About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

New CPB board member Warren Bell on hugging Pelosi: "[T]hat sort of thing leaves a stain"

December 21, 2006 4:23 pm ET

SUMMARY: Warren Bell, a TV producer and National Review Online contributor named to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting board of directors via recess appointment, is an avowed conservative and Bush contributor with a record of inflammatory remarks regarding Democrats, women, minorities, and underprivileged people.

28 Comments

On December 20, President Bush installed via a recess appointment TV producer and National Review Online contributor Warren Bell on the board of directors of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Bell's appointment only intensifies the widespread and longstanding concerns regarding the partisan makeup of the CPB leadership under Bush and their apparent efforts to compromise the political independence of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), National Public Radio (NPR), and other public broadcasting outlets. Indeed, while Bell appears to have no experience in public broadcasting, nor interest in the service, he is an avowed conservative and Bush contributor with a record of inflammatory remarks regarding Democrats, women, minorities, and underprivileged people. For instance, in May 2005 he wrote, "I could reach across the aisle and hug Nancy Pelosi, and I would, except this is a new shirt, and that sort of thing leaves a stain." Remarking on using a TiVo to shield his children from birth control ads on television, Bell said, "A little vigilance is all it takes -- well, that and a couple hundred bucks for a TiVo. Sorry, poor people, your kids are going to be asking you awkward questions about condoms."

On June 26, Bush nominated Bell to the CPB board along with two other individuals, former Sen. David H. Pryor (D-AR) and Bay Area public broadcasting official Chris Boskin. The public broadcasting community quickly objected to the White House's action on Bell. Many cited Bell's divisive comments as well as the recent controversy surrounding another partisan Bush appointee -- former CPB board chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, whose efforts to apply political pressure on PBS and NPR were extensively documented by Media Matters for America. Following Bell's nomination, Association of Public Television Stations president John Lawson told the Los Angeles Times: ''We are definitely concerned about Warren Bell's nomination. After the damage caused by Ken Tomlinson's activities, the last thing we need on the CPB board is another ideologue of any stripe.'' NPR spokeswoman Andi Sporkin -- quoted in the same July 16 Times article -- responded: ''So far as we can tell, Mr. Bell only brings a history of questionable comments about women, minorities and the media, and no discernable relevant achievement, involvement or commitment to public broadcasting.'' Chellie Pingree, president of the watchdog group Common Cause, said: ''Public broadcasting is just beginning to recover from the missteps of Ken Tomlinson. The CPB cannot afford to replace Tomlinson with Warren Bell. He is the wrong man in the wrong job at the wrong time.''

Common Cause and the weblog Think Progress quickly publicized Bell's numerous inflammatory and partisan comments in his writings for National Review Online (NRO):

  • Bell on Democrats: "I could reach across the aisle and hug Nancy Pelosi, and I would, except this is a new shirt, and that sort of thing leaves a stain." [5/11/05]
  • Bell on using TiVo to keep his children from viewing birth control ads on TV: "A little vigilance is all it takes -- well, that and a couple hundred bucks for a TiVo. Sorry, poor people, your kids are going to be asking you awkward questions about condoms." [6/2/05]
  • Bell on reproductive choice: "I am thoroughly conservative in ways that strike horror into the hearts of my Hollywood colleagues. I support a woman's right to choose what movie we should see, but not that other one." [5/11/05]
  • Bell on Touchstone Television's alleged request that he hire more minorities for the TV sitcom he produces, ABC's According to Jim: "Of course, the conservative in me wants to say we should just find the best damn performers available, and judge them on the content of their character-acting, not their color. Ultimately, I will face a situation at some point this year where I say, 'Well, X was the funniest white actor, but we should probably go with Y'." [8/10/05] (Touchstone Television officials issued a statement that Bell's claim ''reflects no one's opinion connected with According to Jim other than his own.'')

In a December 20 post on NRO's blog The Corner, Bell wrote of the Pelosi remark: "I want to apologize for that joke. Here's why: some pretty nasty things were written about me in the last few months, and I didn't like it one bit. I took a totally unprovoked swipe at Ms. Pelosi for no good reason, other than I thought it might be funny. Now that I know how it feels, I'm not going to do that again."

Common Cause further pointed out that Bell had advocated in early 2006 for more films depicting "the heroism of American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq":

Urging in February 2006 that filmmakers make more pictures about "the heroism of American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq," Bell wrote that sports hero Pat Tillman, who gave up football to enlist in the Army in 2002 and died in Iraq, deserved "at least, a cable TV biopic." Bell seems to have never known, or to have forgotten, the widely reported facts that Tillman was killed by friendly fire, that the Army took weeks to investigate and report its findings, and that Tillman had grave doubts about the war in Iraq, although he believed the U.S. fight against terrorism in Afghanistan was justified. (Reminded of these details, Bell asserted, "I am calling for Hollywood writers and directors to make movies and TV shows depicting the heroic stories of the War on Terror, not for a whitewash of history.")

