CPB to sacrifice for storm relief?

[Les]

Just noted in Anchorage Daily News that elimination of funding
for The Corporation For Public Broadcasting is proposed as one
small drop in the bucket toward the $200-Billion (plus, plus,
plus) effor to rebuild hurricane damaged areas.

Article claims that would put $2.1 billion into the pot.
It does not speculate on any effect on public broadcasting.

If the discussion becomes serious (and I don't believe it will;
it calls for too many cuts to pork projects in too many
congressional districts), would it be right to expect that
CPB sacrifices willingly?

If it does, might PBS become "all pledge breaks all the
time"?<P ID="signature">______________
Fanatics are picturesque, mankind would rather see gestures than listen to reasons.
--Friedrich Nietzsche</P>

 

[mwebster]

When some people on this board complain about government money going to NPR, PBS and local stations, people who have worked in public radio come back talk about what a small percentage of funds come from CPB.

Yet when someone wants to cut or eliminate those funds, they scream like all get and try to rally the faithful.

Maybe public broadcasting needs to do a little belt-tightening of its own. I keep reading here that this is not true of all stations, but the established public radio stations appear to have fancy quarters, state of the art equipment, high-paid suits running things, and often for-profit subsidiaries. I don't think they qualify for welfare.

And for the small, hard-pressed community stations I hear about: Well, the ones with which I am familiar seem like a hobby for one person or a small group of people attached to certain music or certain viewpoints. Audiences are miniscule. These stations appear more important to the people behind them than to the mass of people on the other side of the radio.

And somebody will come here, sure as taxes, and point all the other wasteful, useless ways the government spends money. I agree. But that's another discussion.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

There are probably a lot more places where more funds can be cut to free-up money for hurricane relief than CPB/NPR/PBS.

I suspect CPB/NPR/PBS will take a slight hit in Federal funding, but not a major hit or elimination of funding.

Almost everything will be cut a little.

 

[network]

> When some people on this board complain about government
> money going to NPR, PBS and local stations, people who have
> worked in public radio come back talk about what a small
> percentage of funds come from CPB.

Because those who come on here and start complaining are only spouting what they read and/or hear and not from actual knowledge. Those that defend know because they provide actual proof.

> Yet when someone wants to cut or eliminate those funds, they
> scream like all get and try to rally the faithful.

As they should...you would, too.

> Maybe public broadcasting needs to do a little
> belt-tightening of its own. I keep reading here that this
> is not true of all stations, but the established public
> radio stations appear to have fancy quarters, state of the
> art equipment, high-paid suits running things, and often
> for-profit subsidiaries. I don't think they qualify for
> welfare.

And your statement above simply soldifies what I said. "I keep reading". When you can speak from actual knowledge, then maybe you might have a right to criticize. Fact is, public broadcasting does tighten their belt. The services they provide cost money.

> And for the small, hard-pressed community stations I hear
> about: Well, the ones with which I am familiar seem like a
> hobby for one person or a small group of people attached to
> certain music or certain viewpoints. Audiences are
> miniscule. These stations appear more important to the
> people behind them than to the mass of people on the other
> side of the radio.

Again, more comments from those not having any knowledge. "...stations I HEAR about." As far as the audience remark, that just goes to show how completely unknowledgeable you are about this topic. Maybe you should lurk and not post on subjects you don't have first hand knowledge of. And reading about it doesn't qualify you or anyone has having first-hand knowledge (or even remotely close).

> And somebody will come here, sure as taxes, and point all
> the other wasteful, useless ways the government spends
> money. I agree. But that's another discussion.

Nope. But you're entitled to your opinion. As uneducated as it is.

 

[jpearce]

There may be a few public radio stations that are fat...but I haven't personally seen them. At WILL...CPB funding makes up about a quarter
of our budget - and that's rather typical. The point is...we run so
tight already, even a 10-percent cut in that allocation would cost us
dearly. As for fat salaries...what's fat? Our manager makes less than
program directors at other stations in town...and we beat them in the
ratings.

