Public Broadcasting Targeted By House
- Thread starter Orwell
- Start date
-
- Tags
- broadcasting public targeted
Bikewer
Penultimate Amazing
PBS seems to be the latest target of the "culture wars". The NEA a few years back, and now a republican apointee as the chairman of the Corporation that oversees both PBS and NPR.
Tomlinson, the chairman, has hired "ombudsmen" to keep tabs on the "liberal bias" on the various shows, even though polling indicates that the public feels both PBS and NPR are even-handed overall.
Diane Rehm interviewed Tomlinson a couple of weeks ago, and it was interesting.
To my mind, the NPR news segments I normally listen to (Diane Rehm, Talk of the Nation, The World) are much more even-handed than almost any other news outlet, frequently featuring representatives from each side of any particular issue.
Even Bill Moyers much-discussed (and decidedly liberal) show featured many guests of opposing viewpoints.
Tomlinson, the chairman, has hired "ombudsmen" to keep tabs on the "liberal bias" on the various shows, even though polling indicates that the public feels both PBS and NPR are even-handed overall.
Diane Rehm interviewed Tomlinson a couple of weeks ago, and it was interesting.
To my mind, the NPR news segments I normally listen to (Diane Rehm, Talk of the Nation, The World) are much more even-handed than almost any other news outlet, frequently featuring representatives from each side of any particular issue.
Even Bill Moyers much-discussed (and decidedly liberal) show featured many guests of opposing viewpoints.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Tmy said:
Not everybody has cable. It's expensive in some places. I don't have it, mostly because I figured out I can pay off my student loan much faster if I apply that money to extra payments. I do like being able to see quality nature documentaries without paying for the channels that used to show such (although now they seem to show nothing but decorating shows!).
It's not elitist to offer a choice of different kinds of programming. It's elitist to declare it unnecessary because "everyone has 500 cable channels"!
Charlie Monoxide
Wag
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2003
- Messages
- 2,760
Have you ever watched a Frontline episode? They are documentaries done by a variety of people.Luke T. said:
Frontline IMHO is the best documentary news program on television in North America, bar none. Every time I've watched Frontline, I've come away with an expanded view of the subject (both positive and negative). Even on subjects I thought I wouldn't be interested in.
The fact that you can watch a Frontline episode without being bombarded and distracted by mindless commercials is just icing on the cake.
I move around a lot, and the first thing I do when I get settled is know which channel is PSB on TV and NPR on radio.
Charlie (singing the hosannahs of PBS) Monoxide
It isn't clear to me why I should be paying for a television outlet. If they serve a purpose and are that popular then it seems to me they should have no trouble raising some money. If they cannot, it suggests that while people care, they simply don't care enough. As they say, talk is cheap.
True. That said, over 85% of American households have some form of multi-channel pay television. Cable and satellite make up the vast majority of that, with stuff like MMDS (microwave) and dsl-TV making up the rest. At least some of the rest are not dirt-poor people with 30-year old TVs but rather people like yourself who could afford a multichannel service but choose not to because TV isn't that important to them. I have to imagine that there comes some point where the original mission of public television has been accomplished and it should be allowed to fade away? Is that time today? Dunno. But I think that people who believe funding should be restored or increased this year should be able to sketch out a plan for its eventual sunset, given all the changes in radio and television since the CPB and PBS were created.TragicMonkey said:
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Wait, huh? I hear a lot about the how awful public radio/television is from conservative talk shows, but I hardly hear anything from Democrats.corplinx said:
What are you referring to?
Rob Lister
Unregistered
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Messages
- 8,504
For any that are interested, the federal budget for CPB funding works out to about one dollar per person per year ($333m in 2004). Bill gates pays substantially more of that dollar, I pay substantially less. I could work out the difference given enough time but it's hardly worth bothering.
I don't watch them often. I find them very liberal for my taste but that's because my views are more conservative than are theirs. I do watch Frontline (I agree it is the best produced documentary series on television today), Nova, Nature (sometimes), and other shows. I don't contribute to their funding drives, but I get my <$1 worth. I've got no beef with them at that price.
ETA: all of those above mentioned shows would get picked up in a half a heartbeat by other cable channels. In fact, they often try to do just that.
I don't watch them often. I find them very liberal for my taste but that's because my views are more conservative than are theirs. I do watch Frontline (I agree it is the best produced documentary series on television today), Nova, Nature (sometimes), and other shows. I don't contribute to their funding drives, but I get my <$1 worth. I've got no beef with them at that price.
ETA: all of those above mentioned shows would get picked up in a half a heartbeat by other cable channels. In fact, they often try to do just that.
Cleon
King of the Pod People
Upchurch said:
Keep in mind those are the same people who rant and rave about the "liberal media" using radio, television, newspapers, and the web. With a straight face, mind you.