April 29, 1998
"PRESS RELEASE: CAMERA Urges Congress Action on NPR Israel Bias"
"NPR’s bias against Israel is dangerous and extreme ," said Levin.
"We think the public and Congress should be made aware of this. We’re looking for a full, open examination
of National Public Radio’s coverage of Israel."

September 21, 2004
Oversight Failure: The Case of National Public Radio
letter to CPB Board
"In the past, CAMERA forwarded its findings, and numerous complaints regarding NPR’s Arab-Israeli coverage to CPB. The corporation’s 'Open to the Public' report to Congress for 2003, for example, refers directly to those complaints.  
However, CPB’s oversight of NPR as reflected in previous 'Open to the Public' reports is inadequate. It avoids the substance of CAMERA’s criticism and numerous other complaints. These complaints include not only the minority addressed directly to CPB, but the vast majority made to local NPR affiliates.
This oversight failure regarding NPR continues even though “Open to the Public” is submitted to Congress to illustrate CPB’s concern with assuring 'strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.' ...
CAMERA urges the board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to ensure that the agency fulfills its legal obligation when it comes to oversight of National Public Radio. This is an obligation, by the way, which the CPB board unanimously affirmed at its November, 2002 meeting. CAMERA believes this oversight must include substantive responses from CPB to substantive complaints, that the responses must be made in a timely manner, and that this oversight be based on accepted journalistic criteria such as those incorporated in the Code of Ethics of the Society for Professional Journalists. This, rather than vague generalities, is what CPB should be providing Congress in reports like 'Open to the Public.'
CAMERA recommends that as a necessary step to carrying out such oversight, a unit be created within CPB, reporting directly to the president and the board. This unit would conduct substantive reviews of serious criticisms to ensure recipient compliance."

March 29, 2005
"NPR Ombudsman Dodges Listener Query"

April 4, 2005
"NPR Wants it Both Ways"
(Eric Rozenman, Washington Director)
"[NPR President] Klose was testifying recently on NPR’s budget before a House Appropriations Committee subcommittee, simultaneously claiming journalistic excellence and crying poverty. Rep. James Walsh (R-N.Y.) told him that public radio 'is a wonderful service.' But, said Walsh, the more he became involved with issues as a congressman, 'the more I realized NPR is portraying a … liberal-oriented slant' to the news. And, he said, members of the Syracuse Jewish community have complained to him that NPR news carries a strong 'anti-Israel bias.'...
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is supposed to oversee NPR compliance with requirements for "objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature" in exchange for federal funds. CPB continues to receive listener complaints of an anti-Israel spin in NPR news. So do affiliates across the country.
Picking up on Walsh’s comments, subcommittee member Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) reminded Klose that she had discussed charges of anti-Israel reporting with him previously. In fact, Lowey was one of 11 House members to sign a 2003 letter to Klose asserting that "for many years, National Public Radio programs have presented a view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is too often biased against Israel."
Another of the signers, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) told a CPB open forum last September that the problem persists."

August 6, 2007
"CAMERA Op-Ed: Public Broadcasting Must Meet Balance Test" 
(Eric Rozenman, Washington Director)
"A public opinion survey commissioned by CAMERA — the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America — indicated that one reason Americans hold public broadcasting in relatively high regard is that we think the government already ensures its objectivity and balance. But CPB has no substantive way to do this.
The corporation's annual 'Open to the Public' report to Congress has been little more than a pass-through of NPR and PBS's laudatory self-examinations.
In 2005, partly in response to complaints such as those by CAMERA that NPR's chronic anti-Israel reporting violated the objectivity and balance statute, CPB created two ombudsmen positions.
The ombudsmen — in theory one 'liberal,' one 'conservative' — are paid and assisted by CPB, but independent of it. They take complaints and issue opinions. But ombudsmen have no authority to punish or correct. Although they finally provide a specific address within CPB for citizen complaints, they (actually, he — one slot is vacant) do little to ensure recipient compliance with the objectivity and balance standard.
So, in board consideration of upgrading CPB's oversight, the ombudsmen have received virtually no mention. Instead, as Chairman Cheryl Halpern told a House Appropriations Committee subcommittee last March, the board has contacted deans from leading journalism schools about "the best ways to achieve CPB's objectivity and balance legislative mandate.'
...CAMERA proposed to the CPB board in 2004: Create a unit within CPB to conduct substantive reviews of serious complaints. 
...This new unit would report promptly and directly to the CPB president and board. They would consider its findings and include them in the corporation's annual report to Congress. The findings would be weighed when recipients found to have violated the objectivity and balance standards make future funding requests.
No one wants prior censorship of public broadcasting, which is illegal according to the same statutes that require programming objectivity and balance. But public broadcasting is a public trust, and just because stations or producers are non-profit does not mean they're entitled to taxpayers' money for partisan, biased purposes.
Getting the opinions of deans, reporters and broadcasters might be useful. But it's no substitute for rigorous reviews of substantive complaints.
When it comes to objectivity and balance oversight, it's time for CPB itself simply to carry out its own long-standing obligation."

August 6, 2008
"Press Release: Rep. Cantor Urges Public Broadcasting to Conduct Objectivity and Balance Oversight"
"Congressman Eric Cantor (R Va.) is calling on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to develop 'a clear mechanism' to assure that recipients of CPB funding meet the statutory requirement for 'strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.' In an August 4 letter to Chair Chris Boskin and the other CPB board members, Rep. Cantor said 'I remain concerned' about a 2005 Inspector General’ s report that noted the corporation had not carried out its statutory obligation to, in the congressman’s words, 'impose firm objectivity and balance standards on public television and radio.'”

October 24, 2008
"Rep. Sherman Reminds CPB of 'Mandate for Objectivity and Balance'"   

March 7, 2011
"Time to Enforce Balance at PBS, NPR"
(Eric Rozenman, Washington Director)
In 2004, CAMERA, the 65,000-member Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America,
urged CPB to implement the corporation’s 2002 board resolution pledging to uphold the objectivity and balance
standard. This could be done at little or no additional cost, we said, simply by assigning a staff member or two the responsibility of reviewing substantive complaints according to traditional journalism standards. These include accuracy, objectivity, balance, comprehensiveness, context, and willingness to promptly correct errors. 
CAMERA had documented over several decades a pattern of anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian bias in NPR news coverage. ... 
So pronounced was the tilt during the 'al-Aqsa intifada,' for example, that 11 Democratic members of the House
complained in a 2003 letter to NPR of 'imbalanced coverage' and 'lack of context.'
Instead of tasking staff members with objectivity and balance oversight, CPB created two ombudsmen.
This provided a specific address for listener complaints but the ombudsmen — outside contractors,
not corporation staffers — lack authority to punish violators. Generically, journalistic ombudsman too often function
as institutional shock absorbers rather than audience advocates.
In 2005, CPB’s own Inspector-General recommended that the agency upgrade its objectivity and balance oversight.
More than five years later this has not happened."

PBS
search PBS on CAMERA website

search PBS Newshour on CAMERA website  Including: