Juan Williams
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2010-10-26/juan-williams
Juan Williams is a political commentator for Fox News and until last week he was also a news analyst for NPR. He joined NPR in 1999 as the daily host of Talk of The Nation, and in recent years he’s served as an NPR senior national correspondent. His comments on Fox's The O'Reilly Factor last week prompted a seemingly abrupt dismissal from NPR. Juan Williams talks about his career, his roles as news analyst and commentator, and his reaction to the recent controversy over his dismissal from NPR.
Guests
Juan Williams
FOX News political contributor, former NPR news analyst and author of "Enough."
Related Video
Fox News political contributor and former NPR news analyst Juan Williams discusses his feelings about NPP management and the way in which he was fired last week following remarks he made on Fox's "The O'Reilly Factor." Williams described his exchange with NPR senior vice president for news, Ellen Weiss, from whom he received the news of his dismissal: "I asked Ellen Weiss, 'Do you have a conscience?'...she was carrying out orders. This was an execution from her point of view, I guess:"
"I'm a big fan of radio and public radio," Fox News political contributor and former NPR news analyst Juan Williams said in response to Diane's question about whether he meant to attack all of NPR's programming in his recent criticisms of the organization. Williams draws a distinction between local stations' programming decisions and those made at the national level at NPR's headquarters:
Diane's Complete Interview With Juan Williams: Part 1
Diane's Complete Interview With Juan Williams: Part 2
Diane's Complete Interview With Juan Williams: Part 3
Diane's Complete Interview With Juan Williams: Part 4
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Juan - you were unquestionably the best NPR news analyst (along with Cokie Roberts.) You will be greatly missed. Is there *anything* that we can do to get you back??? (And while I certainly can't begrudge you the money, it really hurts that you will be giving credibility to that bottom-feeder, Fox.)- - - - P.S. Please tell the genius that fired you that the vast majority of NPR's listeners would greatly appreciate her looking for another job. The only silver lining - a great excuse not to donate to NPR.
Brian Zack
Princeton, NJ
bgzack@gmail.com
So, Mr. Williams has gone from a "news analyst" to a disinformation deliverer. He couldn't hide forever as a wolf in sheeps clothing. Well, done on NPR's behalf to jettison this one..and of course, he chases the money while casting aside personal ethics and journalistic standards. I count on NPR to keep the toxic rust of conservatism out of the airwaves and promote empirical accuracy to our nation when there are very few public alternatives to retrieve national and world events as they really occur. Well done, and you have my undending support and ever tuned-in ears.
-Always an NPR fan....
The trouble with Juan Williams on Fox is: Fox is not a news network it is undeniably a Republican party extension. Fair and balanced?? No way.
It never bothered me that Mr. Williams worked for Fox. (Mara Liasson has managed the same arrangement professionally.) But too often I would hear the slippery talking-point method of commentary, so prevalent on Fox, filter into Mr. Williams' efforts on NPR. That's when I started to question his journalistic integrity. I must also say that I found his loud, bitter complaining with Bill O'Reilly after the firing utterly unprofessional. I'm glad he's gone from NPR. We can get his point of view from others, who will respect our intelligence as much as we respect their opinions.
I was going to write directly to Mr. Williams, but this will have to do. I had great respect for him when he worked on "Eyes on the Prize" and I do think, at times, he can be a very objective comment. But he should have been smarter than making such a derogatory comment about Michelle Obama (did he ever apologize for that inapporpriate comment) and, knowing he was in the crosshairs, to make another ill-advised comment on O'Reilly was only stoking the flames. Maybe NPR could have handle the firing better, but he brought it upon himslef. His behavior, post firing, has only increased my disdain for him and his ilk......having fed at the NPR troth for years, now he suddenly gets religion and thinks it should no longer get funding from the Federal government. This while fox was only able to become the 4th network through sweetheart deals (citizenship for Rupert because foreigners could not own a network, commercials, etc). Freaking hypocrite
Juan Williams was fired for one reason and one reason only: he didn't follow the editorial standards and policies of NPR.
