Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stop propping up PBS - IT'S THAT TIME of year again.
Baltimore Sun ^ | 09/23/03 | Daniel Lyons

Posted on 09/23/2003 6:45:45 AM PDT by bedolido

Unsatisfied with its $390 million annual grant from Congress, PBS has begun interrupting Sesame Street reruns and documentaries on Armenian culture to continue its relentless pursuit for private donations. This year's efforts have been particularly intense, given the cost of complying with the Federal Communications Commission's requirement that stations convert to a digital broadcasting format. Congress provided an additional $48.7 million to aid that transition, but public broadcasting officials have estimated the conversion's total price tag at nearly $1.7 billion.

(Excerpt) Read more at sunspot.net ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: defundpbs; pbs; propping; stop
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 09/23/2003 6:45:46 AM PDT by bedolido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bedolido
With the advent of the Animal Channel, Food Channel, History channel, etc, etc, what's the point of having an alternative like PBS ?
2 posted on 09/23/2003 7:05:44 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (PBS--invented by LBJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
Just like the slacker who is admonished to find a real job, the Sesame Workshop should be admonished to find a real television network with which it can face competition. In fact, the world will not end if Big Bird & Company no longer grace the airwaves; other shows will follow.

PBS and NPR are examples of what I call media welfare, existing only by virtue of government largesse. They really have no relevance other than to make the socialist-minded feel good. News shows? They're all over. Classical music? A good college station will provide it.

It's time to end this racket and abolish the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
3 posted on 09/23/2003 7:06:20 AM PDT by Ebenezer (Strength and Honor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Sorry, I've always enjoyed Nova and Frontline -

Even if they are the products of the socialist ba*tards at PBS, they often represent the best of what TV can accomplish.

Flame away, but PBS does a better job presenting non commercial science, documentary and purely educational TV than any for profit network - even though it's run by Godless commies.

4 posted on 09/23/2003 7:13:06 AM PDT by xsrdx (Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
There's something about the narration and tone of Frontline that gets under my skin. I think the technique is called 'card-stacking' in the propaganda business.
5 posted on 09/23/2003 7:37:19 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: bedolido
PBS stations along the border would collapse if Canadian viewers didn't keep them afloat; some of them get about half their donations from Canadian viewers, and tailor their programming to a certain extent to them.

In some parts of Canada, PBS actually does a better job of presenting regional programming than our so-called public broadcaster, the CBC, as this 2000 Fraser Institute article will attest.

In a recent pledge drive, the PBS affiliate station KSPS in Spokane, Washington boasted that 50 percent of its non-government income comes from Alberta. (The station receives only 18 percent in federal grants; 82 percent is from private funders). Lest anyone argue that Albertan’s are overly generous when it comes to public broadcasting, a 1996 Angus Reid poll found that Albertans supported cutbacks to the CBC by a 2 to 1 margin. Further, only 22 percent of Albertans thought that the 1996 round of cuts went too far, while 21 percent said the CBC should be cut even further. This was the highest support for cuts to CBC in the country.

The PBS affiliate in Spokane has a number of programs that cater to the Alberta audience. They have a program called “Northwest Profiles” which “explores the four states and two Canadian provinces that make up the KSPS neighbourhood, discovering where to be and who to see... with Public Television.” In addition to the regular feature that often highlights Alberta and British Columbia, PBS offered four specials directed to Canadian audiences. The program “Over Canada... explores the changing seasons of many remote Canadian areas [which] are filmed and set to the music of some of the country’s most popular artists.” There are two series on the main cities in Alberta, “Remembering Calgary” and “Remembering Edmonton,” which “explore the history of the cities through films, photographs and memorabilia.” In addition, there is the program “Spirit of Alberta,” which “explores the scenery, landmarks, and towns that make Alberta what it is.”

A search of CBC’s programming website uncovered no Alberta-centred programming. There were no programs that were based in Alberta that were broadcast to the nation on a regular basis. Indeed, outside of local news, there were no Alberta-based programs aired in Alberta. Moreover, the CBC had no specials on Alberta on its programming schedule.

