NPR fires Williams over Muslim fears

October 21, 2010 By

Late last night, NPR fired senior news analyst Juan Williams. On Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor,” where he also contributes, there was a discussion about something that had happened on “The View” the previous week. Apparently Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar flipped out when guest O’Reilly said that “Muslims” had perpetrated the terrorist attacks on 9/11. They walked off the set in disgust.

So O’Reilly asks his panel about it and well, Williams’ comments didn’t sit well with NPR. The early reports of this news story are likely to be straight news. Here’s Brian Stelter at The New York Times:

The move came after Mr. Williams, who is also a Fox News political analyst, appeared on the “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday. On the show, the host, Bill O’Reilly, asked him to respond to the notion that the United States was facing a “Muslim dilemma.” Mr. O’Reilly said, “The cold truth is that in the world today jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet.”

Mr. Williams said he concurred with Mr. O’Reilly.

He continued: “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. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.

NPR said in its statement that the remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”

The write-up is great and even includes a bit of analysis, although perhaps Williams’ statement about addressing reality should also have been mentioned:

I think, look, political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don’t address reality.

Certainly NPR hadn’t been happy with him for a while, reprimanding him, as The Times notes, for mentioning his actual title (senior news analyst, NPR) outside of NPR. This may have been the excuse they needed to get rid of him.

Speaking of reality, Williams did not get in trouble for attempting to tie Timothy McVeigh’s irreligious terrorism to Christianity. In fact, NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik tweeted:

Williams also warned Fox host Bill O’Reilly agst blaming all Muslims for “extremists,” saying Christians shouldn’t be blamed for Tim McVeigh

It is true that Christians shouldn’t be blamed for McVeigh. Mostly that’s because McVeigh didn’t consider himself a Christian — self-identifying instead as agnostic. It’s a common error, but an error none-the-less. Apparently Folkenflik and many other media bigwigs, such as Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, are unaware of this basic fact. In fact, NPR’s Michel Martin was the last big media type to tar Christians with the Timothy McVeigh terrorism. Perhaps when NPR does its next round of sensitivity training, the network’s leaders might encourage their journalists to get their facts straight on that one.

Anyway, what do you think we’ll see in next-day stories? I assume most newsrooms have their series of Muslim response stories lined up already.

What else? A newsroom-wide polygraph to ensure that newsrooms are free of anyone who worries about Muslim terrorism on planes? A look at some of the hate speech that NPR approves of? An honest discussion of the role religion plays in Muslim terrorism? A collection of denunciations of Williams? A discussion of whether NPR’s status as a taxpayer-funded entity plays a role in Williams’ firing? A discussion of when it’s inappropriate to reveal fears? Somehow I think we might see a few “history of bias against Muslim”-type stories. All I hope for is a solid fashion-based discussion of “Muslim garb.” Well, that and a good treatment of stigma and its use and overuse in reining in bigotry.

The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg weighed in with a look at recent firings of journalists Helen Thomas and CNN’s Octavia Nasr. He wonders if media outlets aren’t getting too touchy in some cases.

No, not Helen’s. He says it appears that Williams was fired for no particularly good reason. He looks at the reality of travel-related violence committed or attempted by Muslim men in recent years. He points out, however, that the terrorists aren’t known for dressing in “Muslim garb.”

These last two statements seem to be a good avenue for further discussion in a news story. Why don’t you throw out your story suggestions. What are the important religion angles to include in this story? Extra points for how to make those “Muslim response to Williams” stories less predictable.

Print Friendly

Filed Under: Godbeat, Islam, Journalism, Politics, Radio & TV, Religion
  • Roberto

    Certainly NPR hadn’t been happy with him for a while, reprimanding him, as The Times notes, for mentioning his actual title (senior news analyst, NPR) outside of NPR. This may have been the excuse they needed to get rid of him.

    I suspect that this may be true. I’ve wondered about his relationship to NPR for a while: I’m pretty sure that Fox pays Williams’ bills and NPR burnishes his journalistic credentials.

    There’s also the fact that Fox has an agenda (and, yes, so does MSNBC increasingly) and to have an NPR guy appear on networks that are seen as advocating rather than reporting is a problem for NPR.

    Re: Michelle Martin, Timothy McVeigh and all that jazz. There’s a limit to the whole “they tar us so it’s not that big a deal when someone else gets tarred unfairly” argument. Yes, NPR should make it clear that McVeigh most decidedly was not a Christian but what that has to do with the substance of Williams’ comments is, to put it politely, unclear.

