The Future of PBS and NPR????

[thetrailboss]

I got an e-mail this morning from MoveOn.org asking me to sign a petition in support of federal funding of NPR and PBS. A movement is afoot to cut their funding because some of those in power feel that the two public networks are "too liberal." There is discussion currently going on in the House on this topic.

For those interested in signing the petition, which will be submitted at the end of the week, go to this link and sign the petition.

Also, Here is a very good news program about the issue. Click on "listen" to hear it...45 mins or so.

Critics claim that PBS and NPR are too liberal and are charging that they show their bias with shows such as "Frontline," "NOW," and Charlie Rose.

What do you think?

 

[Greg]

I got an e-mail this morning from MoveOn.org...

Was it an opt-in mailing list?

 

[thetrailboss]

I got an e-mail this morning from MoveOn.org...

Was it an opt-in mailing list?

It may be...I signed another petition some time ago. I'm sure you could sign the petition and decide not to be added to their mailing list...

 

[dmc]

I can't live without NPR... It's just about the most balanced radio I can listen to..

Sure they have interviews with crazed liberal college professors from time to time.. But I DO think that it's pretty balance... And not not like FOX "balanced"...

 

[Paul]

I will be really pissed if I lose my PBSHD. Its bar none the BEST HD channel out there.



*Okay, unless ESPNHD has a Sox game on, but their announcers still stink!

 

[awf170]

I will be really pissed if I lose my PBSHD. Its bar none the BEST HD channel out there.



*Okay, unless ESPNHD has a Sox game on, but their announcers still stink!

ya i love pbs hd, all i watch now are those HD stations,awsome

 

[Paul]

I will be really pissed if I lose my PBSHD. Its bar none the BEST HD channel out there.



*Okay, unless ESPNHD has a Sox game on, but their announcers still stink!

ya i love pbs hd, all i watch now are those HD stations,awsome

They had a show on about Ireland the other day. Man, the visuals just blew my mind...

 

[ctenidae]

THis argument's been going on for several years now- the GOP has been trying to cut funding (and in some cases have been successful), but it generally gets made up for by corporate grants. Interestingly, one of the reason there are more coporate acknowledgements is the funding cuts, then the acknowledgements are used as an excuse to cut more, since PBS is "selling advertisements".

PBS and NPR are just a bunch of college educated elitists, anyway. Who wants to hear about world news and events from a bunch of smart folks, anyway?

 

[Vortex]

THis argument's been going on for several years now- the GOP has been trying to cut funding (and in some cases have been successful), but it generally gets made up for by corporate grants. Interestingly, one of the reason there are more coporate acknowledgements is the funding cuts, then the acknowledgements are used as an excuse to cut more, since PBS is "selling advertisements".

PBS and NPR are just a bunch of college educated elitists, anyway. Who wants to hear about world news and events from a bunch of smart folks, anyway?

I love sarcastic statements. That was a good one.

 

[BeanoNYC]

Cool, thanks. I was on their mailing list, but I changed email addresses. It's good to be back on.

 

[bigbog]

...

The depth of programming, focusing on science and math-based work on these days is already pathetically shallow. The GOP is just adding their share to the dumming down of America.
Only in America....

 

[riverc0il]

yea, i e-signed that moveon petition. also wrote in via a personal message to the politians earlier when the rublings first started coming down.

repubs in congress are going about this all the wrong way. if they believe public broadcasting is slanted, then they should commission a bi-partisan and balanced study group along with a completely non-partisan (or as close as can possibly be) study to make the case. the matter at hand has been debated endlessly but very little research (at least verifiable well done and repeatable research studies, i.e. scientific studies) has been performed to back up politically insighted opinions. also, politicians are complaining, but i don't hear public broadcasting listeners complaining. since it is our radio station and our air waves, one would believe that outrage from the bottom up would be wide spread if a problem was there. but instead, politically motivated outrage is coming from the top down.

