FAIR Calls for De-Funding CPB

And I agree with them. The PBS system has become polluted with shills for the official government position. They may raise questions that other news networks won't but there is rarely any follow up to those questions. Which allows the message to just float on the wind.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2689
How to REALLY save PBS: Replace corrupt board with independent trust

As Republican activist Cheryl Halpern takes the helm of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and Republicans in Congress call for CPB funding cuts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, public broadcasting's defenders look ahead once again to a fight to "save PBS."

But the broader issues remain overlooked: Is public broadcasting delivering on its promise of offering a true alternative to commercial broadcasting? Does the CPB really, as its mission statement proclaims, "encourage the development of programming that involves creative risks and that addresses the needs of unserved and underserved audiences, particularly children and minorities"?

In the October issue of Extra!, FAIR declares that the honest answer to these questions is no. It's time to stop trying to save the CPB from budget cuts and corrupt leadership; we need to cut the purse strings and develop new, independent funding mechanisms for public broadcasting.

They just get their products plugged before and after the show rather than during.

I think FAIR was the first to show me just how bad NPR's biases were. They did some statistical analysis back in the mid 90s that showed how often left-leaning pundits were asked onto the flagship show, Morning Edition.

Add to that an active campaign to kill it from within, and I say amen. Let another organization form in its place based on a more coop model.

See if they can survive without their stipend, and if they price themselves off the air, no big loss right?

The Marketplace of ideas and all that...

I'm appalled by what I see on PBS these days. Not only the ads, but threatening Bill Moyers and cutting his show down to a 1/2 hour after he left. That show had the most integrity on television, never mind on PBS. I don't like that I see more crap about Riverdance and quirks of history rather than the hard-hitting investigative reporting that was once the hallmark of PBS. Now that got a corporatist in charge of the whole thing... it just makes my heart break.

The FAIR article poses some valid points. Certainly, the CPB is now run by right-wing ideologues. But if there's a push to go to a different funding model, I want to know how and where good public programming will get on the air. And I mean broadcast channels, not cable. Millions of Americans who can't afford cable can see public TV programming today.

http://www.pbs.org /
Frontline
The O.J. Verdict
Tuesday, October 4, 10:00pm

Visit the Web site
“The O.J. Verdict” explores reasons why Simpson was acquitted of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, and gauges the case's impact 10 years later. Producer Ofra Bikel interviews prosecutors and defense lawyers.

To a wingnut, someone who tells the unvarnished, no sh*t, Sherlock truth is always viewed and portrayed as a leftist.
A person who values the truth over lies and privacy over intrusion is a flaming left wing extremist.
A moderate is one who keeps yap shut and allows the rich and powerful to do as they wish--since they must be so much smarter than we are.

you want another CBS? FAUX? Say goodbye to children's programming. How about on 9/11 when all you could see on every channel was planes hitting buildings. Great things for your 4 year old to watch over and over.

PBS did not pre-empt their children's lineup.

How about Nova, National Geographic, Scientific American Frontiers, Nature - these educational, non-political programs would never be seen again.
Entertainment such as Mystery!, American Experience, Ken Burn's documentaries; musical events like Austin City Limits, Soundstage and even special preview events like the newly released "Grateful Dead Movie' before it was available in stores - GONE! Plus locally produced programs, such as Wisconsin Outdoors, Vermont's Outdoor Journal, Maine's Quest, this programming is actually benificial to their local economies. Nearly every PBS affiliate would be forced to shut down local production.

ya know - PBS is way more than NOW and the NewsHour

Hey, we could go commercial, but I'll guarentee you won't like it.

Whether you believe the CPB should stay or go, this is a discussion we who are concerned about the future of PBS need to have. I think FAIR is right on the money. Others say that to take CPB out of the equation would force PBS to become commercial. But why have public monies been cut from public broadcasting? Why is corporate underfunding the way to go?

Kicking for the needed discussion. :kick:

:dem:

http://www.shepherd-express.com/6_23_05/cover.htm

"Cutting Ties
As long as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives government funding, it will be open to political criticism and influence. Thus, if public broadcasting is to retain any independence nationally or locally, it will have to give up the federal contribution of 15% (or $460 million) of the total $2.3 billion in revenues it received last year.

But that amount can be raised from other sources.

Currently 26% of public broadcasting’s revenues come from its viewers and listeners, a group that, with its almost proprietary regard for these services, has consistently increased donations whenever these media faced financial threats. Thus, it’s not unrealistic to anticipate a pledge increase of, say, a third if funding appeals explain that rejecting federal money is the only way to maintain independence. Foundations, always generous contributors, would certainly come through with a few years of increased grants to partially cover shortfalls. More aggressive pursuit of corporate funds with proper insulations against “strings attached� underwriting is another potential source. And finally, a successful effort to establish a large endowment could generate hundreds of millions in yearly operating income. (This last proposal will be the most difficult to achieve, given the size of the endowment that would be required. But there is already a precedent in the quarter-billion-dollar gift to NPR that Joan Kroc, the widow of McDonald’s founder Ray Kroc, established in her will.)

A temporarily tight budget for the next few years is a small price for public broadcasting to pay to finally become a truly independent media force.
"

Also:
http://clipcast.wpr.org:8080/ramgen/wpr/bme/bme050623l.rm

"4:00 PM
Ben Merens - 06/23L

Yesterday Ben Merens spoke with a supporter and with a critic of public radio and television. Today, after four, a third view: Ben’s guest supports public broadcasting, but says it would be better off without federal funding, and the headaches that come along with it.

Guest: Dave Berkman, retired professor of Mass Communications at UW-Milwaukee. Media columnist for The Shepherd Express. Host, Wisconsin Public Radio’s “Media Talk�."

ended up turning it into an oasis of fair-minded broadcasting that they can no longer control with the purse-strings?

Color me cynical...everything has a price.

Like Archer-Daniels-Midland & Jim Lehrer.

And GE, Wal-Mart, and the rest that already influence what they talk about and who they have on as guests.

I couldn't agree more with FAIR on defunding CPB. They bend over too far in an effort to appear bipartisan, that they're effectively right-wing. Most of the political commentators that appear on PBS are moonlighting from other networks anyway, and the whole bunch is useless. The patronage job at the top means they're partisan by design.

I think networks like Pacifica never got the nationwide traction because of PBS & NPR.

I'm all for children's programming and great shows bought from overseas networks, or the ocassional Frontline, but we're in an environment where we can't afford a wishy-washy media outlet such as CPB to represent our viewpoints in the eyes of the red state crowd.

The public money isn't serving the cause of democracy and it's time to cut the knot. Let 'em get money from the corporations who advertise on them and the people who want them, but it's high time they paid their fare, just like Air America or the wacko networks.

Maybe the D's ought to do an about face and make the Rs vote to keep funding?

But there are some programs still seen as positive and credible among moderate left.

I understand the reasoning here, but we are so deep into bizarro world that progressives are calling for the demise of CPB! 1970's America seems like it happened on another planet altogether.

Either the funding need be independent, or two separate NPRs will be needed everywhere.

The Repubs have made it their mission to destroy it and they always get their way.

The liberal ideals of that age are long gone. We may see another resurgence of it after another finacial collapse.