What is Big Think?  

We are Big Idea Hunters…

We live in a time of information abundance, which far too many of us see as information overload. With the sum total of human knowledge, past and present, at our fingertips, we’re faced with a crisis of attention: which ideas should we engage with, and why? Big Think is an evolving roadmap to the best thinking on the planet — the ideas that can help you think flexibly and act decisively in a multivariate world.

A word about Big Ideas and Themes — The architecture of Big Think

Big ideas are lenses for envisioning the future. Every article and video on bigthink.com and on our learning platforms is based on an emerging “big idea” that is significant, widely relevant, and actionable. We’re sifting the noise for the questions and insights that have the power to change all of our lives, for decades to come. For example, reverse-engineering is a big idea in that the concept is increasingly useful across multiple disciplines, from education to nanotechnology.

Themes are the seven broad umbrellas under which we organize the hundreds of big ideas that populate Big Think. They include New World Order, Earth and Beyond, 21st Century Living, Going Mental, Extreme Biology, Power and Influence, and Inventing the Future.

Big Think Features:

12,000+ Expert Videos


Browse videos featuring experts across a wide range of disciplines, from personal health to business leadership to neuroscience.

Watch videos

World Renowned Bloggers


Big Think’s contributors offer expert analysis of the big ideas behind the news.

Go to blogs

Big Think Edge


Big Think’s Edge learning platform for career mentorship and professional development provides engaging and actionable courses delivered by the people who are shaping our future.

Find out more

Let NPR Be NPR (by not being PR)

March 17, 2011, 3:26 PM

Here's an artice that explains well why Congress should get the national government out of the radio and TV business.  A taste:

NPR's defenders would respond indignantly to this argument by proclaiming that NPR is the nation's highest form of journalism, that it's utterly nonpartisan and unbiased, unlike those low-brow partisans Rush and O'Reilly, and that terrible calamities will befall Americans, especially poor and rural folks, if NPR is taken off the federal dole.

Unfortunately, these claims become harder and harder to justify, especially in the wake of conservative muckraker James O'Keefe's video showing NPR's top fundraiser, Ron Schiller, sucking up to what he thought were two wealthy donors affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Schiller casually berated Jews (especially ones who own media companies), the Tea Party, evangelical Christians, and Republicans.

But even leaving that sting video aside, evidence that NPR leans leftward is not hard to find. Take NPR itself, for example. The host of its own "On the Media" show, Bob Garfield, recently confessed: "If you were to somehow poll the political orientation of everybody in the NPR news organization and at all of the member stations, you would find an overwhelmingly progressive, liberal crowd.

The problem, of course, is explaining why a Congress elected by the Tea Party, evangelical Christians, and Republicans should fund a media outlet that not only disagrees with them, but has contempt for them as stupid and immoral.  That's especially true, of course, in a time of potentially crippling public debt.

Some might say the Right has its Beck and Limbaugh, and the other side needs its advocates to have a fair-and-balanced media.  That's surely true.

Beck and Limbaugh have gotten rich through their ratings.  It's a sad commentary, you might add, that the truth, justice, and excellence of NPR should have to survive on such a commercial basis!  But NPR could, in truth,  easily get by both without commercials and without government. 

Nobody denies the quality of NPR's viewers--their education and wealth.  The government only pays are very small part of NPR's bills even now.  And, as the outlet that reinforces the opinions of the comfortable, left-leaning establishment, it could reasonably ask its affluent listeners to pony up just a bit more to have their self-esteem raised by expertly presented supportive information and analysis.

Then NPR could be what it really wants to be without having to worry about catering to a Congress (and indirectly an American public) it doesn't even like or respect. 

You could also add:  That NPR made sense when there was just a limited number of channels and stations and no internet, no satellite radio, etc. etc.  There's a media niche for every manner of opinion and taste now, and they can be very accessible at a very low cost.

The House vote to de-fund was pretty much straight party-line.  That could mean the Republicans are partisan and the Democrats are nonpartisan defenders of the public good.  Or it could be the difference between fiscal conservatives and big spenders.  Or it could be that NPR is not so nonpartisan.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.


Let NPR Be NPR (by not bein...

Newsletter: Share: