening up the phone lines to skeptics would be non-productive.  An hour long show is hardly long enough to talk about all the science behind both sides of global warming.  NPR is extremely liberal.  If you don't like their content, don't listen.  I know I don't.  BTW - Rush is a buffoon  

Answer 5

My guess is that the expert has "been there, done that" in regard to answering the very questions that would have been asked, and didn't want to waste his time doing it again.  But the dissent should have been addressed in some fashion.

Why didn't she get back to the calls?  Her switchboard operators were obviously not getting good, open questions that would have allowed the speaker to answer questions off topic from the host, callers may have given up and switched off, who knows?  Sounds like you hung with it, though.  And there may be more information, or links, on the NPR website.

NPR is packaged pretty tightly, and can be informative, but in this case may not have succeeded in giving you or other listeners the balanced report you were seeking.  If you tried to call in and couldn't, write the shows' host and give them your thoughts.  Can't hurt, can it?

Answer 6

Why??????  There is no more leftist broadcast system in the world other than NPR.   There's no room for debate or differing opinions.

Answer 7

NPR has its marxist marching orders. They must perpetuate the global warming fraud to redistribute wealth through "carbon credits".

Answer 8

The mainstream media have been pretty open about their decision to provide completely biased, one-sided reporting on the issue.

Answer 9

because listeners want to learn not listen to  doubting Thomas'es who say their cattle dont f**t

Answer 10

Maybe NPR and the rest of the media are starting to get the idea that global warming is not a good topic to preach on.

Folks have been saying it is the end of the world for nearly 20 years, and the world is still here.

Like crying wolf for 20 years.  People just tune it out now.

Answer 11

I have to agree with Dana here, if you believe its nonsence, don't watch it.  It only encourages the media to push that kind of thing if people tune into it.

There doesn't seem to be any balanced coverage in the conventional sense.  Either a media organisation believes in catastrophic AGW or they believe it's science fiction.  There doesn't seem to be any middle ground at all.