You know, the same editorial standards and policies that allowed Nina Totenberg to say about Jesse Helms on "Inside Washington":
"I think he ought to be worried about what's going on in the Good Lord's mind, because if there is retributive justice, he'll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will."
-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7msrF1V4NeY
Or, the same editorial standards and policies that allow "Learn to Speak Tea Bag" to remain on the NPR's website: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120344047
Now Juan's a pretty smart guy, how could he not understand that you can say whatever you want to about conservatives on NPR? If he really wanted to have free speech on NPR he simply could have disparaged conservatives, there would have been absolutely no problem whatsoever.
OK Juan, you were telling the truth so you say. In spouting "afraid of Muslims" over the airways and, especially on the Fox network with Bill O'Reilly, you were legitimizing the hate talk that they are so good at. Coming from you, a good NPR person and commentator, you put more hate into the listeners of Fox News. Now you can go on Fox and spread hate talk about NPR.
Barbara, Michigan.
Please, Juan Williams was an embarrassment to NPR. Anyone who calls Fox a "news" station better makes some air quotes when they say it... call it what it is, a defacto arm of the Republican party that for some reason isn't subject to political finance laws because everyone in the political structure is terrified to take on foreign billionaire Rupurt Murdoch. Having an NPR employee on Murdoch's payroll is a flagrant violation of journalistic ethics, and anyone who says otherwise is either uninformed about journalistic ethics or a pernicious liar. I doubled my pledge to NPR when they fired Williams and will do so again if they get rid of another compromised reporter, Maura Liasson.
Get real, these people are damaging to NPR's credibility as a source of news.
MEMO
From: Assoc. Justice Clarence Thomas
To: Vivian Schiller
C.C.: Juan Williams, Liberal Bloggers, I.T.S. Sarcasm
I would like to take this moment to profoundly thank NPR CEO Vivian Schiller for erasing my name from several embarrassing headlines after my wife Ginny's foolish and clumsy attempt to contact her former romantic rival Anita Hill.
Thanks to the liberal blogospheric and Vivian Schiller Scherroding of my boy Juan he got my back AND $2 million from my guys over a Fox. Nice job Vivi for termiting NPR's wood foundation right in the middle of your Fall begathon. Bwahahahaha
Oh and Alicia I heard you on TOTN yesterday and I hope you can teach me some of those pretzel logic techniques you used to justify why Nina can mix it up with Charles Krauthammer on Inside Washington but Juan gets fired for wrestling with a pig in a mud pit.
Juan has now joined an organization that includes conservative and liberal analysts (liberals include Bob Beckel, Alan Colmes, Juan and Mara Liasson, along with others who are not regulars). NPR has NO conservatives either as regulars or as guests (Diane R thinks she is even handed, it is obvious she is not). Well, except for Terri Gross and then she is extremely condescending and spiteful to cons. As a faithful listener/viewer to both NPR and Fox there is more balance and honest discussions on Fox.
pjnuge wrote:
"As a faithful listener/viewer to both NPR and Fox there is more balance and honest discussions on Fox." -- LOL.
Terry Gross is clearly a social liberal. However what she does are interviews. To call her interviews condescending while ignoring O'Reilly's loutish, rude and obnoxious behavior towards guests who disagree with his premises is laughable. NPR WAS stupid and clumsy in the way it handled Juan Williams throughout his tenure and with his abrupt firing. However, calling Fox fair and balanced while calling NPR biased is to simply parrot Fox/GOP talking points.
Terri Gross had Richard Perle on her show and she was frankly rude to him, he was there to discuss his book, but she harped on him about some completely unrelated manner.
The simple fact is that Fox has liberals that engage in debate nightly. Juan Williams has even hosted O'Reilly's show. Can anyone claim that there is anything like evenhanded discussions on NPR? Would Charles Krauthammer ever host terri Gross's show? Of course not.
The answer is no.
