Posted on 06/25/2005 10:35:31 PM PDT by SmithL
WASHINGTON - It's home to Big Bird, Arthur, Bill Moyers and Jim Lehrer - and not normally a source of great controversy. But these days, PBS finds itself at the center of a political uproar over whether public television promotes a liberal agenda.
The man alleging the bias is Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican who heads the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. CPB provides federal funding to public broadcasters including the Public Broadcasting Service, which receives about 15 percent of its operating budget, or $48.5 million, from the corporation.
PBS has denied the charges of a liberal slant. But following the criticism, it moved this month to hire an ombudsman to review its programs and announced a revision of its editorial practices. Among them: a requirement that commentary and opinion be labeled as such.
Democratic lawmakers worry that Tomlinson is angling to turn public TV into a spokesman for the GOP - contrary to the mission of the corporation, which Congress set up in 1967 to shield public broadcasting from political influence.
As CPB chairman, Tomlinson has failed miserably, says Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., a longtime supporter of public broadcasting.
"What Mr. Tomlinson has been doing is very destructive to the interests of public broadcasting," Dorgan said. "The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be better off with a fresh start with somebody who is not spending their time claiming that the public broadcasting system is unfair."
Adding to the Democrats' unease: the new president of the corporation, Patricia S. Harrison. She was co-chair of the Republican National Committee from 1997 to 2001.
Harrison was named to the post Thursday, the same day that the House voted to rescind proposed cuts of $100 million to the corporation's budget for next year.
PBS says the proposed cuts would have severely impacted "Sesame Street," "Clifford," "Between the Lions" and other popular children's shows.
"That federal funding really acts as a spark plug that causes all of this other money to be attracted," said John F. Wilson, senior vice president of programming at PBS.
Even with Thursday's action, PBS still might end up with less money than in its current budget. The legislation would eliminate $23 million for the Ready-to-Learn program, which subsidizes children's educational programming.
Public broadcasting advocates say $82 million is set to be cut from satellite upgrades and a program to help public TV stations switch to digital technology.
Critics scoff at the notion that public broadcasting can't survive without the federal help.
"These stations are fat and happy. They're sitting on millions, if not billions of dollars, in property and equipment and very large salaries. These people are not going anywhere," said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the Media Research Center, a conservative watchdog group.
Graham says broadcasters could make up the money with alternative sources of revenue. Donations could also make up some of the difference, says Graham.
More than a dozen senators sent a letter to President Bush this week and urged him to fire CPB's Tomlinson because he "seriously undermines the credibility" of public broadcasting.
The chairman said he had no intention of stepping down. The White House also expressed support for him.
Tomlinson has specifically targeted Bill Moyers, complaining that his work is not balanced. After protests from Congress, the corporation's inspector general launched an investigation into Tomlinson's hiring of a consultant to keep track of the political leanings of the guests on "Now with Bill Moyers."
Well put. May they be reduced to pushing stolen shopping carts and picking up beer cans.
PBS has had an openly lib bias in their programing for years. Anyone who turns it on figures that out after just a few minutes of watching it. It's laughable that they try to say they're not.
How they can claim with a straight face to be fair and balanced is beyond me. LOL!!
Just like Ted Kennedy!
I really don't agree with subsidizing cable. It's welfare for the cable companies, and it's welfare for the people getting cable.
However, I like the fact that PBS isn't simply an educational programming channel either. The fact that they don't have to rely on advertising and sponsorships means that they can take some chances on programming, and ideally it should cost less for a show to get themselves on PBS as compared to another channel. Ideally, this means that we would get more creative ideas out there.
Of course, you can always argue that the free market will promote good creative ideas, but considering the glut of reality TV we have right now...
here's the thing I don't understand --I called Sesame Street Workshop because there were so many repeats. They only make less than 26 new shows a year now. There's only one month of new shows a year. So if they are selling cd's and tapes, plus all the products, how is it they need to be publicly funded at all?
They must get their budgeting plans from school administrators.
I just took a look at one of local PBS station's programming for the next few hours. It sure looks like a liberal agenda to me.
1:30
am
Castro
(A KQED Production)
"The Castro" chronicles the saga of how a quiet, working-class San Francisco neighborhood of European immigrants gave way to a new community that has become an international symbol of gay liberation. Combining interviews with witnesses to the transformation, archival materials, and contemporary footage, the program captures the spirit and vitality of the Castro district and sheds light on why the rather modest Eureka Valley neighborhood became the world's first "gay hometown."
duration: 1:26:23 CC STEREO TVPG-L
3:00
am
Flowers from the Heartland
On February 12, 2004 the City and County of San Francisco began issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples. Just days after the first wedding was performed, the flowers started arriving. Flowers sent from the very heart of America, the Midwest. Flowers sent with love and support and addressed simply "To Any Loving Couple." Experience again the joy of that magical month when over 4000 gay and lesbian couples were united in matrimony, and meet some of the people from the Heartland who together with thousands of others across the country and around the world sent Flowers from the Heartland. By Peter Daulton.
duration: 24:55 CC STEREO TVG
I have the entire collection of Blackadder on VHS and Mr.Bean on DVD. I love Rowan Atkinson.
I liked Ballykissangel when it was on. The even had Monty Python on regularly some years ago-- now I have some of my own and can rent them at Blockbuster....
Out here in central PA, we have had a regular Sat night PBS routine for years-- This Old House (where rich yuppies get to have their beautiful old homes redone by PBS for free while they have like 0-1 kids to complicate their luxury), Lawrence Welk (a staple for the provincial PA Dutch music lover) and a series of britcoms (the only ones worth watching that they keep on are Keep Up Appearances and As Time Goes By.... the rest are just stupid....
they keep asking for money, for what? So they can produce a useless "Central PA" magazine which says absoutely nothing and fund public school programs (and musn't forget the large executive salaries of the brainchilds running the palce).
I would really like to the the budget for our area, how much money they are getting in goes to other things besides acutal programming ("you are helping pay for programming like this" goes the shpiel).
They DO sell advertising. Sort of.
When I was a kid, there was NO advertising (late '60's early 70's) on PBS. None.
Then they started mentioning "sponsors"-- names of bigwig corportations that get tax write-offs for supporting PBS and charitable trusts that get tax write-offs for supporting PBS.
THEN they started with sort-of ads-- naming the sponsor and a little something about their company..
NOW they are read ads. You hear at least 10-15 seconds or up to 30 seconds about Porter Cable or TJ Waterhouse or whatever. They are COMMERCIALS..
The only difference is that they are paid for indirectly, by donations from the companies to PBS, who in turn give them nice little commericals for their "gift".
I like Red Green too.
This is behind the curve, considering that Congress just authorized restoring $100 mil in funding to PBS. The ever reliable Republican Congress that is. Blackbird.
I worked for a contractor that listened to NPR. One episode was a review of heavily slanted conservative opinions in MSM and NPR "What should we do about it?"
Please! I almost ran the skil-saw through the radio.
Pee BS
I show no mercy when it comes to exposing liberal bias.
AP circling the waggons... note:"claims"
"alegations"
All BS, PBS IS LEFT WING. PBS IS SLANTED.
There is ZERO reason to fund PBS. Shows like sesamee street are funded independently of gov money with all the donation groveling they do.
...well, if the boot fits, wear it. PBS is a liberal cesspit.
May I reccommend www.deepdiscountdvd.com for all your Telly boxset needs? They even have a 20% off sale around Thanksgiving.
And as for support, just check out the underwriters list. That's why you see those "commercials" before and after each program. If they're going to advertise and sell affiliated products, and there are tons of those{check out the toy department}, they can cough up more money. PBS is publicly owned in name only. I would be curious to see an accounting of all monies.
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.