switching gears, lets address so called bias which seems to be the hot button issue. shows such as "the connection" go OUT OF THERE WAY to select panalists that are 100% opposite view points. also, the host is very good at asking questions on both sides and keep discussion on hot button issues balanced. it is an amazingly well researched show, and you can really tell when a guest doesn't know what they are talking about because the questions are tough. on both sides. i've yelled at my radio a few times because of poorly argued positions i disagreed with, so i know the topics are well covered. the palestine/isreal topic comes up A LOT, but frankly i was amazed how balanced this topic is on NPR. the even have a public statement specifically analyzing their coverage of the subject on a regular basis.

an interesting study came out a year or so ago. it asked some questions such as did iraq have WMD, were 9/11 terrorists from iraq, etc. all questions that had a definitive answer. people who listened to NPR regularly scored the highest with over 80% getting all three answers correct. i think CNN was second, with ABC, NBC, and CBS all rounding out the middle of the pack. fox was dead last at only about 1/3 or so, maybe less. i can't remember the exact numbers, but it was amazing. the study raised some interesting questions about the media, imho. self selection of broadcasting medium seemed evident but one can certainly not rule out the medium clouding the message or distorting it completely. public broadcasting does an amazing job reporting the news and does so very accurately.

if NPR was that biased, one would suspect there would be a blue and red state difference. but NPR carries affiliates strongly throughout all the country.

additionally, NPR's news coverage is only a very limited scope of their offerings. NPR offers radio entertainment that simply would never be offered on any other stations, especially in the format it is featured in. this american life, for example, is perhaps the best 60 minutes of broadcast time ever offered on radio or television. spoken word stories feature on TAL are amazing and regularly bring thousands of listeners to tears. if that isn't your bag, marketplace is a phenomenal show regarding the stock market and various economic issues.

i could go on and on. but the most important thing is that public broadcasting is just that, PUBLIC. not political. it is the one aspect of broadcasting that the people still own despite the not so realistic fact that we supposedly own the air waves in general. if this funding issue was anything other than political, it would probably be worth debating. but it is entirely political from all that i can tell. the current administration has taken it to quite a few public programs, but they are going a little to far with the public broadcasting issue.

 

[thetrailboss]

yea, i e-signed that moveon petition. also wrote in via a personal message to the politians earlier when the rublings first started coming down.

Awesome! Thanks!

repubs in congress are going about this all the wrong way. if they believe public broadcasting is slanted, then they should commission a bi-partisan and balanced study group along with a completely non-partisan (or as close as can possibly be) study to make the case. the matter at hand has been debated endlessly but very little research (at least verifiable well done and repeatable research studies, i.e. scientific studies) has been performed to back up politically insighted opinions.

You mean they should actually invest some time and develop articulate statements and good data? :idea: Sounds like the Repubs I saw at work in DC...drag and ignore the important issues that Americans face, like healthcare and the economy, and hurry through the "important things" such as renaming Washington National Airport RONALD REGAN National Airport (when they didn't have jurisdiction or the Regan's permission). NOW that's progress! :roll: :dunce:

also, politicians are complaining, but i don't hear public broadcasting listeners complaining. since it is our radio station and our air waves, one would believe that outrage from the bottom up would be wide spread if a problem was there. but instead, politically motivated outrage is coming from the top down.

How true.

switching gears, lets address so called bias which seems to be the hot button issue. shows such as "the connection" go OUT OF THERE WAY to select panalists that are 100% opposite view points. also, the host is very good at asking questions on both sides and keep discussion on hot button issues balanced. it is an amazingly well researched show, and you can really tell when a guest doesn't know what they are talking about because the questions are tough. on both sides. i've yelled at my radio a few times because of poorly argued positions i disagreed with, so i know the topics are well covered.[/quote]

You cite my favorite show Yes, they do a great job bringing everyone together to hash it out....real great!!

an interesting study came out a year or so ago. it asked some questions such as did iraq have WMD, were 9/11 terrorists from iraq, etc. all questions that had a definitive answer. people who listened to NPR regularly scored the highest with over 80% getting all three answers correct. i think CNN was second, with ABC, NBC, and CBS all rounding out the middle of the pack. fox was dead last at only about 1/3 or so, maybe less. i can't remember the exact numbers, but it was amazing. the study raised some interesting questions about the media, imho. self selection of broadcasting medium seemed evident but one can certainly not rule out the medium clouding the message or distorting it completely. public broadcasting does an amazing job reporting the news and does so very accurately.

