Juan Williams

Is NPR's action to fire Williams justified? What is the difference between a news analyst and a news commentator? As copy-editor, your role is to identify and revise language that expresses bias.

How have the rules changed in journalism today? What is the conflict in the case mentioned above. What would you have done as the commentator? What would you have done as NPR in this case?

In order to completely for an opinion on whether or not Juan Williams firing was justified, you would have to review his contract and see if he breached any terms of that contract. However, based solely on his comments, it was not grounds to fire him. Williams strictly stated his own opinion and his comments were not connected to any news story or anyone else’s opinion. Williams only stated how he felt and did so in an educated manner without using offensive or crude terms.

A news analyst, such as Williams, is an individual that reports the news and has to do so accurately and objectively. A news commentator on the other hand, is someone that commentates on the news and has the ability to state their opinion on a certain topic since they are not the ones that are actually breaking the story. A news commentator is an individual that is solely employed to express their own feelings and allow others to express their feelings in an open forum.

Journalism is constantly changing. The conflict between Williams and NPR would not have happened in past years when there was not the abundance of news channels that there are now. Television is also changing the way journalism works and the avenues in which it is reported.

I believe that NPR had an ulterior behind the Williams firing. The rash comments that Don Imus made regarding the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team were far worse than Williams’s opinion on Muslims. If I was in NPR’s position I would have spoken directly with Williams instead of terminating him through email without giving him a chance to defend himself.