When a senior editor at NPR recently wrote a 3,500-word essay for another outlet, blasting where he works and saying that NPR had “lost America’s trust,” my first thought, quite frankly, was, “ … and he still works there?”

Well, it was learned on Tuesday that the editor in question, Uri Berliner, is currently serving a five-day suspension without pay. NPR media writer David Folkenflik reported the suspension began last week. Folkenflik wrote, “In presenting Berliner’s suspension Thursday afternoon, the organization told the editor he had failed to secure its approval for outside work for other news outlets, as is required of NPR journalists. It called the letter a ‘final warning,’ saying Berliner would be fired if he violated NPR’s policy again. Berliner is a dues-paying member of NPR’s newsroom union but says he is not appealing the punishment.”

Berliner, who has been at NPR for 25 years, wrote his scathing essay for the online news site The Free Press, a publication on Substack. Folkenflik described The Free Press as a “site that has become a haven for journalists who believe that mainstream media outlets have become too liberal.”

The suspension does not mean the firestorm created by Berliner’s essay has been suppressed. Folkenflik wrote, “Yet the public radio network is grappling in other ways with the fallout from Berliner’s essay for the online news site The Free Press. It angered many of his colleagues, led NPR leaders to announce monthly internal reviews of the network’s coverage, and gave fresh ammunition to conservative and partisan Republican critics of NPR, including former President Donald Trump.”

The New York Times’ Benjamin Mullin wrote, “After Mr. Berliner’s essay was published, NPR’s new chief executive, Katherine Maher, came under renewed scrutiny as conservative activists resurfaced a series of years-old social media posts criticizing former President Donald J. Trump and embracing progressive causes. One of the activists, Christopher Rufo, has pressured media organizations into covering controversies involving influential figures, such as the plagiarism allegations against Claudine Gay, the former Harvard president.”

Maher was not at NPR at the time of her posts and, furthermore, the CEO has no involvement in editorial decisions at the network.

But Berliner told Folkenflik in an interview on Monday, “We’re looking for a leader right now who’s going to be unifying and bring more people into the tent and have a broader perspective on, sort of, what America is all about. And this seems to be the opposite of that.”

In a statement earlier this week, Maher said, “In America everyone is entitled to free speech as a private citizen. What matters is NPR’s work and my commitment as its CEO: public service, editorial independence, and the mission to serve all of the American public. NPR is independent, beholden to no party, and without commercial interests.”

As far as Berliner’s essay, many, particularly inside NPR, are pushing back against his various assertions, including that NPR has a liberal bias.

Mullin wrote for the Times, “Several NPR employees have urged the network’s leaders to more forcefully renounce Mr. Berliner’s claims in his essay. Edith Chapin, NPR’s top editor, said in a statement last week that managers ‘strongly disagree with Uri’s assessment of the quality of our journalism,’ adding that the network was ‘proud to stand behind’ its work.”

Tony Cavin, NPR’s managing editor for standards and practices, pushed back against specific claims made by Berliner and told the Times, “To somehow think that we were driven by politics is both wrong and unfair.”

NPR TV critic Eric Deggans tweeted, “Many things wrong w/terrible Berliner column on NPR, including not observing basic fairness. Didn’t seek comment from NPR before publishing. Didn’t mention many things which could detract from his conclusions. Set up staffers of color as scapegoats.”

So what happens now? Will Berliner be in further trouble for criticizing the CEO in an interview with Folkenflik, his NPR colleague?

Berliner told Folkenflik, “Talking to an NPR journalist and being fired for that would be extraordinary, I think.”

I urge you to check out Folkenflik’s piece for all the details. And, by the way, kudos to Folkenflik for his strong reporting on his own newsroom.

CNN’s response

In Tuesday’s newsletter, I wrote how “King Charles” — the limited series featuring Gayle King and Charles Barkley — has ended after 14 shows. I wrote that the network had “pulled the plug” on the show.

CNN said that description was inaccurate and that I was wrong in framing it the way I did.

While I did say that CNN announced from the beginning that the show was a limited series, I also wrote that the show reached its ending “a little ahead of time.” The network, however, said it was clear all along that the show was scheduled to end in the spring, that it is spring right now, and the show was not canceled early.

