Add new comment

Yet, if you review the content of the programmes, who it is that Ms. Tippett interviews, the blog content contributed by staff and guests and which guests are invited or approved, you will find that On Being (a show - initially named Speaking of Faith - broadcast over the public airwaves, financed by grants from Faith promoting organization) keeps the thoughts of those and individuals whose opinions run counter to it off the air and out of the website.

Individuals of great international (his Wikipedia entry appears in 59 languages) and intellectual stature (emeritus fellow of new College, Oxford, fellow of the Royal Society, fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and former University of Oxford's Professor for Public Understanding of Science) such as renowned British ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author Richard Dawkins.  And, Sam Harris, American philosopher, neuroscientist, author of The End of Faith (33 weeks on the New York Times best-seller list) whose writing has appeared in the Huffington Post, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, New York Times, Times of London, Newsweek, Nature and The Boston Globe; who has given talks at Oxford University, Cambridge, Harvard, Caltech, Berkeley, Stanford, Tufts and TED.

These are just two; the late Christopher Hitchens would be another, of the learned gentlemen, against whom Ms. Tippett has issued a virtual fatwa of exclusion. Branding and arrogantly dismissing them with the epithets "polemicists and secular extremists".  Refusing to interview them, in spite of repeated requests by her audience.  Ms. Tippett's reason: "...for the same reason I never interviewed Jerry Falwell, which is that he had all the answers for himself and everyone else.  I'm not even saying that to pass judgment on what they have to say."

She equates Falwell: faith based ranter and spewer of biblical bigotry with Harris, Hitchens and Dawkins: exemplars of free thought, truth seeking and the secular humanist tradition.  She refuses to have them on her show and in the same breath claims not to be passing judgment on what they have to say.  This is the type of cognitive dissonance that informs Ms. Tippett's thought process and content of her program.  It does not occur to her that preventing their views from being heard -censorship- is the ultimate form of passing judgment.  She claims Harris et al. have all the answers for themselves and everyone else.  Why not let the listener be the judge of that?