Posted on 02/13/2018 8:06:26 AM PST by billorites
The president and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) warned Monday of the negative effects that President Trump's proposed budget cuts could have on public broadcasting.
Trump's budget proposes eliminating federal funding for the CPB over a two-year period. The budget has to be approved by Congress before it can take effect.
In a statement released Monday, Patricia Harrison said that the "elimination of funding to CPB would at first devastate, and then ultimately destroy public media's ability to provide early childhood content, life-saving emergency alerts, and public affairs programs."
"Public media benefits all Americans — whether they live in small towns, rural communities, or large urban areas," the statement said.
"Americans rely on public media for high-quality educational and informational programs that are proven to get their children ready to learn, and that provide opportunities for lifelong learning."
Harrison said that federal funding lets the organization continue to "tell America's changing story in a way that enhances civic engagement and connects us to on another."
"We will continue to raise awareness in Congress and the Administration about the valued content and services local public television and radio stations provide to their communities and the vital role federal funding plays in supporting them," Harrison said in the statement.
Paula Kerger, president and CEO of PBS, also issued a statement responding to the proposal to eliminate federal funding for public media.
“Public broadcasting has earned bipartisan Congressional support over the years thanks to the value we provide to taxpayers," Kerger said in the statement.
"PBS, our 350 member stations and our legions of local supporters will continue to remind leaders in Washington of the significant benefits the public receives in return for federal funding."
Kerger said PBS is focused on "providing high-quality content and universal public service to the American people, which is why we enjoy strong support in every region of the country, in both rural and urban areas, and across the political spectrum.”
Libs complain about state tv in communist countries but are all for state tv here. Loony.
A thousand other channels do just fine without government funding so why does PBS need it?
Little chance of defunding them with the GOP spending like drunken sailors.
There are hundreds of channels on my satellite TV, any one of which is more interesting and entertaining than PBS.
PBS runs telethons all through the year to “supplement” their budget, selling concert tickets, CD’s, Albums, DVD’s, etc., to the public.
Anything I can see on PBS, I can see on Youtube.
Those hundreds of other stations have to get out and sell ads and air time to make ends meet...the PBS wonks can do the same.
If “Americans” are so hooked and relying on Kermit and Big Bird, then any commercial station should be able to pick them up and make a programming fortune with them sending it out to “the kids”.
I ran small radio stations for years, never had the government pay for anything...but I made ends meet.
The PBS guy is just really worried about his phoney, baloney, job and not having to do any work to stay in the money.
Kill CPB and PBS...they’re a waste of time and money. Free those frequencies up for a commercial endeavor.
NPR - the Sominex of the airwaves
PBS has long outlived any reasonable argument for its funding. When I was a kid and we had at most nine channels available, a somewhat plausible (if thin) argument for non-commercial programming could be argued. But today, television has not only moved beyond the airwaves, it has also outgrown cable and moved onto other platforms. There is no longer a bar to accessing quality programming.
The last time I mentioned PBS to a liberal their best argument for it was that it airs British programs, and if it didn’t they would have to pay for DVDs or beg their library to get them. Yeah, I should subsidize your entertainment...not.
It should be cut 100%. No more free ride.
Tell them the money will go to Palestine, then laugh diabolically.
NPR can use Pateron and other crowd-sourcing to run. Sure better than using tax dollars and a small number of people that actually pledge cash.
PBS can use licensing fees, and use a greater cut of the merchandise sales from Sesame Street and other properties.
Fire ‘em.
So what did they do with all the money they made illegally selling their contributors lists to the Democratic party?
Shaka Laka!
I bet a private channel (”PBS Classics”) could be launched that would show “Firing Line”, “Masterpiece Theatre”, “Once Upon a Classic” (that had Bill Bixby as host), and other programs from the 1960s through the 1990s era that would be better than useless reruns of Lawrence Welk and other nonsense being trotted out.
I don’t know what it is for others here, but in my locale (that is served by WPBS in Watertown, NY), the programming is especially awful during the fundraising times.
Paula earns $632,233 a year at PBS.
I am in the wrong business
I still remember - with nausea - the way their simpering, brown-nosing ‘news casters’ would say, with a sigh:
PRESIDENT Clinton!
You could almost hear them dropping drawers and bending over or getting on their knees.
Cut public broadcasting totally out of the budget, please. I am still not tired of winning.
JoMa
ALL of their programming is a swipe at America.
The fact that Netflix is so successful with original programming shows there is now less need for PBS. That is unless PBS can get funding from license fees for owning a TV set—good luck with getting that passed through Congress!
All Americans benefit even if they don’t know they are getting the benefit. It’s kind of like White Privilege. All whites are racists even if they don’t know they are racist. You are racist in such deep-down, hidden, ingrained ways you don’t know you are racist.
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.