Is anyone here a regular listener to Ian Masters?

[tech3149]

I started listening to his show on KPFK probably a decade ago. I always found his interviews and guests to be most informative. Lately I have noticed that all discussion of Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Palestine, or US foreign policy tend to be extremely one sided.
It is disheartening to say the least but also very informative. On many subjects he does a good job but the above mentioned subjects seem to be a touchstone. For me it shows that even a trusted source may not be entirely accurate or unbiased on all subjects.
I would hope he opens up his view of the world or at least admits that, and provides a voice, that will provide a contextual perspective.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

1. I haven't listened to his radio show in years

although I know I should. I can't comment on recent trends on his show such as one-sided discussions. But when I did listen, especially during the Bush years, I thought he had the most informative and intelligent show on the air, better than Rachel Maddow or Amy Goodman (whom I love), better than anyone else i heard. I could not believe the multiplicity of high-level guests he had access to on each show, week after week allowed to engaged in in-depth discussion. Sorry to hear that his very high standards as a journalist on certain issues may have lowered.

[Definition Dissident]

2. perspective on ian masters

I have been aware of ian masters since at least the 1980s. I'm not sure his show was always called Background Briefing, in the early days it may have been called something else. Right now, his is the BEST show on radio, PERIOD. I am a chronic listener and re-listener. You say he is one sided on these foreign policy issues, but you don't specify how.

Ian has in recent weeks and months had some amazing, amazing guests that I haven't heard about anywhere else. He's NOT a dumb "neutral" journalist, he has an element of advocacy. and yet he doesn't really get in the way of his guests, either. Ian always plays it cool, always understated. Some of the two brightest lights in recent weeks were Henry Giroux and George Lakoff and Chris Hedges. I mean they were fucking amazing interviews saturated with depth and meaning and insight.

The thing I've noticed is that guests are much better when they phone in from their private location than when they come into a television studio. Henry Giroux was like night and day. Sitting in a television studio with lights and cameras is very intimidating, and with Bill Moyers, Giroux really tightened up and spoke slowly and haltingly. With Ian Masters, Giroux came in one a phone line and he was really able to relax and be himself. WOW. He was a different person, so different i bought one of his books and read it.

So despite the low fidelity of a phone line, the sacrifice is worth it because guests feel way more comfortable and open up much more.

Good luck. And one additional thought about the media.

"The industry that practices issue evasion and suppression on a massive scale, while showering itself with awards for accuracy and integrity, is ITSELF the issue."

please visit my page on facebook "Definition Dissident"