Public Radio/TV Facts And Myths

[OHTBGH]

I'm confused.

Congress is on the budget and once again CPB is on the bubble. They are claiming how we do not need to spend millions of Taxpayer dollars to fund PBS and NPR.

But when I hear the local NPR and PBS stations doing pledge drives, They always claim they get very little from the Feds. Our donations are the lifeblood and without it they will parish.

I do have a big problem with PBS scrambling their channels when the Feds are giving them money.

Which brings up a point: Maybe PBS should scramble itself like 21,27 and 33 did in the 80's with On TV, Vue and Preview respectively. You pay your dues and get a decoder box.

No pay? No Watch! Should be a piece of cake since everything is digital now.

How its gonna work with NPR is anyone's guess.


I'm not starting this post to talk politics on this subject just the funding points?

So which is it? And how much REALLY are the Taxpayers covering?

-BGH

 

[mic_check]

The reason why they are considering cutting funding for CPB is because of the anti-America rhetoric that's ALWAYS coming from it's broadcasters. These are the public air waves and if the public doesn't like what your programming they can cut your funding by voting it gone.

 

[uncamark]

The reason why they are considering cutting funding for CPB is because of the anti-America rhetoric that's ALWAYS coming from it's broadcasters. These are the public air waves and if the public doesn't like what your programming they can cut your funding by voting it gone.

Documented proof, wingnut. The fact that "Morning Edition" is the second-most-listened to national program after Limbaugh speaks for itself.

And as for the alleged far-left-wing bias of public broadcasting (forgetting "The McLaughlin Group" and "Adam Smith's Money World," I present another view:

http://nprcheck.blogspot.com/

I think this guy is as over-the-top as you are, but in many ways this proves that if the extremists on both sides feel this way about NPR, it must be doing something right.

 

[copydesk2]

http://www.npr.org/about/aboutnpr/publicradiofinances.html

 

[OHTBGH]

I've also noticed alot of PBS and NPR stations are run by Universities. Maybe more of them should be to help with costs. What about KERA run by a University to help with funding?

 

[Albert19X]

The reason why they are considering cutting funding for CPB is because of the anti-America rhetoric that's ALWAYS coming from it's broadcasters. These are the public air waves and if the public doesn't like what your programming they can cut your funding by voting it gone.

Yeah, NPR being an anti-American mouthpiece is a great myth. It's right up there with the one about George Soros running NPR with a paltry $1.8M donation. You'll hear more anti-American rhetoric coming from Rush or Hannity than NPR.

 

[OHTBGH]

Well so much for the political rants! ;D

 

[fybush]

I've also noticed alot of PBS and NPR stations are run by Universities. Maybe more of them should be to help with costs. What about KERA run by a University to help with funding?

One of the threads that led to "public radio" as we know it today runs all the way back to the very dawn of radio, when land-grant universities in places like Madison and Iowa City and Norman looked to radio as a way of expanding their educational mission. Many of those early stations fizzled (in part thanks to federal regulators in the 1920s and '30s whose policies strongly favored the expansion of commercial radio), but a few survived to become some of the founders of the public radio system as it now exists, while other universities came to join them later.

But many colleges and universities are crunched for money these days, too, especially state schools that are fighting for that same shrinking pool of government money as public media. Down in Waco, Baylor shut down its PBS station last year because it couldn't afford to keep it running. Odessa College is trying to unload its KOCV radio right now. Many other universities have kept their licenses but long since stopped providing any cash support, instead leaving "their" stations to look for other sources of income. KUHF remains licensed to the University of Houston, and UH provides it with office space, but not an operating budget. I believe the same is true of KNTU and UNT in Denton.

It's hard for me to imagine a university entering the public broadcasting world as a new player now...but I'll confess that I'm not intimately acquainted with the ins and outs of the university community in North Texas.

 

[KMRD]

The reason why they are considering cutting funding for CPB is because of the anti-America rhetoric that's ALWAYS coming from it's broadcasters. These are the public air waves and if the public doesn't like what your programming they can cut your funding by voting it gone.

Yeah, NPR being an anti-American mouthpiece is a great myth. It's right up there with the one about George Soros running NPR with a paltry $1.8M donation. You'll hear more anti-American rhetoric coming from Rush or Hannity than NPR.

Please give specific examples of anti-American rhetoric coming from Rush or Hannity. Otherwise, your comment is mere heresay and unsubstantiated.

(Hope you get to read this before my comment gets removed).

 

[OKCRadioGuy]

In most cases "public radio stations" have to rely on listener support and "underwriting" for most of their funds. The support from a univerity varies. Most get building space and a couple saleries, and sometimes free electrical power, utilites, etc. but that's about it. The rest HAS already been effectively transferred over to the station itself. Today's higher education world is more sink-or-swim than most people realize. Few departments get to operate at much of a loss without getting either cut back, messed with, or removed. Radio is no different.