Jay Pearce
Manager
WILL Urbana, IL

 

[perenoel6218]

Speaking of the cutting of funding...I thought it quite ironic when the President,
not my President mind you, said yesterday that to help the energy crisis we
Americans, among other things, should take advantage of mass transit...great
idea, yet he proposed only a few months ago the total elimination of Amtrak!!!
As for CPB and especially NPR, I am thinking their days are numbered. What
with all the satellite services and cable channels, is it not time to let
the non-profit stations seek their own existence? Most community radio
stations do not rely on a single penny from Uncle Sam, so why do public
tv stations need that assistance?
> I haven't personally seen them. At WILL...CPB funding makes
> up about a quarter
> of our budget - and that's rather typical. The point
> is...we run so
> tight already, even a 10-percent cut in that allocation
> would cost us
> dearly. As for fat salaries...what's fat? Our manager
> makes less than
> program directors at other stations in town...and we beat
> them in the
> ratings.
>
> Jay Pearce
> Manager
> WILL Urbana, IL
>

 

[Timothy]

> As for CPB and especially NPR, I am thinking their days are
> numbered. What
> with all the satellite services and cable channels, is it
> not time to let
> the non-profit stations seek their own existence? Most
> community radio
> stations do not rely on a single penny from Uncle Sam, so
> why do public
> tv stations need that assistance?

There are a number of problems with satellite radio that aren't being talked about. Sirius is largely speculatively funded, worse than gov't funding, it's money that doesn't actually exist, but may exist in the future. Plus, HD radio has more bandwidth and better sound quality.

Both networks aren't offering anything more compelling than what is on the terrestrial dial. Let's see, I can hear Kiss XM for $9.95 a month? Or Mix XM? I already hear those for free. Or I can hear NPR, but they aren't telling me what's going on in my hometown....

Satellite radio is currently available. The equipment price point isn't dropping, and the audience represents a blip. Radio listening in general, and prublic radio particularly has gone UP as more people have purchased sat radio.

 

[testing]

it is way too early to start predicting the demise of NPR and CPB at the hands of Satellite Radio. Broadband, for instance, may well end up cleaning Satellite's clock. podcasting. streaming on your cell phone. who knows? we just don't know yet. too fluid, too much changing right now.

> > As for CPB and especially NPR, I am thinking their days
> are
> > numbered. What
> > with all the satellite services and cable channels, is it
> > not time to let
> > the non-profit stations seek their own existence? Most
> > community radio
> > stations do not rely on a single penny from Uncle Sam, so
> > why do public
> > tv stations need that assistance?
>
> There are a number of problems with satellite radio that
> aren't being talked about. Sirius is largely speculatively
> funded, worse than gov't funding, it's money that doesn't
> actually exist, but may exist in the future. Plus, HD radio
> has more bandwidth and better sound quality.
>
> Both networks aren't offering anything more compelling than
> what is on the terrestrial dial. Let's see, I can hear Kiss
> XM for $9.95 a month? Or Mix XM? I already hear those for
> free. Or I can hear NPR, but they aren't telling me what's
> going on in my hometown....
>
> Satellite radio is currently available. The equipment price
> point isn't dropping, and the audience represents a blip.
> Radio listening in general, and prublic radio particularly
> has gone UP as more people have purchased sat radio.
>

 

[doc9464]

When Ted Stevens gives up that stupid bridge, then CPB can give up some of its funding...

> Just noted in Anchorage Daily News that elimination of
> funding
> for The Corporation For Public Broadcasting is proposed as
> one
> small drop in the bucket toward the $200-Billion (plus,
> plus,
> plus) effor to rebuild hurricane damaged areas.
>
> Article claims that would put $2.1 billion into the pot.
> It does not speculate on any effect on public broadcasting.
>
> If the discussion becomes serious (and I don't believe it
> will;
> it calls for too many cuts to pork projects in too many
> congressional districts), would it be right to expect that
> CPB sacrifices willingly?
>
> If it does, might PBS become "all pledge breaks all the
> time"?
>

 

[Les]

Grim reality:

> When Ted Stevens gives up that stupid bridge, then CPB can
> give up some of its funding...

Ain't nobody gonna give up nuthin.

It's all grandstanding; no member of congress is going
to sacrifice anything that benefits his district in the
interest of people in another state who can't vote for
him. Of course CPB is sorta handicapped in this regard
because it's not unique to any one state so has limited
claim on the affections of any particular "champion".
That doesn't seem to seriously effect them, though.<P ID="signature">______________
"Only sick music makes money today."
--Friedrich Nietzsch (he said this before
rap was invented, or even rock!)</P>