I never found Juan Williams a particularly astute analyst and frankly didn't like is role at Fox. However, many NPR analysts have found homes at other networks and seemed to have shared opinions. NPR has to be consistent with it's decisions about reporters and analysts voicing their opinions.
I have always enjoyed listening to Juan Williams. Not only for his excellent analysis, but also for his ability to express the contrary point of view. I have felt uneasy about his close ties to Fox shows and personalities who clearly bias and misrepresent facts to suit their opinions - which I do feel violates the policies stated in the email released after he was fired.
Had Williams been fired, or at least not had his contract renewed, for these associations, I don't think there would have been any big outcry. However, what happened seems a gross overreaction. He expressed a personal view that is probably shared by a large percentage of citizens, even those who wish they didn't have that reaction. He was not saying that it was okay to feel nervous, just that he did.
I have heard similar personal expressions several times on Diane's News Roundup. I would like to know if Williams thinks that he would have been fired had he made those comments on the News Roundup.
I would also like to know whether he feels that the characterization of "several" previous conflicts with NPR management is accurate.
Terri Gross is not an employee of NPR, however many NPR stations subscribe to her show. She has never claimed to be a news analyst or reporter.
I am mystified by Mr. Williams for two reasons. First, how can someone who is steeped in civil rights history broadcast publicly, using a network renowned for its anti-progressive, anti-civil rights bias, that he suffers from a bigotry this is not only distasteful, but undermines his reputation? Substitute "black" for "Moslem" in what Williams said, and you can see how wrong he was in giving imprimatur to prejudice. Second, how can he claim that his freedom of speech is being restricted when he just received a $2 million contract to say whatever he wants to say on the world's most popular advocacy channel? He is sure making a lot of noise in the most prominent fashion possible for someone who has been silenced.
Oscar G
No, tahitiwahini, those editorial standards were implemented recently. The comments by Totenberg and others were alleged to have been said many years ago. NPR came up with a Code of Ethics specifically to avoid such problems.
The bottom line is that Juan Williams spoke truthfully about what many of us feel. I don't see it as a discriminitory comment, but rather he was speaking to his honest feelings and fears and I believe we live in a country that allows us to do that. Does Freedom of Speech mean anything anymore? As long we don't let our natural fears affect how we treat others, we should have the freedom to state those fears with out any backlash.
Shame on NPR...shame. Good luck Juan.
On Thursday night after your dismissal you appeared on the O'Reilly factor and agreed with O'Reilly that George Soros was "the puppeteer" at NPR responsible for your firing. This is the sort of double game you were playing at Fox, where you would go on the O'Reilly factor and throw red meat to conservatives, and then go on NPR and do straightforward political analysis. If you have some evidence to suggest that there was indeed a quid pro quo at NPR that you would be fired in exchange for a grant from George Soros, please offer it.
Was firing Juan Williams a violation of the First Amendment?
No. All companies deserve the right to terminate employees.
So firing him was fine?
No. It wasn't illegal, but it presents serious problems about NPR.
Should the government terminate funding of NPR?
Not because of this. There is a legitimate debate as to how much the government should support NPR. But reacting to cut off NPR's funding because of this would be as bad as NPR firing Juan Williams because of his admission of a personal foible.
What did the ombudsman say about this?
On "On Point," she said Williams was fired because he was on "The O'Reilly Factor" and that there was shouting and interrupting on that show. Tom Ashbrook asked if that was the reason, and she changed the subject and said it was because they had gotten lots of complaints about Juan Williams.
So we can get anyone kicked off of NPR if we initiate lots of complaints?
Apparently. The ombudsman is being a total weasel. To repeat, this is within NPR's rights. But other people should be able to call out weaselness.
But there was shouting and interrupting on "The O'Reilly Factor"!
I don't like that form of communication. It's why I listen to NPR. But it doesn't mean that the "shouting-style" form of discussion is illegitimate. NPR may wish to illegitimize it, but there are lots of people who get their information from there.
Fox News! Fox News! Bawk!
I don't watch Fox News (or pretty much anything that isn't NPR), but if the policy is "you can't appear on Fox" then NPR should say that's the policy.