    I don’t think that Williams should have been fired for that comment — as I noted above, I agree that it was probably a pretext — but that’s a far cry from saying that it has any merit other than as an insight to his inner state. If you’re going to report on these sorts of fears then you should cover how bad people are at assessing risk in general. You should cover the volumes of research on how perception and symbols shape beliefs and behavior in ways that are almost pre-cognitive. You should discuss the long American history of associating violence and chaos with the currently-unfavoired “other.”

    In other words, provide real historical and scientific context. Not that I expect this, which is why I don’t watch cable news.

  • http://forgottencenotaph.blogspot.com J. Lahondere

    What interested me about this story was that Mr. Williams obviously felt that saying these things on national television did not constitute an “inconsistency” with NPR’s editorial standards and practices. I wonder exactly what NPR’s editorial standards and practices are and in what way he violated them.

  • http://alislam.org Hasan Hakeem

    I get nervous when liquor begins to flow on planes. Why pick on Juan Williams — Hasan Hakeem, a Muslim.

  • Roberto

    As it turns out, Williams, at least according to Slate, was the victim of a Sherrod Brown-type editing job. After acknowledging his fears, he went on to add that these kinds of fears should not form the basis for thinking about all Muslims or public policy.

    Okay, we’ve officially reached the point where the inter-tubes are the biggest threat to self-government and social peace. Shut ‘em down.

  • Bram

    Contra Roberto, Williams wasn’t fired for appearing on a network that advocates things, since NPR itself does that. Rather, he was fired for appearing on a network that advocates things different from those than NPR does. In a sense, he was fired for being a journalist, rather than a propagandist — fired, that is, for being someone independent enough of party lines to contribute to two different organs of opinion that each have their own diametrically-opposed party lines, neither of which did Williams tow consistently. It’s telling that it was NPR and not Fox which Fired Williams first for departing from the party line. Telling, and much more flattering of Fox than it is of NPR — Fox which seems more inclusive, more diverse, and more tolerant in this case than NPR.

  • Martha

    “(I)f I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried.”

    I’d disagree with that point; if someone is a terrorist going to blow up a plane, they will (if they’re any way smart) dress and behave just like the rest of the mass of passengers so as not to arouse suspicion.

    It’s the guy in the chinos and sunglasses you should be worrying about, not the woman in the chador.

  • Todd

    President Obama makes a very large number of statements similar to what Juan Williams said in his book “Dreams From My Father”, and nobody seems to mind.

  • http://goodintentionsbook.com Bob Smietana

    William Saletan has an interesting take on Williams.

  • bob

    Several years ago the local NPR station in Seattle used to deal with those who disagreed with the Canonical Opinions of the radio host in a more subtle way. If a caller on a talk show was not *correct* the volume was turned down by the engineer. Mr. Williams just got turned way, way down.
    I recall seeing a woman (well, it might have been a woman!) on a cross Atlantic flight in 1992, accompanied by a man and a little boy. Covered from head to toe, slightly darker area at the eyes. The person must have been able to see through this as she(?) didn’t bump into stuff. Of course she might have been Lutheran. Williams is just jumping to conclusions so he had to go.

  • Jerry

    they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

    “they are identifying themselves first and foremost as [Christians], I get worried. I get nervous.” “they are identifying themselves first and foremost as [atheists], I get worried. I get nervous.” they are identifying themselves first and foremost as [democrats/republicans], I get worried. I get nervous.” That’s a perfect sentence fragment that can be used to drop in whichever group you hate or fear. And that exact symmetry needs to be kept in mind.

  • Bram

    The problem, Jerry, is one of consistency. Saying that one is made “nervous” by people who identify themselves “first and foremost” as Christian would probably get you a raise at NPR, not fired.

  • http://goodintentionsbook.com Bob Smietana

    The whole interview – gives much more context.
    http://www.getreligion.org/2010/10/juan-williams-worries-gets-fired/

  • http://www.tmatt.net tmatt

    JERRY:

    Read his NEXT PARAGRAPH. You cannot rip this comment out of context.

    I wish more secularists (to pick on one group) WOULD say precisely what he said — with the word CHRISTIAN inserted — and then go on to say precisely what he said in the NEXT PARAGRAPH.

    What are you saying was his journalistic sin?

