Juan Williams pulls a Rick Sanchez

[hoyainspirit]

NPR fires Juan Williams over anti-Muslim remarks

Quote
NPR said in a statement that Williams's remarks - including that he gets "worried" and "nervous" when he sees people dressed in Muslim-style clothing on airplanes - "were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR."

Williams, 56, made the remarks Monday after the show's host, Bill O'Reilly, asked him whether he thought the United States was facing a "Muslim dilemma." O'Reilly said that "jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet."

Williams, who is African American and writes and speaks frequently on race, told O'Reilly that he agreed with his assessment.

"I mean, look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country," he said. "But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they're identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."

Not as egregious as Sanchez, IMO, but over the line nonetheless. Williams' statements were certainly stupid, but I'm not sure he should have been fired.

[ksf42001]

The NPR/Williams situation has been strained for quite some time. While this particular comment doesn't reach the level of Sanchez's, I think it was just the one that made NPR realize keeping Williams on was more trouble than it was worth.

[The Stig]

More stupid than offensive, in my opinion. If somebody (Muslim or non-Muslim) is going on an American flight with the intention of carrying out an attack, Muslim garb would be the LEAST likely thing I can see them wearing. The 9/11 hijackers certainly weren't wearing traditional Muslim garb when they hijacked those planes.

[jerseyhoya34]

Fox has now signed up Williams who will add his voice to those of the channel's other satirists. The backlash against NPR is fairly disgusting.

[ksf42001]

Nice, Williams now has a 3 year, $2 Million deal with Fox. Regardless of what you think about NPR's handling of the situation, Fox just rewarded someone who, even in the most positive light, made insensitive comments...

[TC]

Oct 21, 2010 16:25:16 GMT -5 ksf42001 said:

Nice, Williams now has a 3 year, $2 Million deal with Fox. Regardless of what you think about NPR's handling of the situation, Fox just rewarded someone who, even in the most positive light, made insensitive comments...

You say insensitive, I say they'd be just about the most balanced and sensitive thing you'd hear on FOX - at worst they are sorta run of the mill for something you'd hear out of Steve Doocy's mouth.

[rosslynhoya]

Remind me again why people can't say insensitive but true things on television?

[DFW HOYA]

This plays into the sentiment that NPR really doesn't want voices from the center/right in their well-manicured sandbox. What could have been a teaching moment for NPR's gentrified listenership becomes another exercise in PC.

[The Stig]

Oct 21, 2010 17:09:03 GMT -5 rosslynhoya said:

Remind me again why people can't say insensitive but true things on television?

Why is that relevant to this discussion? Williams' comments were not true - they were untrue fearmongering. Do you really think that a person who's going to hijack a plane is going to dress up in full Muslim garb? Come on! Our enemies may be evil, but they're not stupid. An attacker with even a tiny dose of intelligence is going to do what the 9/11 hijackers did - dress up in Western clothing in order to blend in.

If you put all the passengers on a plane in a lineup and asked me to pick out the one who's LEAST likely to carry out a terrorist act on that flight, I'm going to pick out the guy in full Muslim garb.

Being controversial is fine. Spreading false ideas in order to scare people isn't.

[jerseyhoya34]

I think Williams probably knew what he said was over the line. Generally there is something unsettling when comments have to be prefaced by "I am not a bigot." Why was that necessary if everything that followed was clean and tasteful?

What has become politically incorrect is to call folks such as this guy what they are.

[SFHoya99]

I'd fire him because he's an idiot.

If your clothes are your first and foremost identification, there's a lot of people out there who are more citizens of the Banana Republic than the US of A.

NPR has a listenership, and they cater to it just like Fox does. I'd actually prefer there to be a discussion there so people could point out that logically, his fear has a fairly limited basis and that we shouldn't be discriminating against people purely because of that.

I'm actually with Rosslyn here in general on the point that we need to have discussions on these things. I have no problems with feelings. The problem is in how it's discussed. If it's here's my feeling, let's evaluate whether that's rational and how I should act on that, great.

Without hearing it, without hearing what's after, it certainly sounds like he is positing something else. But I'd prefer to hear it in context. But given the quote, this guy isn't evaluating how he feels. He's stirring things up without a lot of basis other than his personal prejudices.

A bigger issue is frankly our media has gotten so weak it views fact-checking/challenging as partisan. If someone says this (and it's not off the cuff -- the topic was slated) shouldn't the interviewer be able to come back with both facts (were the 9/11 attackers dressed in Muslim garb?) and basic logic (like Stig's argument) or even just provocative questions that forces a more fully fleshed out idea.

Our media is attempting to be so impartial, they allow open lying and intentional misleadings constantly.

[ksf42001]

"if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims"

I find this kind of leap in logic horribly troubling. Why can't clothing just be clothing?

[Boz]

NPR can do what they want.

I don't think CNN should've fired Rick Sanchez (unless they wanted to fire him for low ratings) and I don't think NPR should've fired Williams, particularly if you do listen to the entire conversation (available here).

They kind of look like hypocrites for firing Williams but posting insulting and crude videos like "How to Speak Teabag" on their site.

But they want the freedom to do what they want and impose arbitrary standards, I have no problem with that.

As long as we don't provide public funding for them anymore, that is.

Their CEO has come out today and said they do not need that funding and they can go on without it.

Good for you. Do it.

(I have a feeling the new Congress is going to make you do it anyway.)

I have never had a single bad thing to say about Juan Williams and really enjoy him and Bill Kristol going hammer and tongs at each other every Sunday.

This incident does not change my opinion of him.

EDIT: As for Williams' new full-time employer, might I suggest Hannity & Williams? Hannity's show was far better when it was point/counterpoint between he and Alan Colmes for the full hour.

[TC]

Oct 21, 2010 17:19:56 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

This plays into the sentiment that NPR really doesn't want voices from the center/right in their well-manicured sandbox. What could have been a teaching moment for NPR's gentrified listenership becomes another exercise in PC.

They don't. They want impartiality.

[Boz]

Oct 21, 2010 18:40:14 GMT -5 TC said:

Oct 21, 2010 17:19:56 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

This plays into the sentiment that NPR really doesn't want voices from the center/right in their well-manicured sandbox. What could have been a teaching moment for NPR's gentrified listenership becomes another exercise in PC.

They don't. They want impartiality.

That was pretty funny. Good one, TC.

[SFHoya99]

Oct 21, 2010 17:19:56 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

This plays into the sentiment that NPR really doesn't want voices from the center/right in their well-manicured sandbox. What could have been a teaching moment for NPR's gentrified listenership becomes another exercise in PC.

While I don't disagree this was really PC, what's the teaching moment and why is "gentrified" relevant?

Because reading your comment ... I don't want to unfairly brand it so i'll wait for a response.

[TC]

The well manicured sandbox part was what struck me more. Renee Montagne must have some really nice fingernails or something.

[kchoya]

Oct 21, 2010 16:25:16 GMT -5 ksf42001 said:

Nice, Williams now has a 3 year, $2 Million deal with Fox. Regardless of what you think about NPR's handling of the situation, Fox just rewarded someone who, even in the most positive light, made insensitive comments...

Yeah, because it's not like he wasn't on Fox before.

[GIGAFAN99]

Oct 21, 2010 18:05:27 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

I'd fire him because he's an idiot.

If your clothes are your first and foremost identification, there's a lot of people out there who are more citizens of the Banana Republic than the US of A.

NPR has a listenership, and they cater to it just like Fox does. I'd actually prefer there to be a discussion there so people could point out that logically, his fear has a fairly limited basis and that we shouldn't be discriminating against people purely because of that.

I'm actually with Rosslyn here in general on the point that we need to have discussions on these things. I have no problems with feelings. The problem is in how it's discussed. If it's here's my feeling, let's evaluate whether that's rational and how I should act on that, great.

Without hearing it, without hearing what's after, it certainly sounds like he is positing something else. But I'd prefer to hear it in context. But given the quote, this guy isn't evaluating how he feels. He's stirring things up without a lot of basis other than his personal prejudices.

A bigger issue is frankly our media has gotten so weak it views fact-checking/challenging as partisan. If someone says this (and it's not off the cuff -- the topic was slated) shouldn't the interviewer be able to come back with both facts (were the 9/11 attackers dressed in Muslim garb?) and basic logic (like Stig's argument) or even just provocative questions that forces a more fully fleshed out idea.

Our media is attempting to be so impartial, they allow open lying and intentional misleadings constantly.

The media weakness is not about impartiality. The media weakness is in that loud lies that rate .8 on Thursday afternoon are better than rational thoughts that rate .75.

TV/radio news is 9 parts TV/radio and 1 part news. They have the same measurement of success as Kitchen Impossible, Howard Stern, and Two-and-a-half-Men. If an interviewer starts a "conversation" he/she might as well start looking for a new line of work.

[rosslynhoya]

Oct 21, 2010 17:40:14 GMT -5 The Stig said:

Oct 21, 2010 17:09:03 GMT -5 rosslynhoya said:

Remind me again why people can't say insensitive but true things on television?

Why is that relevant to this discussion? Williams' comments were not true - they were untrue fearmongering. Do you really think that a person who's going to hijack a plane is going to dress up in full Muslim garb? Come on! Our enemies may be evil, but they're not stupid. An attacker with even a tiny dose of intelligence is going to do what the 9/11 hijackers did - dress up in Western clothing in order to blend in.

If you put all the passengers on a plane in a lineup and asked me to pick out the one who's LEAST likely to carry out a terrorist act on that flight, I'm going to pick out the guy in full Muslim garb.

Being controversial is fine. Spreading false ideas in order to scare people isn't.

Williams wasn't spreading false ideas in order to scare people. He didn't tell people to beware of Muslims or people in Muslim garb, this wasn't a tactical recommendation for crying out loud. He confessed to thinking naughty thoughts -- that even though he's a dyed in the wool good-thinking NPR liberal progressive, when he sees people on a plane in Muslim garb, his immediate reaction is one of nervousness.

I also think anyone who traipses around in full Muslim garb should not be surprised when people treat them "differently" than integrated Muslims. They are intentionally doing it for some reason, and we can all cross our fingers and hope it's because the outfits are uber-comfortable. They could choose to avoid the reactions they get from normal America, but they opt not to. It's more likely they want to shock and/or intimidate others. Why did an American-born Palestinian like Nidal Hassan decide to put on full Pashtun dress before his killing spree at Fort Hood? Because a dude in an Armani Express t-shirt or even traditional Palestinian dress just didn't fit the image he wanted to project that day.