Shame ---
First, What right does Wikileak have to be this influencial? Who is this? Who voted for this person? How do we know that what was published is even real????? Shame Daniel, shame!!! I marched against Vietnam; I was and am against these wars. I know Bush et al lied. Still I say SHAME. This leaker is dead wrong. These are not the Pentagon Papers. And Wikileaks person is an egomanic who thinks his opinion is more valuable than anyone elses ... wrong. He is causing people to die. Just as guilty as the war mongers. Would he have leaked the Allied invastion of Europe?
Second, good morning Daniel, War is Hell. Surprise! Everyone knows that unspeakably bad things happened and continue to happen. That's what happens in a war; that is why I am against war. People who are for it, know and don't care...for a variety of reasons. Therefore, letting people know that bad things are happening in detail ... only hurts us.
Third, Americans (and probably all other humans) learn nothing from knowing about the attrocities. We know that awful violent things happen in all wars. That doesn't stop them. Does it? What single war was stopped ever because someone pointed out how awful war is? Get a grip!!! This stuff doesn't help stop wars. It just makes officials sneakier, perhaps making the situation worse because the radicals push out the moderate voices that might otherwise temper the call to war.
Fourth, there is absolutely nothing good that can come of leaking mission details. Americans learn nothing new. But the enemy does learn enough more about us to hurt our soldiers.
Diane, you did not equit yourself well in asking questions or in controling Elsberg, who is clearly off his nut and looking for publicity. Nothing he said is useful to Americans, Iragis or humanity or to the mission for peace on earth!!!! And you let him go on and on.
Shame ---
First, What right does Wikileak have to be this influencial? Who is this? Who voted for this person? How do we know that what was published is even real????? Shame Daniel, shame!!! I marched against Vietnam; I was and am against these wars. I know Bush et al lied. Still I say SHAME. This leaker is dead wrong. These are not the Pentagon Papers. And Wikileaks person is an egomanic who thinks his opinion is more valuable than anyone elses ... wrong. He is causing people to die. Just as guilty as the war mongers. Would he have leaked the Allied invastion of Europe?
Second, good morning Daniel, War is Hell. Surprise! Everyone knows that unspeakably bad things happened and continue to happen. That's what happens in a war; that is why I am against war. People who are for it, know and don't care...for a variety of reasons. Therefore, letting people know that bad things are happening in detail ... only hurts us.
Third, Americans (and probably all other humans) learn nothing from knowing about the attrocities. We know that awful violent things happen in all wars. That doesn't stop them. Does it? What single war was stopped ever because someone pointed out how awful war is? Get a grip!!! This stuff doesn't help stop wars. It just makes officials sneakier, perhaps making the situation worse because the radicals push out the moderate voices that might otherwise temper the call to war.
Fourth, there is absolutely nothing good that can come of leaking mission details. Americans learn nothing new. But the enemy does learn enough more about us to hurt our soldiers.
Diane, you did not equit yourself well in asking questions or in controling Elsberg, who is clearly off his nut and looking for publicity. Nothing he said is useful to Americans, Iragis or humanity or to the mission for peace on earth!!!! And you let him go on and on.
As an avid NPR listener it is hard for me to understand why someone who is supposed to be a non-biased reporter would go on the O'Reilly Factor, or any opinion news show, and put out opinions that could present you as a BIASED reporter. If NPR had continued to support Mr. Williams I would never have been able to listen to him without wondering if his bigotry/racism was tainting the report.
I think NPR was correct in terminating Juan Williams' contract, however I don't think the way they did it was well thought out. They should have met with him in person, discussed the transgression and parted peacefully.
For the record, I also think Mara Liasson should take herself off of the Fox News Channel. It is only a matter of time until she lets an opinion slip and will be terminated from NPR as well.
I wonder how many of the people contacting NPR and threatening a boycott have actually LISTENED to or DONATED to their local public radio station.