A CNN spokesperson told me, “‘King Charles’ has come to the end of its limited run, as we announced when it launched last fall that it would run through spring. The show was a great addition to CNN’s lineup, with the youngest, most affluent, and most diverse P2+ audience in its cable news time period and brought new audiences to CNN. It’s inaccurate to report that the show was canceled as it went through its full run and duration of the limited series. We hope to work with both of these incredible talents in the future as they balance their very busy schedules.”

With the NBA playoffs about to begin, Barkley is about to head into extra duty at his main job as studio analyst for TNT’s “Inside the NBA.”

The show’s average viewership was under a half million and lagged behind competitors Fox News and MSNBC, but CNN said it was pleased that the King-Barkley broadcast brought new audiences to CNN. It pointed to this statistic from Nielsen via Npower that said 43% of the “King Charles” audience was nonwhite, compared to 7% for Fox News and 27% for MSNBC during that Wednesday at 10 p.m. Eastern hour.

Smartmatic and OAN settle suit

Smartmatic, the voting technology company, and One America News, the far-right TV network, have settled their lawsuit. Smartmatic was suing OAN, claiming the network lied that the company rigged the 2020 election in favor of Joe Biden and against Donald Trump.

Neither side disclosed the terms of the settlement.

Smartmatic still has pending lawsuits against Fox News and Newsmax. And OAN is still facing a defamation lawsuit from Dominion Voting Systems. That’s the company that Fox News settled with out of court a year ago by agreeing to pay Dominion a whopping $787.5 million.

Missing at the Masters

According to Sports TV Ratings, Sunday’s final round of The Masters golf tournament on CBS averaged 9.58 million viewers, which was down 20% from last year’s final round, which averaged 12.05 million. This shouldn’t be a surprise. This year’s final round lacked drama, with winner Scottie Scheffler pretty much in control throughout the day.

Sports Media Watch’s Jon Lewis noted that in the past three decades, only COVID-era Masters in 2020 (5.64 million) and 2021 (9.54 million) had fewer viewers. Those were the least-viewed Masters since 1993.

But Lewis also points out, “As one would expect, the final round of the Masters still ranks as the most-watched golf telecast and one of the most-watched sporting events of the past year — placing ahead of four of five World Series games and every Daytona 500 since 2017. It also goes without saying that the Masters dominated all other weekend sporting events.”

Just for fun, however, I will mention that the 9.58 million was nowhere near the number of viewers (18.7 million) that watched the NCAA women’s college basketball final between South Carolina and Iowa (and star Caitlin Clark) one week earlier on a Sunday afternoon.

Other media notes, tidbits and interesting links …

• Speaking of Clark, Tom Kludt writes for Vanity Fair: “Behind the Scenes With Caitlin Clark on WNBA Draft Day: ‘I Definitely Know There’s Eyeballs on Me.’”
• Axios’ Sara Fischer with “Dozens of Alden newspapers run coordinated editorials slamming Google.”
• For the Los Angeles Times, Greg Braxton and Carolyn Cole with “What ‘Civil War’ gets right and wrong about photojournalism, according to a Pulitzer Prize winner.”
• For The Washington Post, Dave Barry, Angela Garbes, Melissa Fay Greene, John Grogan and Charles Yu with “How does the election feel around the country? 5 writers capture the vibe.” Barry, as always looking at things a bit differently, writes, “Greetings from the Sunshine State! The mood down here, as we anticipate the 2024 presidential election, is one of hopefulness. Specifically, we’re hoping that a large, previously undetected meteor will strike the planet before November.”
• For NPR and “Morning Edition,” Elizabeth Blair with “50 years ago, ‘Come and Get Your Love’ put Native culture on the bandstand.”

More resources for journalists

• Thursday webinar: Covering transgender issues with authority and accuracy.
• Applications for Poynter Producer Project close on Friday!
• Reporter’s Toolkit gives you the tools to succeed early in your career. Apply by April 28.
• Delve more deeply into your editing skills with Poynter ACES Intermediate Certificate in Editing.

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at tjones@poynter.org.

The Poynter Report is our daily media newsletter. To have it delivered to your inbox Monday-Friday, sign up here.