The government funds PBS, the carrier.
Truly funded, Allen would pay for it to be an infomercial on a commercial carrier.
The government funds PBS, the carrier.
Truly funded, Allen would pay for it to be an infomercial on a commercial carrier.
The government shouldn't be in the broadcasting business but the percentage of total costs paid by the taxpayers in this case is minor. Unless it has changed recently PBS gets less than half of their money from the taxpayers. So the money involved would be a fraction - I've heard 40% - of the general operating expenses of the stations for the hours during which the program is broadcast.
But if you want to argue that one dime means that you should have a say in it how far are you willing to take this? Can I use this argument to prevent any promotion of Wicca, Hinduism, or the New Age on PBS on church-state separation grounds?
If you're thinking of the value of the licenses and want to call that a government subsidy you might want to reconsider. If stations are seen as arms of the government that could be used to argue against any religious broadcasting.
The answer is to get government out of this completely.
But don't think that would stop evolution from being promoted on science programs. Paul Allen has plenty more money where that came from.
Come to think of it the Discovery Channel does more to promote evolution than anyone with their great dinosaur specials and they don't get dime one from the feds.