  • Jerry

    It’s trivial to refuse Bram’s (and other’s) misstatements about NPR. Google and 5 minutes found these stories:

    Vets Stand Guard Over Christian Flag In NC Town
    Mormon Parents Rejected For Scout Leadership Post
    Cubans Flock To Evangelism To Fill Spiritual Vacuum
    Raised In America And Aligned With Al-Qaida
    New Poll: Tea Party Overwhelmingly Christian And Socially Conservative
    Christian Aid Groups Tread Lightly In Muslim World
    Christian Groups Find Way Around High Health Costs
    Christian Academics Cite Hostility On Campus
    Writer Anne Rice: ‘Today I Quit Being A Christian’
    Christian Filmmakers Creating An Industry Of Faith

  • Bram

    Jerry, neither I nor anyone else here is claiming that NPR never covers anything to do with Christianity. Rather, the claim is that NPR is not an organ of opinion that’s generally been all that friendly or even fair toward people who identify “first and foremost” as Christian. How many such people, for example, does NPR employ? As for the stories you cite, what’s to say that those stories don’t contain precisely the kind of anti-Christian bias that I and others have claimed?

  • http://www.getreligion.org Mollie

    Bram,

    But Jerry’s headlines show that NPR does have substantial coverage of Christians and frequently not in biased or partisan ways.

    We’ve criticized them but we also praise their work a lot, too.

  • Jim

    @jerry #10:

    When any of the groups you listed are responsible, on a consistent basis, of bringing down planes, buildings, or performing be-headings to post on mass-media, then you can claim “exact symmetry.”

  • Evanston2

    The problem, y’all, is that NPR is directly and indirectly supported by taxpayers. I could care less what most media outlets say, because I can choose to not support them. Have a problem with the “ladies” on The View? No problem, don’t watch them. Not so with NPR or PBS. Every time their existence is challenged they trot out Big Bird or Elmo. Why am I forced to pay the salaries of people who are governmentally protected parasites, and therefore sympathize with every government program designed to tax and regulate me? These propaganda outlets will continue to do so as long as they are a protected, quasi-public entity. It is time to end this. With the internet and satellite streaming, etc. the argument for “another voice” for “the people” has passed from questionable to ludicrous. I feel for Juan Williams. He didn’t recognize the nature of NPR. Sorry, but if you defend NPR you don’t “get it” either.

  • Julia

    Lots of truth in Evanston2′s statement:

    With the internet and satellite streaming, etc. the argument for “another voice” for “the people” has passed from questionable to ludicrous.

    I’d add cable TV and Twitter.

  • Bram

    Mollie,

    Your word “frequently” sounds to me like unintentionally damning with faint praise. Shouldn’t NPR *always* be fair and unbiased where Christians and Christianity are concerned? It the instances when they are not — in the instances implied by your word “frequently” (instead of always) — is the journalist or commentator who was unfair or biased summarily fired, the way Juan Williams was fired, where Islam was concerned? How often are journalists and commentators *ever* fired at NPR or elsewhere in the mainstream media for being unfair toward or biased against Christians and Christianity? Granted, they may be called out by Get Religion, which is better than nothing at all, but that’s about the only penalty the vast majority of them will ever face.

  • Bram

    Jerry and Mollie,

    A thought experiment: Suppose Juan Williams was commentator for NPR but also for MSNBC instead of Fox News. Supposed that he appeared on a regular basis on the Rachel Maddow Show. Suppose that during a discussion of gay marriage or the recent suicides of gay teens, he said that he was made “nervous” by people who see themselves as Christian “first and foremost” and bring that identification with them to the public sphere. Under those circumstances, would Williams have been summarily fired from NPR? If the answer is anything but “no,” then please “pass the dutchie” (as the old song goes).

  • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    With a deficit in the trillions, why are we spending any money on radio (or TV for that matter) when there is so much choice out there. Funding TV and radio harkens back to the electronic media’s Dark Ages when choices were very limited.
    I rarely agreed with Williams but found him to be an articulate and respectful promoter of many ideas I disagree with. How come no mention (yet, I guess) about the talk I heard on a number of sites about liberal billionaire, string-puller George Soros only yesterday giving 1 million dollars to NPR to hire 100 reporters. And Williams gets fired the next day????

  • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    Liberal fascism in the media marches on: I just heard that Face Book will now not allow criticism of anything gay on its site. Are they going to purify its site of anything critical of Christians??? Jews??? Moslems???

  • http://davidgriffey.blogspot.com/ Dave G.

    “they are identifying themselves first and foremost as [Christians], I get worried. I get nervous.”

    According to Tavis Smiley, that’s pretty smart. After all, he has assured us that Christians murder people every single day – in this country. People walk into post offices every day. They walk into schools. That is what Columbine was about. There are so many more examples of Christians who kill people than any examples of Muslilms who do that. Oh, and he still has his show. Oh, and it’s on PBS. This despite all that media outrage we remember over his statements.