Sorry Mr. Williams, just your showing up on the FOX so-called News shows you legitimized their rants & raves....and lost all your credibility with me. I have not listened to you since. It was about time for NPR to fire you, they should have done so...the only problem I see is that NPR handled it incorrectly.....
I'm a NPR member of KUT Austin, TX
Thanks to Mr. Williams for his work as a civil rights historian and biographer of Justice Thurgood Marshall. It was very disappointing to me that you went to Fox News, which is not a news organization. I often wondered why you were able to work for NPR and Fox. Sadly, I must agree with your termination from NPR.
NPR well done, NPR made a right decision to keep the radio credibility, honest, balance news, and fair discussion. Juan Williams bigoted remarks has no place in NPR and any other radio has creditability or in business for good reporting not a spread hatred, diversion and destruction. Mr. Williams, NPR is not FOX News. NPR does not except that kinds of comments but FOX NEWS will pay you more with your bigoted remarks.
I'm am very disappointed in NPR's dismissal of Juan Williams. It was totally inappropriate. I have enjoyed listening to Mr. Williams on NPR for a long time.
No, I am not a Fox news listener, my political views are very progressive. However, Mr. Williams was one of very few African American voices on NPR and offered a great perspective to his reporting and analysis.
No, I was not offended by his remarks, when taken in context to the entire discussion. I understand that the comment could be considered inappropriate if clipped out of context. But, that's a Fox news trick...
Mr. Williams has appeared on Fox for the past ten years while also working for NPR. Since NPR did not object to his other long time employment, this established a de facto condition of employment that takes precedence over other NPR policies articulated by NPR CEO Vivian Schiller. NPR should have entered into negotiations with Mr. Williams if they desired to change their employment standards, or they wished to enforce standards that they had been lax to enforce in the past.
Additionally, I was very disappointed in Ms. Schiller's comments on Thursday, October 21, before the Atlanta Press Club, where she said that "Mr. Williams would have been better served confiding his thoughts to his psychiatrist......" Apology after the fact, or not, these are outrageous remarks from the NPR CEO.
Thank you
I really did not mind Mr. Williams' comment about Muslims, maybe because I'm not a Muslim.
I do, however, REVILE Mr. Williams comment about Mrs. Obama, when he called her "Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress." http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/27/juan-michelle-stokely/
I hate, abhor and revile this comment for several reasons.
1. Because it makes Mrs. Obama appear less womanly, by comparing her to a man "in a dress." It's not only disrespectful to Mrs. Obama, but to all women who are educated, accomplished, and strongly express a point of view.
What if Williams had said something comparable about Mrs. Bush?
2. By comparing Mrs. Obama to a 1960s black radical on Fox News, Williams helped stoke white fears of a black President and a black family in the White House, to a particularly vulnerable white conservative audience. Such a comment helps divide our country.
I think that Williams should have been canned by NPR right after that comment.
THough I am no fan of Juan Williams I think his firing was wrong. Here is my standard response to this:More and more people who aren't PC are loosing their jobs and careers. Freedom of speech means you can say something even terribly offensive to almost everyone. If we allow corporations to ruin careers every time people working for them offend, we will have lost our right to free speech. Free speech means saying something YOU don't like. It means you can safely say something that OFFENDS you and keep their job without fear. Loosen up people. Let others speak - even when what they say is dumb. Lets' say everyone can say 10 separate dumb things before their career is ruined.
The hijackers of 9/11, the "shoe bomber" and the Times Square bomber were not wearing "Muslim garb". If anything, they wore clothing to blend in, so why be scared of "Muslim garb"?
NPR should have just let Williams' go quietly after his contract expired and saved itself this trouble. He apparently can not see anything wrong with his "Muslim garb" comments, and now he sees nothing wrong with being made a millionaire twice over by Fox for this indecent. If he can't see that he is being used by Fox, he is truly blind...
After listening to the whole program, he is truly blind to any possible notion that he said anything wrong, and he keeps repeating the "truth" of his "Muslim garb" comment and no one calls him on it (the fact that terrorist will not--in fact--wear "Muslim garb", but will blend in, like the 9/11 terrorists).