• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

House Seeks to Defund CPB

The original public broadcasting act was passing in 1967, not long after former FCC Commissioner Newton Minow made his "vast wasteland" speech. What he said then could be said about a lot of TV and radio today. Minow was a consultant on the writing of the act. He said that the greatest country in the world deserves the best broadcasting in the world. That wasn't going to come from companies focused on delivering profits to owners and stockholders. So removing the profit motive seemed like the right thing to do. If all the money is directed to serving the public, you end up with better broadcasting.
 
After I was "wished well in all his future endeavors" at the last commercial station I worked for, I tried for a gig at the local public radio outlet. A friend who worked there gave me a tour, and I got to sit in on one of their locally produced shows. Most of the folks I'd worked with who had "News Director" in their job title were nothing more than "the person who got the news off the wire and read it on the air twice an hour."

This place had a fully-staffed news room that rivaled that of the major market full-service station I'd toured as a college student 35 years prior. I'd been a morning producer, host, music director, prod director, etc. but these people were doing journalism. I had a pretty good interview, but I was way out of my league.

and i am not a news person.. it takes alot more skill then ive got ... im a news person when i have to be.. but i wouldnt call what ive done journalism. its not easy to meet public radio standards for news
 
The original public broadcasting act was passing in 1967, not long after former FCC Commissioner Newton Minow made his "vast wasteland" speech. What he said then could be said about a lot of TV and radio today. Minow was a consultant on the writing of the act. He said that the greatest country in the world deserves the best broadcasting in the world. That wasn't going to come from companies focused on delivering profits to owners and stockholders. So removing the profit motive seemed like the right thing to do. If all the money is directed to serving the public, you end up with better broadcasting.
Reminds me of a scene from "Meet Joe Black." Anthony Hopkins is head of a media company in the process of being sold, and Brad Pitt is...Death.

 
A lot of the states have their own public broadcasting services that provide state-wide coverage of news and information. Earlier in this thread I mentioned the Alaska network based in Anchorage. The station gets CPB funding for its operations, and the news service gets CPB funding as well. They use the national interconnection system to distribute the programming among the member stations. All of that would be in jeopardy if the CPB appropriation wasn't funded.
The recent programming merger between WKSU and WCPN parent Ideastream Public Media was partially CPB-funded. It consolidated NPR/APM/PRX programming onto one station instead of two that were cannibalizing each other for membership and ratings; therefore, it was money wisely spent.
 
Today the Senate Appropriations Committee recommended funding CPB:



Obviously this will have to be reconciled with the house committee.
 
The original public broadcasting act was passing in 1967, not long after former FCC Commissioner Newton Minow made his "vast wasteland" speech. What he said then could be said about a lot of TV and radio today. Minow was a consultant on the writing of the act. He said that the greatest country in the world deserves the best broadcasting in the world. That wasn't going to come from companies focused on delivering profits to owners and stockholders. So removing the profit motive seemed like the right thing to do. If all the money is directed to serving the public, you end up with better broadcasting.

It seems to me that public broadcasters anywhere (in the world) are painted as left wing. In Australia, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is routinely smeared by conservative politicians as being Left Wing. This is in spite of a number of, Murdoch owned Sky News former staff, filling key appointments in the news and current affairs. Plus, a key management role went to a person who had the experience, but was widely accused of being too cosy with the (former) conservative government.

It's funny how large public broadcasting bodies get attacked as being "city centric institutions of the Left", when most of their best work is in the regional area's that commercial operators struggle to offer what the audience wants or needs.
 
It seems to me that public broadcasters anywhere (in the world) are painted as left wing. In Australia, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is routinely smeared by conservative politicians as being Left Wing. This is in spite of a number of, Murdoch owned Sky News former staff, filling key appointments in the news and current affairs. Plus, a key management role went to a person who had the experience, but was widely accused of being too cosy with the (former) conservative government.

It's funny how large public broadcasting bodies get attacked as being "city centric institutions of the Left", when most of their best work is in the regional area's that commercial operators struggle to offer what the audience wants or needs.
Also in some parts of the country Public Broadcasting have their main studios at the state Capital from ones I seen like Hawaii PBS, Hawaii Public Radio. Sure public broadcasting originally had their intentions to educate the public but that changed to provide investigative journalism via documentaries though.
 
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting reacts to congress passing their appropriation:


As they note, there was bi-partisan approval for this bill, which has been the case for over 50 years.
 
So the title of this thread is House Seeks to Defund CPB. At this point, its becoming more like Congress Continues to Refund CPB.

Time after time after time again, CPB continues to get the money they need and despite pushback time after time after time again, Congress just easily and bipartisan-ly gives it to them. It proves how much of a political theater Congress and politics is in today's world.
 
It proves how much of a political theater Congress and politics is in today's world.

Part of it is political theater, and part of it is ignorance about how government works from the people in congress. New members all the time, they don't know what the job entails, they don't know there's no line item in the budget to defund NPR for example, so they speak without knowledge. They don't know that funding for CPB means funding for red state public broadcasting authorities. Then the day comes when they have to vote, and the funding gets passed.
 
The House appropriations subcommittee has once again recommended zeroing out public media funding:



The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies recommended zeroing out public media funding in its fiscal year 2025 appropriations bill.

Made public Thursday, the bill proposes no funding for CPB effective FY2027. The corporation’s appropriation, currently $535 million, is forward-funded two years in advance.

As we've said in this thread, this is federal money mainly for red states, such as Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Alaska, that need federal money to operate their state public broadcasting authorities.
 
The House appropriations subcommittee has once again recommended zeroing out public media funding:





As we've said in this thread, this is federal money mainly for red states, such as Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Alaska, that need federal money to operate their state public broadcasting authorities.

There is no state public broadcasting authority in Alaska, smal;l point of contention.. the only licenses the state owns are a bunch of tv translators. But yes, ironically.. the states who most need the money most want to defund it and get rid of it
 
There is no state public broadcasting authority in Alaska, small point of contention..

Thanks for the information. Reminded me that the politicians in West Virginia recently changed their state run public broadcasting system from an authority to a commission, thus placing it under direct control of the governor, rather than being independent:

 
Thanks for the information. Reminded me that the politicians in West Virginia recently changed their state run public broadcasting system from an authority to a commission, thus placing it under direct control of the governor, rather than being independent:

let me rephrase and clear it up even further

alaska has the AK Public broadcasting commission
"The commission was created to encourage and supervise the development of an integrated public broadcasting system in Alaska, and for the coordination of Alaskan public broadcasting stations. The commission additionally supports noncommercial public broadcasting in Alaska through the advocacy of financial support for locally controlled nonprofit broadcast stations or telecommunications entities."

But we havent gotten any state funding in awhile.

The state doesnt own any signals that can originate programming.. just the hordes of useful digital tv translators
 
The House appropriations subcommittee has once again recommended zeroing out public media funding:





As we've said in this thread, this is federal money mainly for red states, such as Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Alaska, that need federal money to operate their state public broadcasting authorities.
Also in the various threads we said something similar where at the time certain members of Congress falsely accuse PBS Kids shows for stuff that we later trace back to stories on PBS Newshour, PBS Frontline, Local affiliate editions, and NPR News. It's always this certain lawmakers either don't understand how Public Media funding works or they want certain segments censored from the news and documentaries section of the PBS TV app or radio apps that carry NPR affiliates.
 
Here's reaction from America's Public Television Stations to House defunding CPB:


I wonder if the ideologues in congress ever speak to the governors of their states. They're the ones who depend on federal funding.

The fact is that all of public broadcasting is being blamed because of one article written by one former employee of NPR.
 


Back
Top Bottom