Remember, "truth" is code for something... :roll: Maybe some folks have been watching too much of, "A Few Good Men," ('you can't handle the truth!') Now come on, do you really think people want to hear the truth? :lol: :dunce:

additionally, NPR's news coverage is only a very limited scope of their offerings. NPR offers radio entertainment that simply would never be offered on any other stations, especially in the format it is featured in. this american life, for example, is perhaps the best 60 minutes of broadcast time ever offered on radio or television. spoken word stories feature on TAL are amazing and regularly bring thousands of listeners to tears. if that isn't your bag, marketplace is a phenomenal show regarding the stock market and various economic issues.

Good points.

i could go on and on. but the most important thing is that public broadcasting is just that, PUBLIC. not political. it is the one aspect of broadcasting that the people still own despite the not so realistic fact that we supposedly own the air waves in general. if this funding issue was anything other than political, it would probably be worth debating. but it is entirely political from all that i can tell. the current administration has taken it to quite a few public programs, but they are going a little to far with the public broadcasting issue.

Yes, :beer:

 

[pedxing]

Personally, I think there has long been an effort to attack sources of information and opinion that are recalcitrant to the influences of big money. I don't think of this as being conspiratorial, but it's effect is a systematic attack on institutions that interfere with the control of information by wealth. Thus, there are concerted attacks on academia, public broadcasting, scientific research and independent newsmedia.
I think that the move towards term limits and government by referenda can even be seen in this light. Career politicians with a constituency develop their own independent power base.

 

[Charlie Schuessler]

I believe that the educational and news program productions created and broadcast by NPR and PBS are the best available in the United States. Because there are no reception costs for the listener or viewer, all anyone has to do is tune in. Very simple and smart.

 

[thetrailboss]

I believe that the educational and news program productions created and broadcast by NPR and PBS are the best available in the United States. Because there are no reception costs for the listener or viewer, all anyone has to do is tune in. Very simple and smart.

Yes, another good point.

In Britain, every TV owner has to have a license (BW TV's are still big over there for this reason). The proceeds goes towards the BBC, which IMHO is probably the finest international news outlet in the world. It's also scary how well they report on the happenings in our OWN Country... :blink: ...maybe the American outlets could learn a thing or two.

 

[ctenidae]

I watch the BBC news much more often than US news, and almost always double check a US story against the BBC online.

Sad, but necessary these days.

 

[riverc0il]

Thus, there are concerted attacks on academia, public broadcasting, scientific research and independent newsmedia.

very important point brought up by pedxing. a lot of politicians are pro-capitolistic market economy to a faulty, that they would love to see all public funding and public programs cut. there are other ways to run a smart money government than simply dropping programs that were put in place for very important social reasons (i.e. certain programs would never be offered by for profit business because they simply can not make money such as running national radio without ads. does that make it a bad thing? not imho - same arguement for police, fire, and many other essential services we have. do you want the police being run by a money pinching corrupt corporation? just one of many examples that things not for profit and government run are important to our society).

 

[Lostone]

Important to let your representatives know how you feel.

We're ok in Vermont, but it doesn't hurt to give them the backup. In other states you might sway a slightly undecided pol.

Also, ask them to get the CPB chair to try to do his job. That is to keep politics out of the running of public broadcasting. :angry:

Tomlison wants to get balance to NPR, but he is from the right wing and probably thinks Fox is "fair and balanced".

I have heard William Crystal doing commentaries on NPR. He is the former chief of staff for Dan Quayle. They are balanced, but when you're on the right, the center is on the left. :blink:

 

[thetrailboss]

Wrote my Congressman. Have you???