The Great “I LIKE” Campaign, Part 3

It’s difficult for me to write with humor. It’s probably the way I write and I just haven’t learned the art of writing humorously yet. So, I state this up front: Today is just FUN. I’m not going to talk theology or church ministry. I will give opposites in media today. The idea of my little project is to say what I LIKE about two opposites rather than point out the ridiculous downsides. When I point out what I like, please understand that doesn’t make it a full endorsement.

As to media, I truly believe this is the best thing about the internet. I can now read The New York Times and Fox News and get different angles to a story. It doesn’t make sense to me how people in this day and age read only liberal sources or only conservative sources. Especially for Christians, it is the equivalent of only listening to preachers who “tickle your ears” as Paul warned Timothy. We don’t need to be that way. We need to see a story and explore it from different angles to make better evaluations. Of course, we don’t do that, but at least we can have the opportunity.

So, today’s opposites: National Public Radio and Talk Radio.

NPR: What I truly like about NPR is when they talk sports (which I love) they REALLY talk sports. They get into the story and cover it better than any “sports talk” station I could listen to. It’s truly a LIKE for me with NPR.

Talk Radio: Here I have conservative talk radio in mind. It was a huge influence on me in the 90s. Not so much anymore. But when I listen, I try to find the true LIKE I still have with conservative talk radio: Bill Bennett. He is a reasoned man. He reads widely and will not let discussions disintegrate into shouting matches.

I LIKE both formats in a certain way.

3 responses to “The Great “I LIKE” Campaign, Part 3”

  1. Ok…NPR. I like NPR for certain things too and talk radio for certain things as well. But…what I don’t like about NPR more than anything else is the FACT that they don’t have to compete in the public market place for ALL of their financing. They don’t have to ensure they meet a market demand for their product and that leads to a sense of entitlement among all their leadership. WHY? should public radio or (TV) get a pass and be allowed to reach into your pocket in order to exist in the public market place? Why do the leadership personalities of public radio make exorbitant salaries and not have to produce a product that meets public demand in every respect? Watching an entity like NPR fire a perfectly reasonable and rational individual simply because he expressed an opinion that was different to NPRs obvious PC agenda was the end of my financial and vocal support for them. They need to compete in the public market place and see if they can survive…I’m sure they would…which is another reason they don’t NEEEEEEED federal financing to do what they do…especially now. If they want to express a point of view…let them solicit ALL of their funds from the public! It’s a different story when you have to get your funding and actually stay on a budget. So in the end…I think your campaign is almost intellectually cowardly Dan (with all respect) Comparing NPR to Talk radio is truly an apples to oranges comparison and disingenuous. It almost seems as f you are being dishonest with yourself and with us. I can stand on a fence…It’s easy to look reasonable and rational when you refuse to make a stand. In the end everyone needs to take a side.

    1. This is a personal exercise in which I am looking to take a break from criticism. It is not a campaign to be only nice all the time. I’m sorry you’re missing my point and simply disagree with your assessment of my personal intellect.

    2. And also understand it is not any attempt at all to refuse to take a stand. While I can point out the negatives as easily as anyone (although you just may have championed that), and certainly take a stand, that is not my point in this exercise.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.