or excuses any of those is appropriate. Even the appearance of impropriety calls intoquestion everything that NPR stands for.
wrote:Not trying to be personal or any kind of attack on you as a person, but NPR stands, in mymind, for integrity and truth, and in the story of the "Impossible Standard" the wholearticle is about why NPR did right in not making a truthful article on 5-hour energy.Corporate sponsor or not, I would have liked to have seen a non-biased, investigativereport on the company or it's product, and the positive and the negative health-effectsof the product. In not doing so, NPR is fully letting go of it's (in my mind) highly heldbanner of truth and non-partisanship. I am afraid that if this is the mentality of NPR, thatyou, Mr. Schumacher-Matos, claim that it is, NPR is not going to remain with it's highstandards that I have come to know it by. This will definitely make me not listen to theradiostation anymore, if this truly is the stand NPR goes by. What if the 5-hour energydrink turned out to be hazardous to human health, would you then report on it? Orwould the corporate sponsorship bias prevent that as well? This thinking is exactly whathas landed us in the place where we are today, in which truth always is lost when"money passes hands". I beg you, Mr. Schumacher-Matos, to rethink this and reconsiderNPR's stands on this.
wrote:This article seems to state that because it's impossible to eliminate all conflicts, there'sno need to disclose the most obvious ones. The logic is flawed and disappointing. NPR ismissing the boat here, and this article is making it worse.
Victor Frankenstein (Nicodemus145)
wrote:We know you don't HAVE to make a disclaimer on every piece about a sponsor, and weknow you can't eliminate EVERY possible conflict of interest in your stories. The point isthat your listeners trust you to a higher standard than other media outlets, and a simpleone-line acknowledgement of their sponsorship would have been enough, especiallysince the piece stepped over the huge, gaping, obvious question that everyone asksabout those energy drinks: the health effects.
wrote:White I've written employer handbooks for years. It's not a handbook problem.Disclosure is essential and with each news agency who tosses it out the window, the