Posted on 03/13/2011 3:06:03 PM PDT by raccoonradio
(snip)I oppose federal funding of public radio and TV on First Amendment grounds: In my view, Congress has no legitimate authority or reason to control, influence, or subsidize any domestic media. But even those who think Congress does have such power should be able to recognize that public broadcasting would be healthier and happier if it broke its addiction to taxpayer dollars.
MoveOn.org, the left-wing pressure group, is promoting a petition that urges Congress to “protect NPR and PBS and guarantee them permanent funding, free from political meddling.’’ Yet political “meddling’’ is the inescapable price of taking political dollars. Conservatives would complain about NPR’s liberal tilt no matter where its funding came from, just as liberals complain about the conservative tilt of Fox News. But if NPR were no longer on the government dole, its political leanings would no longer be a congressional issue. The budget storms in Washington pose no threat to Fox because Fox doesn’t run on taxpayer money. They wouldn’t threaten NPR either — if only NPR would give up its subsidy.
The public broadcasting industry is waging an aggressive campaign to save its federal allowance...170MillionAmericans.org claims that “more than half of all Americans use public media each month’’ and exhorts supporters to “send a message to Washington that public broadcasting matters.’’
Wouldn’t it make more sense to exhort those millions of fans to dig into their own pockets, contribute directly, and eliminate the federal middleman?
After decades of mainlining public funds, NPR’s brass is understandably alarmed at the prospect of going without its drug. But addictions are unhealthy, and it is a blessing to get free of them. Ron Schiller was right: NPR would be better off if it gave up federal funding. A little tough love from Congress can finally make that happen.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Defund.
Wait a minute ... wait a goll darn minute!
Let’s think this through before we go and get all goosey about cutting funding for government TV and radio.
First, “we the people” are supposed to own government TV and radio. That means we own the equipment, offices, translators, and all the other stuff like cars, trucks, etc.
“We the people” are not just going to give this massive investment away ... instead the proper course would be to sell the assets.
Now whether to piece meal it or sell it as a whole, that needs a proper study. I can imagine there is benefit to selling whole, but just giving it to the people who operate it right now is not an option. They will have the opportunity to bid on the assets just like everybody else.
I further suggest that all proceeds be soley used to help pay down the out-of-control national debt.
As this “de-funding” debate goes on its merry course, I encourage you to make these points that the assets should be properly disposed.
“What NPR needs is some tough love”
Exactly - take their allowance away and let them earn their keep.
I rather doubt “subsidy” means “partial ownership.” It is more akin to “gift.” We have no asset ownership. It was federal subsidy of their ultra-lib viewpoints, pure and simple.
What NPR needs is to face the competitive forces of a free market.
Get the FCC to allow them to run ads: Car Talk, sponsored by Sears Auto Centers. Morning Edition, by Starbucks.
If you were a liberal and wanted to hear your views which would you choose?
—a low powered static filled Air America station on AM
—a 50,000 watt no static at all NPR outlet on FM
No wonder Air America failed. We already had a lib network and it’s taxpayer funded and commercial free (for now)
As a freeper commented on an earlier thread - PBS is a system where all are taxed to support an organization that only appeals to left wing elites - - taking from the poor and middle class and giving to the liberal, white, wealthy elites.
Actually what needs to happen is the Republicans who own the purse strings should fire everyone from NPR and put their own people in place.
This is what townships and counties do with things like concessions.
Run the network as a Conservative network. Since there will be redistricting that will benefit Republicans for years to come, take over the network.
What are the RATS going to do? When they complain, agree with them and sell to the highest bidder. The EIB might be interested.
Also, revoke their tax free status as non-profits.
Let the folks who want to see “Are You Being Served?” for the umpteenth time fund PBS. Why should my tax money be used to broadcast 35-year old British comedies over and over and over?
Doesn’t PBS make enough money from selling DVDs and Sesame Street junk?
* Defunded
Spot on. Along with NPR, revoke taxpayer funding for CPB, PBS and VOA (once headed by Commie apologist Fast Eddie Murrow). The commercially-driven free-market has served broadcasting well since the 1920's. We're not Canada and don't need anything akin to their government-run (and more often than not, totally boring) CBC.
>>>170MillionAmericans.org<<<
Our little local public radio station has been exhorting us for weeks now to refund NPR, including telling us to go to this website.
My response to everyone I talk to here: if they actually have 170 million listeners, NPR is therefore one of the most popular and powerful radio networks on Earth. Let’s say each listener contributed $10 every year. NPR would have an operating budget of $1.7 billion dollars - enough to run a radio network, I’d imagine.
Leave it to the left to come up with something this stupid. They’re trying to desperately show that they’re popular, and at the same time undermining their own argument.
I will actually miss our little station, but they hitched their wagon to a losing star.
And in answer to Jeff Jacoby - NPR doesn’t need tough love. They need to be served with divorce papers.
“I rather doubt “subsidy” means ‘partial ownership.’ It is more akin to “gift.” We have no asset ownership. It was federal subsidy of their ultra-lib viewpoints, pure and simple.”
I'm doing a bit more research on WHO owns PBS and NPR. I know that some states own their stations. It is similar to asking who owns Freddie and Fannie Mortgages.
One big clue as to ownership is to ask if the employees participate in a government sponsored health care plan and a government pension/retirement system. Who do they really work for?
When the government money starts drying up, you bet they (PBS/NPR) will claim independence.
There are many entities that are quasi-government like the Associations of Counties, Cities, Sheriffs, etc., that are wholly funded by tax dollars, yet claim independence, yet are included the the government health and retirement systems.
Just because PBS/NPR says they are not government and the taxpayers only subsidize and gift money to them ... I disagree. We the people paid for the assets ... we the people own it.
I've been in appropriation hearings where the local PBS was presenting their BUDGET requests, including equipment upgrades and the like.
Let's sell the PBS/NPR assets and apply all the proceeds to helping retire the national debt.
A recent column by Kansas City Star opinion writer Sanchez piece, “’Gotcha’ news goes too far,” castigating O’Keefe was simply more sanctimonious drivel of a leftist embarrassed that more of her media cohorts had been outed, something now occurring with increasing frequency.
If Sanchez REALLY thinks these NPR “progressives” (the modern euphemism for socialists or communists who have not yet acquired firearms) would have admitted to their bias in a more formal reportorial setting, she must not get out much. If she did, she’d know that courts have repeatedly ruled that cops can use all manner of deception in securing evidence and confessions. Can you say “undercover?”
Ahh, say you, there’s a difference. Yes there is.
When cops do this, they’re attempting to solve crimes against individuals and property.
When folks like O’Keefe do this, he’s attempting to expose far more subtle crimes by those seeking to overturn an entire way of life, i.e. America, the idea left us by the Founders.
I’m one of those nut jobs who believes that saving America is more important than the vital work being done by the cops.
Forcing conservatives to pay for anti-conservative propaganda: PRICELESS!
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.