While Calgarians can receive local news coverage from CBC, it appears that very few Calgarians actually tune into the public broadcaster’s newscast. In the last three of Broadcast Bureau of Measurement’s “Top 20” lists for Calgary, the only CBC programs that made the list were the 1998 CFL Grey Cup game which Calgary won, and Hockey Night in Canada. No other CBC program was among the top 20 programs watched in Calgary, not even the local or national news. In contrast, the private local newscast from CFCN station is regularly among the top 10, and is often in first place.

Within CBC’s national newscasts, Albertans are poorly represented. In a 1996 study of the news agenda on CBC, we found that CBC’s news coverage of central Canada is more likely to be concerned with serious matters, whereas the news from Western Canada tends to be more sensational. In general, politics dominate the news agenda in Quebec, Ontario, and the Maritime provinces, while the news from BC and the Prairies emphasizes crime and catastrophes.

The PBS programs on Alberta provide affectionate looks at the region’s frontier past. On the other hand, CBC’s current news and public affairs programming emphasizes a “Wild West” image of the region. Rather than evoking the tradition of self-reliant homesteading in the province, CBC’s current affairs coverage reports on crime and catastrophes. While half of CBC’s attention to Ontario focused on politics or economics, just 37 percent of the broadcaster’s coverage of Alberta focused on these issues. Moreover, while CBC’s attention to crime in Ontario amounted to 12 percent of the that province’s coverage, 17 percent of Alberta’s coverage was on crime. This, despite the fact that Ontario has a higher crime rate than Alberta.

In contrast, CBC had five programs that originated in Atlantic Canada. Three of the programs are seen nationally, the teen show “Street Cents,” the comedy “This Hour has 22 Minutes,” and the children’s program “Theodore Tugboat.” In addition, the Atlantic provinces have regionally broadcast programs, including “Land and Sea,” and “In the Garden.” In case anyone believes that programming and support for CBC are unrelated, they need look no further than the Angus Reid poll mentioned above. In it, the strongest opposition to CBC cuts was found in Atlantic Canada, where 55 percent were opposed (25 percent strongly).

What is probably most ironic about the comparison of PBS and CBC coverage is that CBC is mandated by the 1991 Broadcast Act to provide Canadian regional programming. Section 3(1)(m) (ii) demands that CBC “reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences, while serving the special needs of those regions.” Despite the regulations requiring that it provide such service, CBC’s television programming is woefully inadequate in this respect. In contrast, PBS, which has no such mandate, but which does need to obtain funding from its viewers, provides at least some acknowledgement of the region. In this case, the market satisfies the goals of the Broadcast Act much more effectively than does government regulation.

That some PBS programming caters to Albertan audiences reflects the network’s high regard for Alberta viewers. That CBC provides no Alberta-focused programming reflects that network’s low regard for Alberta viewers. Although PBS is a public broadcaster, it requires voluntary contributions from its viewers, which means that it takes viewers’ interests into consideration when making its programming decisions. At the same time, CBC is funded primarily by involuntary tax dollars, which enables it to ignore the interests and needs of Albertans.

7 posted on 09/23/2003 8:21:38 AM PDT by Loyalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rrstar96
For the Record, Sesame Street is already on non PBS station... they have been on the NOGGIN network for a while now.

Personally I like our local PBS station here in Pittsburgh, they do a decent amount of regional and original programming you can't get on the local network affiliates or on national cable shows.

Not only is it where Mr. Rodger's was originated and produced for its entire life, but they have weekly local events and news coverage of things you can't find on the ultra hype show the blood stain commercial news, and make great documentaries about 1 a year on local topics.

Frankly I think QED/QEX here in Pittsburgh does a better job serving its community than any other TV station here. They truly do serve and put the community in the forefront are active in it and provide a great service to it. There isn't a commercial channel that even comes close, on broadcast or Cable TV here.
8 posted on 09/23/2003 8:32:28 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
The trouble is that the IRS makes us give every year.
9 posted on 09/23/2003 8:33:20 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Here's to Hillary's book sinking like the Clinton 2000 economy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
The reason PBS never releases RATINGS, is because RATINGS mean nothing to a station that doesn't SELL advertising... Ratings MEAN nothing, they are arbitrary numbering scale that is accepted by sellers and buyers of ad time to judge the worth of their advertising dollar nothing more...

