Posted on 06/16/2005 6:11:28 AM PDT by T-Bird45
We need PBS, but we could do without the politics.
You know what would be fun, and actually helpful? If in the latest struggle over funding for public television, people said what they know to be true.
The argument, once again, is about whether PBS has a liberal bias. There are charges and countercharges, studies, specific instances cited of subtle partiality here and obvious side-taking there. But arguing over whether PBS is and has long been politically liberal is like arguing over whether the ocean is and has long been wet. Of course it is, and everyone knows it.
Not just Republicans, but Democrats. I doubt you could find a Democratic senator who, forced to announce the truth, standing at the gates of heaven and being questioned by St Peter, would not, on being asked, "By the way, is PBS liberal?" answer, "Of course." Or, "Yes, but don't tell Tom Delay I knew."
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
What say the rest of you?
They already have such programs, or their equivalent.
Cable has made PBS irrelevant and unnecessary.
Great minds think alike. There is the history channel, the science channel and discovery channel.
Nova and the other good stuff would find a home. There is even ovation, which could do the shakespeare stuff.
Peggy is drifting left.
I disagree with Peggy and think that there are channels that would fund the programs she cites. For example, the History Channel regularly does programs such as the Civil War. I see no reason to make Ken Burns rich with my tax dollars (Big Bird either for that matter).
Back when PBS used the slogan "If we don't do it, who will?" I used to shout at the screen "The Discovery Channel! Bravo! A&E! Animal Planet! The History Channel!" And on and on.
In truth, most of these don't pony up for much original programming -- in fact, they mostly recycle old PBS and BBC programming. But the audience is clearly there, so I think the money would follow if there were no PBS to crib from. How much good original programming do they do these days? And isn't it telling what they show when they're trying to hook a hand in your pocket -- old Hollywood movies, for the most part.
she is right- the argument should not be whther it is biased or not, the argument should be WHY ARE WE FUNDING THIS AT ALL???
Peg's off base here.
"The Civil War" series would have sold on commercial TV easily and made zillions of dollars.
PBS(my next-door neighbor, btw)is unremittingly liberal. Period. And I resent funding its liberal worldview.
The United States does NOT need PBS anymore than it needs NPR(and I have friends who work there). They are all liberal. Big surprise, ay?
Why is that? IMO, it is due to the loss of her close friend in terrorist crash into the Pentagon (sorry, name escapes me right now) and the death of Ronald Reagan last year. Are we watching the same process that turned Barry Goldwater to mush late in his Senate service?
How about: "Trains and airlines should be subsidized by government. Because, without tax dollars, we would not get any decent transportation."
How about: "Software companies, like Microsoft, should be subsidized by government. Because, without tax dollars, we would not get any decent software."
Peggy’s argument is an argument for socialism. She should be ashamed.
Also, if PBS were “de-politicized” and got out of the News biz, and just focused on the Art and Culture that they do so well, what would we see? Arthur Miller’s “The Crucible” – a slam at McCarthy. Or, “The Vagina Monologues”. Or “Maya Angelou discusses the poetry of oppression”. Or a 13-part series on how Homosexuals built our civilization.
That stuff is just art and culture. Nothing political about it, right?
Art is in the eye of the beholder. If Peggy thinks tax dollars can fund “neutral” art then she does not understand the modern world very well.
I say PBS may not have outlived it's original purpose ~ as hard as it is to for some to believe, many homes do not have cable or satellite dishes and I think there is still a niche for a Public Broadcasting System.
My problem with the existing PBS is that it has morphed into a something that no longer seeks to fill it's original purpose and, because of this, I no longer support it thru donations nor do I want my tax dollars to supporting it.
On the contrary -- it was the rest of the GOP that turned to mush while Barry Goldwater kept to the principles of limited government.
True confessions time here -- I worked for the Oklahoma NPR affiliate while in college about 30 years ago. I got over it and made a full recovery.
A note for the scorebook of those wondering who is on first as regards PBS/NPR: PBS is the television side, NPR is the radio network, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is the umbrella funding source that vacuums the money in from Congress and, ultimately, the taxpayers.
I say we need to pay taxes to fund a 131st channel!
Wait! How did Howard Dean take over my computer!
ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When I scan the TV schedule I note the PBS channel is filled with stupid junk valuation shows for hours on end. Is this a good use of a state-owned TV channel ? Does the state need a TV channel ?
Nope ~ as I said in my post:
My problem with the existing PBS is that it has morphed into a something that no longer seeks to fill it's original purpose and, because of this, I no longer support it thru donations nor do I want my tax dollars to supporting it.
Sorry, Peggy. We do NOT need PBS, or NPR for that matter. I have just basic cable service and I get over 80 channels, some of them as interesting and informative as anything PBS pumps out.
All that PBS is useful for are the British Comedies which run the full 30 minutes and would get cut-up on broadcast stations.
"...many homes do not have cable or satellite dishes..."
My county has approximately 30,000 residents, around 8,000 homes. Our public library eats up $800,000. per year. It is mainly used by parents who don't want to ante up for an after school babysitter and instead rely on the rest of us taxpayers. I'm sure it's the same at most public libraries. If we took the money earmarked for PBS and the public libraries in this country, we could give every household in America FREE INTERNET AND FREE SATELLITE SERVICE! Better yet just let us keep our tax dollars, do away with all the useless government workers with their gravy train pay & benefits, and let us pay for our own internet and satellite.
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.