it's starting to look that way, isn't it?
i wonder if fox is now paying him more than they would have had he simply resigned fro npr in order to splash about there.
and npr's issued a mea culpa on process grounds.
Quote:
*
NPR CEO apologizes for handling of Williams firing
Vivian Schiller, the NPR CEO who has gotten criticism from all sides about NPR’s decision to fire Juan Williams, apologized to her colleagues Sunday evening for the way the firing was handled.
Among the most problematic aspects of the firing was the NPR’s initial statement suggesting that Williams's statements on “The O’Reilly Factor” were to blame. Schiller later said that Williams had long been in hot water at NPR, and the recent statements were simply the last straw, but the timing of his firing undermined this argument.
In her latest statement, Schiller acknowledges that “reasonable people can disagree about timing” and apologizes for firing Williams over the phone, but doesn’t back down from the decision itself.
The letter:
Dear Program Colleagues,
I want to apologize for not doing a better job of handling the termination of our relationship with news analyst Juan Williams. While we stand firmly behind that decision, I regret that we did not take the time to prepare our program partners and provide you with the tools to cope with the fallout from this episode. I know you all felt the reverberations and are on the front lines every day responding to your listeners and talking to the public
This was a decision of principle, made to protect NPR’s integrity and values as a news organization. Juan Williams’ comments on Fox News last Monday were the latest in a series of deeply troubling incidents over several years. In each of those instances, he was contacted and the incident was discussed with him. He was explicitly and repeatedly asked to respect NPR's standards and to avoid expressing strong personal opinions on controversial subjects in public settings, as that is inconsistent with his role as an NPR news analyst. After this latest incident, we felt compelled to act. I acknowledge that reasonable people can disagree about timing: whether NPR should have ended its relationship with Juan Williams earlier, on the occasion of other incidents; or whether this final episode warranted immediate termination of his contract.
In any event, the process that followed the decision was unfortunate – including not meeting with Juan Williams in person – and I take full responsibility for that. We have already begun a thorough review of all aspects of our performance in this instance, a process that will continue in the coming days and weeks. We will also review and re-articulate our written ethics guidelines to make them as clear and relevant as possible for our acquired show partners, our staff, Member stations and the public.
The news and media world is changing swiftly and radically; traditional standards and practices are under siege. This requires us to redouble our attention to how we interpret and live up to our values and standards. We are confident that NPR’s integrity and dedication to the highest values in journalism and our commitment to serving as a national forum for the respectful discussion of diverse ideas will continue to earn the support of a growing audience.
I stand by my decision to end NPR’s relationship with Juan Williams, but deeply regret the way I handled and explained it. You have my pledge that the NPR team and I will reflect on all aspects of our actions, and strive to improve them in the future.
Please feel free to share your concerns and suggestions.
Respectfully,
Vivian Schiller
|
NPR CEO apologizes for handling of Williams firing - On Media - POLITICO.com
the decision is based on professional misconduct and the premise for that outlined in the paragraph in bold. it appears that the usual process leading to the firing was followed even if the handling of the firing itself was maybe a problem (i didn't know about the phonecall. but my personal interest in this lay elsewhere, in the mis-statement of the situation by the conservative punditocracy and how that played out.)
appearing on o-reilly and hannity and being baited into playing the rhetorical game (to put it charitably with respect to williams) is a problem because those shows are infotainment, not journalism. they are editorials with a shabby footnote apparatus. i'm glad that the distinction between types of side-show at fox gets made.
but i wonder the extent to which fox's response is about protection of its business model. because the williams firing raises problems for it at the level of revealing how fox news is perceived beyond the limits of itself, beyond its own self-framing. it's one thing to have people in a disempowered public scoff at fox---it's quite another for a broadcast outlet to effectively argue that fox has programming that violates professional standards for journalism (even as that should be obvious.) so maybe the tempest in a teapot from the right was also a defense of the television outlet that is at this point the most important mobilizing tool they have.