Think Progress also noted that Bell has bragged about his large contributions to Bush's presidential campaigns. In a March 31, 2005, NRO column, he wrote: "I have met President Bush twice. I have no powerful political connections -- both times were the result of sizable checks written by me to support his campaign." According to the Center for Responsive Politics campaign finance database, Bell gave Bush $1,000 for his 2000 bid for the White House and $3,000 for his 2004 re-election campaign.

Bell's support for public broadcasting has also been called into question. A September 21 Los Angeles Times article reported that several of Bell's former colleagues had sent a letter to the Senate Commerce Committee in which they claimed he had previously described public broadcasting as a waste of taxpayer dollars and proposed "dismantl[ing]" CPB:

In a letter sent Tuesday to the committee's ranking members, a married writing-and-producing team that worked with Bell for two years on "According to Jim" stated that they often heard him say that federal money should not be "wasted" on programs like public broadcasting.

Jeffrey B. Hodes and Nastaran Dibai said the topic came up during political discussions that frequently arose in the show's Studio City production offices. They served as executive producers on the ABC comedy before leaving in 2005.

At one point, "We said to him, 'How would you change CPB?' " Hodes said in an interview. "He said, 'I would dismantle it.' "

Further, in the July 16 Times article on his nomination, staff writer Matea Gold reported that "Bell admitted that he has 'limited' familiarity with NPR, adding that he usually listens to sports talk radio."

The Senate Commerce Committee subsequently approved the nominations of Boskin and Pryor in September, but removed Bell from the list of nominees in consideration. The White House then announced on December 20 that Bush had installed Bell at CPB using a recess appointment. As of 3 p.m ET on December 21, the Associated Press and Reuters were the only major news outlets to report on this development.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by greekfurnace (December 21, 2006 4:30 pm ET)
         

      Is this what some posters would consider 'moderate'? Just trying to get my definitions straight.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by marco21 (December 21, 2006 4:33 pm ET)
         

      I am sure his first move will be making sure Big Bird wears pants at all time.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by soros (December 21, 2006 5:00 pm ET)
         

      "Of course, the conservative in me wants to say we should just find the best damn performers available, and judge them on the content of their character-acting, not their color. Ultimately, I will face a situation at some point this year where I say, 'Well, X was the funniest white actor, but we should probably go with Y'."

      Well then Mr. Bell, why did you take the job on the CPB?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by spooky3 (December 21, 2006 5:35 pm ET)
         

      ...in a much truer sense than John Belushi ever was.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by valentinian (December 21, 2006 5:43 pm ET)
         

      ...of the whole "edgy, non-PC" thing. It's in fashion now. Being a dick is the new black.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by the Grey Path (December 21, 2006 6:04 pm ET)
         

      When are you going to start trying to protect NPR again? When the best new organisation in the USA starts playing George Bush's comments an average of 4 to 5 times every hour during Morning Edition, we've got a problem; no free thought. It may say 2006 on the calendar, but it's really 1984.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by evillib1727 (December 21, 2006 6:36 pm ET)
         

      this stuff just is not important. What happened to substance?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by valentinian (December 21, 2006 8:40 pm ET)
           

        ...there was a survey that indicated that people who got their news from NPR and PBS were less likely to believe things like Iraq had WMDs, Saddam was involved in 9/11.

        [link to 65.109.167.118]

        It's actually pretty important that some of the news media report things that are, you know, true.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by evillib1727 (December 22, 2006 11:50 am ET)
             

          and those are about the only TV news channels I trust.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by kamgirl (December 22, 2006 1:50 pm ET)
             

          Living in a very red state and in a very red county, we only have NRP to listen to to get the real news. All other stations in northern Indiana play the conservative trashy junk - mostly spewed information as they see it.

          We need to keep NRP on the air so that folks such as myself get some of the news that is correct!

          Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (December 21, 2006 11:03 pm ET)
           

        Rude and insulting comments against liberals. Because that worked out so well for us when we ignored Limbaugh and Coulter for so long. Not a winning strategy. Calling attention to boorish and churlish behavior is the proper tactic

        Report Abuse
        • Author by evillib1727 (December 22, 2006 11:23 am ET)
             

          I think it is just stone throwing. Name calling and getting upset over it is playground BS. It is just rediculous how sensitive people are.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by spooky3 (December 22, 2006 5:47 pm ET)
               

            to let them know how childishly you think they are behaving?

