• 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

Rally For a Fair Contract! today, 4-6pm

WNTIRadio said:
The government doesn't need to fund un-necessary things right now.

I agree. So lets start with the trillion dollars going to Iraq. What's necessary about that? If the people really want democracy let them fight for it like we did. How much cheaper is your gas now that Saddam is gone? You tell me.

Radio isn't a luxury when you have two feet of snow on the ground. Public radio is part of the educational system in this country. How many kids were raised on Sesame Street because their parents were too busy to spend time with them?

Keep in mind that if non-commercial stations get too commercial, the commercial stations will object. The sales guys at WBZ don't want to have to compete with WGBH for advertisers. They like it that WGBH gets federal money and is kept in a tight little box.

WNTIRadio said:
And if they're so concerned on the left, why doesn't Soros set up an endowment fund? God knows he's got the cash.

First of all, Soros HAS set up an endowment, but it's only for NPR, not the local stations. But in point of fact, culture and the arts are loved by all political perspectives. Conservatives don't all drink beer and listen to Toby Keith. Although when Toby plays with the Boston Pops, everybody wins.
 
Also, if the Boston Symphony draws such a minuscule audience that it takes government money to keep it on the air, maybe it's time it went off the air. Again, if it is that important to so many, then get the support to keep it on from private/business sources.

Remember "New Coke"? It sucked. The sales weren't there. It went away. The Feds didn't step in and fund new Coke to keep the 3 people that liked it happy.

There is plenty of private money in Boston to support all of these programs and stations. I was in public radio for over 6 years in management, I understand how it works, and also how it doesn't work. It doesn't work when it gets complacent on no strings attached hand outs, and loses the connection with the listeners and community because it doesn't have to listen to the marketplace.

In NJ, there was a state run network that's now up for sale. A statewide network that couldn't raise over $70k from members. My former employer did that in one membership drive, with one signal. The government has no business in radio or TV. Or the auto industry, banking, home loans and fill in the blank with the latest waste of money program...
 
I agree, we should have at least taken the oil from Iraq as "fee" for going in there and getting rid of Saddam. Trust me, I'm no fan of the wars either. Another huge waste of not only money, but most of all, lives.

And tough titty to the WBZ sales staff if they have to compete with WGBH or WBUR. Here's a concept: Competition. Make your product better!! Sell the virtues of your better product. Tell them why you're better than WBUR or GBH. And if you're not better, then either get better or change to Regional Mexican Polka Discotron or some other format.
 
WNTIRadio said:
Also, if the Boston Symphony draws such a minuscule audience that it takes government money to keep it on the air, maybe it's time it went off the air. Again, if it is that important to so many, then get the support to keep it on from private/business sources.

Once again, it's not an "all or nothing" thing. Do you only have one client? Arts organizations have learned to diversify, and they do. So they have memberships, endowments, donations, and anything else.

New Coke was a product of corporate thinking, not public broadcasting. Let's stick to the topic. Public broadcasters are not asking for federal dollars because of their mistakes. They're asking for federal dollars to support the goals set out by the federal goverment, like diversity, localism, and saving the environment. If more commercial broadcasters acted responsibly, instead of fattening the corporate wallets, we wouldn't need public broadcasting. But corporate greed has forced commercial radio to cut staff and services to the public. So it falls on public radio to pick up the slack.

WNTIRadio said:
In NJ, there was a state run network that's now up for sale. A statewide network that couldn't raise over $70k from members.

First of all, that's New Jersey. Need I say more? But second of all, they tried to do public TV on the cheap. No local programming, no community outreach, and the radio stations had low power in unpopulated parts of the state. No wonder no one listened. The fact that no one really wants to buy this system now tells you what it's worth. So don't compare NJ with WGBH.

Let's stick to Boston. WGBH is the crown jewel of public broadcasting. They produce local and national shows. They hire lots of people. They do quality radio that doesn't focus on lowest common demoninator. They get great ratings in Boston. Lots of corporate stations wished they had the numbers of WGBH or WBUR. They diversify their funding, so government money is just one part.

WNTIRadio said:
The government has no business in radio or TV.

Fine. Want to save money? Get rid of the FCC. Get rid of VOA and all the government propaganda. Get rid of AFRTS. Get rid of government advertising budgets. Do you know how much money the federal government spends on national TV and radio commercials? Do you know how much money government agencies spend creating free radio and TV programming like Tax Tips from the IRS? Why just pick on public broadcasting? Could it be politics, not the budget?
 
Collective action is a reasonable response and a reasonable hedge against a very natural human commodity: greed. No doubt the rich and powerful have always written the tax codes and used the force of the State to quell popular uprisings (c.f. Silent Cal & the Police strike-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Police_Strike). Is that a "natural law" or do reasonable people have the right to organize to mitigate this power? Imagine this country without the benefits derived from union activity. Or, is it just coddling 10 year olds to keep them out of the mills for 10 hours a day?
 
I listen to public radio every day, I enjoy many of the programs. Yesterday I spent an hour in the car listening to Science Friday about the Japan nuclear disaster. Compelling, informative programming. It's not politics, it's the principle of it in general. I truly believe that these programs can survive and even thrive without government involvement. The less things the government is involved in, the better for everyone.

And I'm sick of the Sesame Street argument! Again, if it is that damn important to people, they'll pony up the cash to keep it going. I also agree that the government shouldn't waste time with the IRS tax tips and all the other bloat. With web sites, why do we need to waste money on radio/TV spots?
 
WNTIRadio said:
The less things the government is involved in, the better for everyone.

And yet this latest law, just passed during an emergency session on Tuesday, tells local stations that they can't spend money on NPR dues or buying Prairie Home Companion from American Public Media. In my view that's government overstepping its bounds. A station should be able to spend money on whatever services or programs its community wants. If that includes Garrison Keilor, so be it.

WNTIRadio said:
I also agree that the government shouldn't waste time with the IRS tax tips and all the other bloat. With web sites, why do we need to waste money on radio/TV spots?

Yet the ONLY thing they're hell bent on cutting is NPR. This is a very targeted attack, not based on saving the government money to getting the government out of things they shouldn't be in. It's a specific attack on NPR and NPR stations.

Getting back to the topic of this thread, I'm sure it's in the minds of WGBH execs that they can't seriously negotiate with a union when they don't know the state of their funding. And they won't until an actual federal budget bill is passed, which probably won't come for a while.

I'm not suggesting that without federal funding, WGBH will go belly-up, but you can't sign a contract with a union, promising an increase in pay or benefits, at a time when a portion of your funding is in doubt. If listeners want to put together a special endowment for CWA, great. But the employer is under fire, and it's the wrong time to ask for a raise.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom