Skip to comments.NPR And PBS: Taxpayer Dollars Down The Drain
Posted on 05/17/2002 9:03:03 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
The Media Research Center and recently-born, "The Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly" made mention of a story by Lisa Myers of NBC News complaining that talk radio was dominated by conservatives. Both the Media Research Center and The Factor noted that Ms. Myers failed to mention National Public Radio in her analysis of talk radio. As anyone from either side of the political fence knows, NPR is by no means a bastion of conservative thought. Rather, NPR and its television cousin, PBS, nearly always present a liberal tone in any program dealing with politics or the issues of the day.
With this in mind, does it not trouble anyone else that it is our tax dollars that help fund both National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System? The annual report of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is the umbrella organization of both NPR and PBS, noted that it received federal appropriations of $300 million in 2000. Is this a necessary expense of government?
Some may argue that NPR and PBS provide benefits and programs that would not normally be produced by commercial radio or television networks. This argument has little merit, as television networks such as C-SPAN, CNBC, Disney, Nickelodeon, A&E, Discovery and National Geographic produce largely the same types of programs as PBS and without funding from the government.
Sesame Street, by far the best children's program on PBS and possibly among all others, could easily be produced profitably. Cookie Monster could even drink Nestle chocolate milk instead of chocolate milk with a plain carton, utilizing the trend among many programs of grabbing advertising dollars by using name-brand products on air.
The same holds true in regards to NPR. NPR programming consists nearly entirely of news, talk radio, classical music and some jazz music. Each of these programming types has managed to thrive without the help of government funding. NPR stations should have to compete against other local stations without the benefit of government subsidies. Simply put, there is nothing that NPR or PBS produces that cannot be produced profitably by for-profit radio and television stations.
Even for those individuals who live in rural areas of the U.S. and do not have cable or satellite television services, it is still quite easy to obtain weather and emergency information. An internet connection affords these individuals with virtual real-time access to this information. For those who do not have internet access, signals from radio stations can be picked up from hundreds of miles away and can provide these types of information.
The most disturbing aspect of public funding for NPR and PBS is that American taxpayers, regardless of their political persuasion, are forced to subsidize a radio and television network that, to put it mildly, slants to the left politically. Imagine if legislation was enacted that allocated $300 million of federal money to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or other programs with well-known conservative hosts. The Left would be outraged and they would have every right to be upset.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting needs to become a for-profit company that does not receive any significant federal funding. It can and should compete in the capitalistic marketplace of ideas among other communication companies. In NPR and PBS, essentially we have government controlled radio and television networks. Of course, this is not unique as countries such as Cuba and Iraq find government-owned networks to be quite convenient in passing along their messages. Let us urge our lawmakers to end federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and let the fate of its more than 1,000 radio and television stations be determined by their local markets.
To put it mildly indeed.
I have created a 3 hour radio show, where I respond to callers using only arm-pit farts and burping. So far this has not drawn much interest from our local commerical radio stations. Do I have a future on NPR?
Source: MBCNET Article
A friend of mine's son who is in the business reports that two of the three most expensive, modern, high-tech radio stations on the East coast belong to NPR, one in New York City and the other in Washington, D.C. Liberal propaganda on the public teat - that's what the Long March Through The Institutions was all about.
As I understand it, KQED here in the Bay Area has better, more expensive equipment than NBC,CBS,ABC combined.
I'm able to recieve two Public Broadcast TV signals and 4 (or is it 5) radio signals. Your tax dollars at work!
I have a little game play every time that Education Correspondent Claudio Sanchez comes on.
Almost without fail, he slips the word "Latino" into whatever his report is on.
The funny part is that, despite his impeccable English, his accent always shifts gears when he says "Latino".
Cheap thrills, I know. But I get a laugh out of it.
Although I have seen some left leaning programs on PBS, I have also seen some excellent unbiased shows. The recent 'The Commanding Heights' is just one example.
Yeah KQED TV has a gay pride month during which they highlight an endless parade of films on either how tough/or how great it is to be gay. Little more than tax funded aggrandizement...
PBS axed Bob Villa for his endorsement of Sears and Craftman Tools. While at the same time airing these thirty minute commercials for Sesame Street merchandise. Don't even get me started on ADM. What a bunch of clymers.
CUT THE FUNDING NOW!
PBS and NPR = Mockery of what the free press and journalism should be!
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.