            Didn't think so.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by tabkhan (December 21, 2006 6:36 pm ET)
         

      NPR has become an extension of the White House's propaganda apparatus, and I no longer listen to it -- at all. Warren Bell should be stripped of his citizenship and be deported to Cuba, North Korea or Russia, whichever nation will accept that America-hating lunatic.

      It sickens me to no end that the management not only slants the news, they get out of their car to push it along, they fall over each other to trumpet the glories of Coward Bush. Further, how can NPR claim to be objective when they permit that awful, awful liar, Maura Liaison, to also work for the most loathsome news org in America, Fox?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by sasami (December 22, 2006 3:29 am ET)
         

      I am extremely saddened and angered by what Bush is trying to do to my public broadcasting. Tune in to channel 1984 to watch the new Ministry of Truth station. Yay!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by spizzle (December 22, 2006 7:55 am ET)
           

        It is a life goal to work for NPR and these constant attacks by the histarical right really bother me. It is not enough that they insist on continueing this "liberal media bias" line (as if "the media" were just one person, and not thousands of diffrent people who only repeat what others say). Now they have to go after colleges and NPR. IS nothing safe from this lunitics!!??

        Report Abuse
    • Author by kelletim6638 (December 22, 2006 8:58 am ET)
         

      "A little vigilance is all it takes -- well, that and a couple hundred bucks for a TiVo. Sorry, poor people, your kids are going to be asking you awkward questions about condoms."

      Oh my god what a moron. If you are a parent and feel that questions about condoms are awkward, you should kill yourself immediately and leave your child to a gay couple.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by evillib1727 (December 22, 2006 11:48 am ET)
           

        Because they use condoms?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by kelletim6638 (December 22, 2006 3:44 pm ET)
             

          just being flippant since queers are most certainly not going to have hang ups talking about sex. Certainly many straight people do not either, but this fellow is ridiculous.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by jscott (December 22, 2006 10:09 am ET)
         

      is the one that will be left by this guy's influence on one of the few remaining mainstream media outlets with even a shred of journalistic integrity.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by kelletim6638 (December 22, 2006 11:28 am ET)
         

      how progressives of any kind can stomach NPR, or more properly NBR, National Business Radio.

      NPR is, and always has been a business propaganda organ. What isn't business propaganda on NPR is trivial fluff, which is almost humorous - like when they interview the person who is currently living in the apartment where some forgotten 1920's broadway songwriter lived for 4 months. Or the rants of their nerdly sports guy, who is an intolerable moron.

      The crap NPR comes up with as "news" is simply incredible. How can anyone listen to that crap?!

      Report Abuse
      • Author by wheat (December 22, 2006 1:18 pm ET)
           

        Being that 95% of thier "news" is misleading, dishonest crap.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by kelletim6638 (December 22, 2006 3:48 pm ET)
             

          Fox is beyond the pale. that doesn't mean NPR is beyond reproach - NPR is most definitely part of the whole game, in many ways it is even worse than Fox since NPR has become the de facto "liberal" news source, and plays a part in defining liberal stances on issues. In my opinion NPR is extremely right wing.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by ChristianDemocrat (December 22, 2006 2:00 pm ET)
           

        ...when I'm on the road. Yes, some of the extraneous items are not of interest to me either. I also tend to tune out when their analysts, e.g., Cokie, Mara and Juan are speaking (Daniel Schorr excepted, perhaps because of his Murrow upbringing). But for free news, it beats anything else available in my area.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by chin music (December 22, 2006 1:59 pm ET)
         

      Two more years of this manure fire! Why can't bush just go hunting with cheney? Oh no, then shooter would be pres.. Never mind.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by misterb (December 24, 2006 1:33 am ET)
         

      The media is essentially right wing and radical. News is reported the way the owner and the advertisers want it. If you disagree you are fired. Public radio and television was for the rest of us. The stakes have become too high.

      The right has to silence the center and the left. The right has to destroy public radio and television. They are working on it. The only hope for a free press is to cut it loose from government and turn it into a non-profit. It can only survive on endowment.

      The right hates us with a passion. They want us kept ignorant. They hate freediom for us. They can always buy all of the freedom they want. Only the poor and the middle class have to fight for freedom.

      Freedom for us is to know and to learn the truth. The right lies, twists, spins, and propagandizes. It is very difficult to discern the truth of a matter when your enemy spends hundreds of millions on polished professional liars. The fact that there are advertisements on public radio and television already leaves it suspect.

      It may not be possible to save public radio and televsion. But the internet certainly does seem to be alive. Congratulations to all of you. You are doing good work you know.

      Report Abuse