Home Recommended Products Contact Us
Resources & Links
Fatherlessness Statistics
Child Support
Legal Resources
Search This Site
Bad Judges List
Free Templates
Restraining Orders
Judicial Abuse Stories
Father's Stories
Legal Help & Referrals
Constitutional Rights
Table of Contents
Terms & Conditions
Signup for Newsletter
Search Site
Excellent letter to National Public Radio on their Supposed "Balanced" position

Human Events ^ | 10JUN05 | Phyllis Schlafly


With no shows on the father's issues, which are ruining families and damaging an entire generation of children, yet a constant stream of shows on "Women's issues" should men really be supporting this network? I will listen, but NEVER contribute money to this propaganda machine.  With quality programming it is amazing how this constant bias can happen.

Jones, Ken A. (Civ,ARL/SEDD) wrote:

        My letter to NPR, another publically supported organization that seems to be increasingly anti-male.  If enough people complain, maybe they will become more father friendly out of fear of loosing their public subsidies and advertizing support. 

Ken in MD

Dear Ms. Rehm:
        While listening to All Things Considered last night and hearing about the polygamist colony in West Texas, I realized what made me uncomfortable with your somewhat self righteous statement that you always provide a fair and balanced view in response to a caller from St. Louis on Tuesday.  After hearing about the Conference on Women in Bejing thirteen times on one All Things Considered Program some years ago, I concluded that NPR is a propaganda machine for the radical feminists and have not supported it since then.  However, I have continued to listen because there is much that is good, and some of us like to see how long it will take NPR to air some of the outrageous statements made by NOW - an organization that has about as much appreciation for factual knowledge as does Rush Limbaugh.  The answer is usually the same day, but most certainly within a week.  In a few instances we even heard something announced on NPR before it was officially released by NOW.

        A few cases in point were the separate "studies" in California and Massachusetts supported by NOW that irrefutably showed that the family and probate courts favor men in child custody cases.  The fact that in Massachusetts that women get custody 93% of the time and men do only 4% of the time - the remaining 3% are mutually agreed to joint custody -  wasn't deemed to be important enough to mention.  I heard a number of sympathetic interviews with the mother in California who was not allowed to take her children with her when her new husband wanted to move to Ohio because it would destroy the relationship the children had with their involved, noncustodial father.  Of course, there was no interview with the father, and the millions of fathers who come home one day to find themselves "visitors" in their children lives where they are "allowed" to "visit" their children every other weekend and on some holidays and have to pay dearly for this "privilege".  You also never hear about the bizarre cases of move-away moms where a judge concluded it was okay for Mom to move from Boston back to Long Island to live with her mother and three preschool children because both Mom and Dad were good with computers so that Dad could "visit" his twin two year old daughters via video every Tuesday and Thursday evening at 6:30.  In another instance I heard about this poor mother, Bridget Marks, who had lost custody of her twin six year old daughters to this older, rich casino owner who had fathered the girls while married to another woman.  The implication, of course, is that the 'victor' was rich, evil, and male, and the 'victim' was poor, sweet, and female.  It was never reported that the reason Ms. Marks had initially lost custody was because she had coached her daughters to say that they had been molested by their father so that he would be denied the "visitation rights" he had.  Nor was it reported that an appeals court gave custody back to Mom, and that one of the judges stated in her opinion that there is no demonstrative evidence that training your young daughters that they were molested by their father has any negative effects on their development.

        Which brings me back to the connection between the report on the polygamist colony and your self righteous statement.  Whereas I applaud your attempts to be fair by usually having a person with a liberal point of view and another with one that is conservative and I marvel at the breadth of your knowledge, I take issue with the choice of topics you chose to discuss.  I recall you having a number of programs concerned with issues with women as victims, such as domestic violence, but not one such as restraining order abuse or false paternity claims where men are the victims.  I almost weep when I think about how this marvelous institution called NPR has become more irrelevant as it increasingly advocates the radical feminist point of view and ignores the other.  Because of your inherent desire to be fair, I think a part of you is able to listen to what I say, but I see even you slipping away into the morass of gender politics.  My mother once told me that if I am criticized by a single person to consider the source, but if I am criticized by a number of people that I should consider the possibility there is at least an element of truth in what they say.  It is good advice.  I sincerely hope you will consider it.

Kenneth A. Jones
Silver Spring, MD