 

[Albert19X]

Please give specific examples of anti-American rhetoric coming from Rush or Hannity. Otherwise, your comment is mere heresay and unsubstantiated.

(Hope you get to read this before my comment gets removed).

I'll do one more post in this thread. Sorry, OHT. I know this isn't what you intended.

I don't have a specific example, any more than mic_check could cite specifics if pressed. However, Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al., spend hours each day criticizing American elected officials, American public and private institutions, American culture and their fellow American citizens. If that doesn't scream "I hate America" I don't know what does.

 

[KMRD]

I don't have a specific example, any more than mic_check could cite specifics if pressed. However, Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al., spend hours each day criticizing American elected officials, American public and private institutions, American culture and their fellow American citizens. If that doesn't scream "I hate America" I don't know what does.
[/quote]

Again, broad generalization without any specifics. If Rush and Hannity "spend hours a day criticizing American elected officials, American public and private institutions, American culture and their fellow American citizens" then you should have no trouble at all citing just one little example. You mention that criticizing "American elected officials" and how that screams "I hate America". Using your logic, were those who relentlessly and unjustly criticized President Bush for 8+ years screaming "I hate America"?

 

[Albert19X]

I don't have a specific example, any more than mic_check could cite specifics if pressed. However, Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al., spend hours each day criticizing American elected officials, American public and private institutions, American culture and their fellow American citizens. If that doesn't scream "I hate America" I don't know what does.

Again, broad generalization without any specifics. If Rush and Hannity "spend hours a day criticizing American elected officials, American public and private institutions, American culture and their fellow American citizens" then you should have no trouble at all citing just one little example. You mention that criticizing "American elected officials" and how that screams "I hate America". Using your logic, were those who relentlessly and unjustly criticized President Bush for 8+ years screaming "I hate America"?
[/quote]

But...but...but...if your implication is correct that would mean you can actually have a critical discussion of America and not be America hating commies providing oral gratification to the terrorists! In radio terms, that means NPR's programming, that presents calm, reasoned discussion of today's issues, that assiduously strives to consider all sides of an issue, is no more an example of America hatred than Rush's four hour daily dose of "America sucks!"


EDIT: Please pledge to KERA. Your dollars make the difference. There. We are back on topic.

 

[KMRD]

But...but...but...if your implication is correct that would mean you can actually have a critical discussion of America and not be America hating commies providing oral gratification to the terrorists! In radio terms, that means NPR's programming, that presents calm, reasoned discussion of today's issues, that assiduously strives to consider all sides of an issue, is no more an example of America hatred than Rush's four hour daily dose of "America sucks!"

So just to sum up your view of reality, NPR is calm, rational, non-partisan and considers all sides, while Rush and Hannity scream "America sucks!"? Oh, and give more of your taxpayer dollars to NPR.

 

[Albert19X]

But...but...but...if your implication is correct that would mean you can actually have a critical discussion of America and not be America hating commies providing oral gratification to the terrorists! In radio terms, that means NPR's programming, that presents calm, reasoned discussion of today's issues, that assiduously strives to consider all sides of an issue, is no more an example of America hatred than Rush's four hour daily dose of "America sucks!"

So just to sum up your view of reality, NPR is calm, rational, non-partisan and considers all sides, while Rush and Hannity scream "America sucks!"? Oh, and give more of your taxpayer dollars to NPR.

Yes. And the sky here is blue. What color is the sky in your reality?

 

[OHTBGH]

<SFX> Bangs Head against wall. :'(

 

[uncamark]

<SFX> Bangs Head against wall. :'(

And meanwhile, nobody notices that the far left hates NPR as much as the far right. Which in my mind means that they must be doing something right.

 

[ropertex]

Two years after President Johnson established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Nixon tried to cut funding by 50%

Fred Rogers' (Mister Rogers) testimony to Congress in 1969, is as good a summation today as then for public TV.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=yXEuEUQIP3Q

 

[outlaw2448]

There are people on both sides of the political spectrum that spout things that could be considered, in the terms that seem to be put out there on this post, "Anti-American" speak.

Rush hating on Obama, Chris Matthews hating on Boehner, everyone hating Pelosi. It's not just one person, or network, or political party. It's everyone. It's only Anti-American speaking if you don't agree with it.

Edit: BTW, NPR barely gets any funding from the Government, so to hear people wanting to get NPR's funding to get cut doesn't realize that NPR would probably still run because of private fundings, and foundatons that give them money.

 

[bturner]

I think NPR would do just fine without government dollars from what I've seen. From earlier discussions from other postings, it seems many of those dollars go to helping smaller stations with things like equipment purchases. Even so, groups like Minnesota Public Radio get some funds making me wonder if they truly need the dollars. It is a hot issue on each side. It seems those saying NPR needs funding are also saying NPR is very popular. It seems if NPR has such a great audience the funds would not be needed. With that said, I'll reserve my opinion for additional details that have nothing to do with political opinions.