• 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

US HOUSE WANTS TO END PBS/NPR FUNDING

gregg75

gregg75

gregg75 said:
I'm not sure where I stand on this, but if stations are "earning" 50 million a year (as someone on here stated), do they really need funding?

from ABC news
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/budg...licans-put-npr-pbs-chopping/story?id=12915626
Click to expand...

Like Obama says, times are tough and cuts have to be made. If the president plans to cut military spending, plus programs for the poor, along with Pell Grants, then it's time to pull the plug on federal funding for NPR & PBS.

Let those who watch or listen to public broadcasting pony up their own money instead.
 
On second thought, maybe the Government ("Knows All, Sees All") could just up the Childrens' Programming requirements for commercial broadcasters (radio and TV, both) and make us all produce things like Sesame Street, etc.
;D
 
The pubcasters are up in arms over this, but they should support it. Getting away from government funding will free them up to do whatever kind of programming they can get funded from private sources.

I do think the FCC should loosen the underwriting rules to let them sell more traditional "advertising" in limited blocks after shows. As it is, many companies won't buy underwriting because they have to produce a separate spot to run on pubcasters that meets current FCC underwriting rules.
 
tested said:
I do think the FCC should loosen the underwriting rules to let them sell more traditional "advertising" in limited blocks after shows. As it is, many companies won't buy underwriting because they have to produce a separate spot to run on pubcasters that meets current FCC underwriting rules.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, one could argue that people who watch PBS may not respond to traditional advertising. I remember someone who appeared on the News Hour was acting like they were on cable news and received a mountain of complaints from viewers.

- Trip
 
gregg75 said:
I'm not sure where I stand on this, but if stations are "earning" 50 million a year (as someone on here stated), do they really need funding?
Click to expand...

It takes a lot of money to run a TV station. Those that have lots of outside funding don't "need" aid from the government. But the funding also comes with mandates that the government wants, like minority hiring, environmentally friendly buildings, and programming aimed at kids or the elderly.

But the majority of public stations are struggling, and serve a poor population. And they do so in a way that commercial stations do not.

The bigger picture is that these same Republicans are also cutting arts & humanities funding, which sometimes goes to public broadcasters or program producers. So that's two sources of funding that are being cut. Coupled with cuts in state funding, and a drop in viewer/listener support and corporate donations due to the bad economy, and you have a huge problem.
 
tested said:
The pubcasters are up in arms over this, but they should support it. Getting away from government funding will free them up to do whatever kind of programming they can get funded from private sources.
Click to expand...

Really? You think it's that easy? And that the commercial stations haven't already tried to get that same money?
 
TheBigA said:
But the majority of public stations are struggling, and serve a poor population. And they do so in a way that commercial stations do not.
Click to expand...

Oh, come on! Struggling in their shiny new buildings on prime real estate with state of the art equipment. Not to mention the salaries the suits pay themselves.

Poor population? More like an elite audience. That's what sponsors (corporate underwriters) are targeting. American Experience. Nova. National Geographic. Masterpiece Theater. Newshour. These are shows targeting up market, upper income, upper social and upper educational groups. This is not what poor people watch.

Hey, Gregg: The House has not decided to do anything. This budget hasn't even gotten to committee. The issue is scheduled to be debated - and the debate hasn't happened yet. In my journalism school an inaccurate an misleading headline would get you an F.
 
"American Experience,Nova,National Geographic, Masterpiece Theater andNewshour are shows targeting up market, upper income, upper social and upper educational groups. This is not what poor people watch."

So you are saying that I don't watch TV then, yeah? Because I watch all of those (save for "Masterpiece Theatre" (watch your spelling!) and I'm community-college educated, in a lower-wage dead-ended job and barely making enough to get by. I'll watch "News Hour" before I'll watch any of the network affiliate "news" broadcasts.

I think you need to check your broad, sweeping statements......
 
Well, everyone better gear up for those same Suze Orman, The Piano Guy and Victor Borge specials all day every day on your local PBS affiliate because they will be in Beg Mode from the moment CPB funding is cut to when the station goes dark or the funding returns.
 
Darth_vader said:
So you are saying that I don't watch TV then, yeah? Because I watch all of those (save for "Masterpiece Theatre" (watch your spelling!) and I'm community-college educated, in a lower-wage dead-ended job and barely making enough to get by. I'll watch "News Hour" before I'll watch any of the network affiliate "news" broadcasts.

I think you need to check your broad, sweeping statements......
Click to expand...

I'm saying, based on your description of yourself, that you are not in the target audience for the sponsors or the programs.

Actually, WGBH has dropped "theatre" (or "theater") from the show's title. Are you sure you're not from the Canadian Vancouver?
 
MattParker said:
Oh, come on! Struggling in their shiny new buildings on prime real estate with state of the art equipment. Not to mention the salaries the suits pay themselves.
Click to expand...

I think you're limiting your comments to your own area local station. When I was running an NPR station, we operated from an empty storefront, using second hand equipment, and got paid less than high school janitors. I'd suggest more stations operate under those circumstances than the few you're talking about.

MattParker said:
American Experience. Nova. National Geographic. Masterpiece Theater. Newshour. These are shows targeting up market, upper income, upper social and upper educational groups. This is not what poor people watch.
Click to expand...

That's prime time PBS programming. Not what the station airs during the rest of the day. And there are lots of public stations that can't afford to pay PBS dues. So they don't have access to that fancy, high tiered network programming.
 
@BigA: For the sake of discussion, I will allow that maybe the majority of public television stations may be struggling. In number of sticks they may be the majority. In number of viewers or proportion of the total public television audience, they are not the majority. For the majority of the population, public television is the kind of stations I described.

The stations you are talking about may qualify for CPB funding but they are more like community stations or OTA public access channels.

And there are even some stations with fancy buildings that claim they can't afford PBS fees - like KCET in Los Angeles.
 
MattParker said:
In number of viewers or proportion of the total public television audience, they are not the majority. For the majority of the population, public television is the kind of stations I described.
Click to expand...

Believe what you want to believe. The fact is that, as this article points out, the federal funding is just the tip of the iceberg. State governments, universities, and area arts councils, who provide funding and facilities, are being cut too. The independent community stations, like WNET, WGBH, WXXI, KQED, and WHYY, are in the minority, but are rich and powerful because they are based in big cities, with large endowments, and take the biggest liberties with funding regulations. KCET seems to feel it can survive with studio rentals and brokered broadcasting. But the vast majority of stations depend on state and local taxes, as well as support from area educational institutions, all of which will be cutting funding.
 
There are plenty of PBS programs that I've enjoyed over the years, but when the budget situation
is Defcon 5, this seems like a pretty obvious cut. Public broadcasting is a pretty low budgetary
priority in the scheme of things, no matter how loathe one may be to admit it.
 
@MattParker--

Well, then, if I am not supposed to watch PBS because of my demographic, please tell me so I can start watching the mind-draining trash the local commercial stations pass off as "programming". Can't be out of compliance with the law, man.

And yes, I am 200% certain that I am not from the "other" Vancouver. Never been there. Closest I have been is Victoria (lived there for four years.)
 
MattParker said:
Hey, Gregg: The House has not decided to do anything. This budget hasn't even gotten to committee. The issue is scheduled to be debated - and the debate hasn't happened yet. In my journalism school an inaccurate an misleading headline would get you an F.
Click to expand...
I was just repeating what was on the ABC website this morning. Give them a call.
As we all know the House is in Republican hands right now.
 
FreddyE1977 said:
Public broadcasting is a pretty low budgetary
priority in the scheme of things, no matter how loathe one may be to admit it.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but they're not laying out the whole list of cuts for the public to look at. I think if you saw the things they're continuing to fund, you'd say they're lower than public broadcasting. All the proposed cuts are domestic. Meanwhile they continue all foreign aid without any cuts. It seems like we'd be better off moving to a foreign country than living here.

At the same time, Republicans have changed tax laws (and propose to do so again this year) to lessen the value of charitable contributions. As it is now, only a certain percentage of charitable contributions can be deducted, and you need to fill out a Schedule B. One proposal I've seen will cut the deduction for all charitable contributions.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom