 Plagiarizers |
 Boozers |
 Shills |
Posted on 05/03/2005 3:58:15 AM PDT by billorites
AFTER BEING American television’s home for left-wing political and cultural programming for decades, PBS suddenly is horrified that politics has reared its ugly head at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. What a hoot.
The New York Times reported yesterday that CPB Chairman Kenneth Tomlinson, a Republican and a Bush appointee, was ruffling PBS executives’ feathers by insisting that the network abide by its mandate — written into its charter — to ensure “objectivity and balance” in its programming. Man the barricades, it’s a conservative takeover!
Liberals have an ingrained sense of ownership over PBS, a sort of proprietary instinct. It is their network. Yet at the same time they deny there is even a hint of left-leaning bias there. If PBS contains no programming, or very little, that makes liberals uncomfortable, while being chock full of shows that make conservatives cringe, how can it possibly be considered objective and balanced?
The reaction to Tomlinson’s efforts to make PBS abide by its own charter has been hilarious. Opponents have said it amounts to political intimidation and violates the First Amendment. There is no way they are going to let more than one token conservative show onto PBS without a fight.
Perhaps this little spat will illustrate to liberals the pitfalls of taking government money. As long as PBS takes money from taxpayers, who include large numbers of conservatives, it has no right to complain when conservatives ask for balance.
Plagiarizers |
Boozers |
Shills |
Libs seem to have this sense about so many things - as in anything publicly funded/run by government. They always want control over "OPM." (Other people's money.)
Man, MF...that's darn good. You are so clever.
Was this picture taken in 1975? She doesn't look anything like this today.
I would no care if PBS stays exactly as it is. I insist, though, that the name be changed to something more honest and descriptive to reflect who they really are.
"Public Broadcasting" sounds like they are the voice for the overwhelming majority of the American citizens.
I always thought the idea of a true "public televsion" station would be incredible.
Imagine young filmakers being able to showcase their emerging works.
Imagine a place for local talent shows, for involvement with otherr local community activities which would then be broadcast. A place for the common man to become uncommon through publicity which would, of course, be free.
AND a place where views of ALL political kinds could be freely aired without repercussion.
But no. PBS is just a place for rich snobs to get shows on redoing their million-dollar houses.... I LOVE the cultural programming (i.e., classical music, opera and jazz, as well as British dramas and comedies) BUT I cannot stand the PC garbage imbued into everything from transvestite Teletubbies to Heather Has Two Mommies.
Except out here in central PA, we DO get Lawrence Welk EVERY Saturday night. Our local PBS station would be dead without it. They keep everything pretty mild around that show....
The internet has become what PBS was MEANT to be...
The network is like some churches. They are basically a tax free income producer. Those that derive income are there because they can avoid requirements of earning income in a business that has risk.
PBS ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.