  • Jerry

    Since NPR funding is being brought up, it’s worth mentioning the actual facts since the right wing is now on the warpath again. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20020383-503544.html has a breakdown of their funding of which the vast majority does not come from the government in spite of what the right wing thinks. And, for what it’s worth, Williams has a $2 million contract from Fox so he’s hardly hurting.

  • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    Jerry–Went to site you suggested. All public broadcasting money comes to $422 million according to CBS. Only in Washington robbing our wallets would almost a half billion
    dollars be treated as “chump change.” And NPR doesn’t get money directly from us. Right!! The radio money (93million bucks) instead goes to their outlets directly. Since you consider it such a pittance, then they won’t miss the money if the money pipeline closes down.

  • http://www.tmatt.net tmatt

    “Liberal fascism in the media marches on: I just heard that Face Book will now not…”

    DEACON:

    A URL for that info, please. Now.

  • GhaleonQ

    This is a perfect, archtypal Get Religion post. Great job, Mollie.

    Personally, I’d love to see someone (the recently-renamed “Speaking Of Faith”?) take on the evolution of religious symbols/garb (outside of stereotypical stories about French Muslims or what-have-you) in secular societies. How have outward signifiers changed to accomodate those uncomfortable with it? “Ceremonial dress” is fast fading these days, so such a story would be useful.

  • Jeffrey

    What’s surprising is how few people really do face consequences for anti-Muslim comments, not just that a non-employee has his contract terminated for saying potentially offensive things. If he’d made similar comments about Jews–just ask Thomas, Nasr and Sanchez–he would have lost his job much earlier and for much more subtle comments.

    Media ompanies have an obligation to readers/listeners and to avoid things that blemish their brands. Just as CNN is concerned about vague anti-Semitism among its contributors and employees, so is NPR concerned about offending Muslims. It’s unlikely it will hurt his career, he just won’t be able to hide behind the NPR brand.

  • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    t.matt–I do not have Facebook. But I heard the story about Facebook controlling debate on gay issues on two radio sites I have found to be usually reliable.
    So at your request I did further research on Google to try to find out Facebook’s policies. Not easy. They apparently take down people and words as they see fit.
    According to an AP story on a couple of sites on their banning practices Facebook says its policies (which I could never find in specific words)
    prohibit hateful content (no definition given for what they consider “hate”) and they say they have “systems” in place to take down “hate” posts. Everything was very vague. Another site reported pages taken down that were receiving many messages opposing
    some Gay Rights marches in Europe. (They were getting too much “hate” speech it is alleged.)
    But according to sites put up by Facebook apparently the reason they don’t have a specific policy is that, according to a number of sites, including theirs, Facebook works closely with with Gay Rights groups (not independent First Amendment scholars or lawyers) to decide what is “hate’ speech.
    And the news stories indicate the Gay groups are very pleased with the results. Considering that they consider any opposition to their movement “hate” one can logically assume there is a lot of censorship going on behind the scenes. Or maybe the two sources I heard on the radio have more info than I could glean from Google leads.

  • http://forgottencenotaph.blogspot.com J. Lahondere

    I don’t know if this helps, but I found this (in regards to Facebook and anti-gay comments)

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jqjQKeQ3UaUeXh8EEUYUtPsdicCA?docId=17a9915eee9b4091b18a245ae0a933b1

  • http://www.tmatt.net tmatt

    Deacon:

    URLs for any of those quoted news stories?

    We want people to contribute on the record info, if at all possible.

  • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    matt–I’m not very computer literate. What is an URL??? The long, long code list at the end of the Google lead (some are so long and complicated I doubt I could ever type them in right)–or the name of the site (which I will start writing down). I try a lot of different search words on Google to find sites that might have info on the question at hand.
    Last night I used search combos that had gay-censorship in it. One of the stories was the AP story Lahondre sent. Two or three were Facebooks own exposition on what gets banned (it looks comprehensive, but is vague in the specific giving their censors great latitude).
    Today I just Googled: “Facebook: censorship issues” and it appears that those who say things critical of Islam get bounced or their words get censored even more than those who are critical on some Gay issues. “Atlas Shrugs” is a site that had some info on the Moslem censorship issue and Facebook.

  • http://www.tmatt.net tmatt

    URL: The address online at which you found the information. The hyperlink.

    As in, for this thread:

    http://www.getreligion.org/2010/10/juan-williams-worries-gets-fired/#comments

  • Evanston2

    Julia (19): You’re correct, of course, about Cable TV though I’m not sure if Twitter really has enough depth to count as a significant expansion of media for consumers. I suspect the discussion of these issues has moved to Mollie’s latest post, and I’ll move there also.