Ratings have no meaning to a station who is not selling ad space. It would be a waste of time and energy for a station to track their ratings in this model and its a waste for arbitron to publish ratings for a channel that doesn't sell ads. Arbitron could publish PBS "ratings" tommorrow, but why would or should they? It would mean nothing to there customers.
10 posted on 09/23/2003 8:39:08 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
The NYT also does a better job of presenting scientific matters than any other fishwrap. Doesn't change the fact that they are godless Commies, too. Commies are notoriously good at science.
11 posted on 09/23/2003 8:43:53 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
PBS does a better job presenting non commercial science, documentary and purely educational TV than any for profit network

I do not mean this as a flame, but PBS is commercial TV. PBS airs just as many commercials as any other network. True, for now, PBS commercials are shorter in duration, but that too will change.

12 posted on 09/23/2003 8:45:04 AM PDT by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: StarFan; Dutchy; alisasny; Black Agnes; BobFromNJ; BUNNY2003; Cacique; Clemenza; Coleus; DKNY; ...
ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

13 posted on 09/23/2003 8:47:48 AM PDT by nutmeg ("The DemocRATic party...has been hijacked by a confederacy of gangsters..." - Pat Caddell, 11/27/00)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
While I do read the NYT for Tuesdays science section I've found that the Wall Street Journal many times has equal if not superior coverage. If only the WSJ would publish Safire, the Time's crossword puzzle, and the 'who got married' section they'd be perfect!
14 posted on 09/23/2003 8:53:12 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
do you have cable ?

I used to watch pbs a lot too. Now I watch animal planet, discovery channel's, history channel, the learning channel, cnbc, and fox news. PBS's time has come and gone. Let's take back the 390 million and give it to the tax payers. Let's auction off their spectrum and get billions back for the tax payer.
15 posted on 09/23/2003 9:09:33 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xsrdx
I agree. Most of my TV viewing is on PBS stations. No one can compete with Masterpiece Theatre or British sitcoms on WLIW. As for science-related programming and documentaries, Nova and Frontline are still the far ahead. I only have Broadcast-basic cable right now and can't stomach most network programming.
16 posted on 09/23/2003 9:15:45 AM PDT by stanz (Those who don't believe in evolution should go jump off the flat edge of the Earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
what if we freeped their phone banks, with calls, about the weather.

Back in my younger days, after having a few beers, we'd do this, call them when they are showing the phone bank on live TV, then watch the expressions of the answerers when they answer our call and hear something strange on the phone.
17 posted on 09/23/2003 9:30:20 AM PDT by Johnny Gage (Ever have a "salmon" day at work? You swim upstream all day, in the end you get screwed and die?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

To: stanz
"No one can compete with Masterpiece Theatre or British sitcoms on WLIW"

That is easy enough to fix. Someone out there can start "BritTV" cable station doing wall to wall British TV programming if the BBC sells shows to a comercial outfit. The format will be the same as PBS - keep the commericals at the top and bottom of the show not interrupting the story. Also if there is a two parter being shown, sell adds for the intermission. There are enough old and new BBC and British shows produced to fill years worth of programming.
19 posted on 09/23/2003 10:18:37 AM PDT by HRC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
do you have cable ?

LOL, yah, DirecTV Plus with sports, HBO/Starz. I get right around 1,000,000 channels, give or take a few.

Most are total cr*p. It's excruciatingly simple, on any give night, to find *NOTHING* on except Trading Spaces, and SpongeBob SquarePants.

I don't watch PBS much, but shows like Nova and Frontline, specifically, can be stunningly well done, unlike some of the fare on, for example, the Biography Channel, or Discovery Times.

If *my* tax dollars are involved, I'd rather they go to producing in depth educational and documentary programming, than funding needle exchanges or sending illegal aliens to Stanford.

20 posted on 09/23/2003 11:36:50 AM PDT by xsrdx (Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson