Lassoing PBS

The Pittsburgh Tribune Review ^ | 04/30/05 | Editorial

[smoothsailing]

Lassoing PBS

Saturday, April 30, 2005

Liberals are moaning that the Bush administration is turning public television sharply toward the right. It would be difficult to detect such a turn if public television had not previously and decidedly headed left.

Liberal Bill Moyers is gone from Public Broadcasting Service stations. Kathleen Cox, the former chief executive of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, was replaced by Ken Ferree, a Republican.

In addition, PBS, the private nonprofit owned and operated by the nation's 349 public television stations, was told by the corporation it must commit to "objectivity and balance" as a condition of funding.

The corporation was established in 1967 as a conduit for federal money and shield between public broadcasters -- such as WQED in Pittsburgh - and lawmakers whose votes of taxpayer dollars help fund PBS programming.

PBS' lawyer grouses that the pledge of objectivity might violate the First Amendment. But that would be an icing on the cake of unconstitutionality.

Congress requires taxpayers to subsidize speech with which they may not agree -- a violation of the First Amendment. Even if some do agree, would they spend money to say it? The First Amendment also conveys a right to choose silence.

If the conservatives have won,what is the prize?

© 2004 by The Tribune-Review Publishing Co.

[highlander_UW]

I really don't care if PBS became perfectly balanced or even right leaning (although there seems no risk of that!). The conditions that led to it's formation are no longer valid. When there was only 3 primary broadcast channels it was perhaps reasonable to establish an independent (supposedly) source of information, but with the advent of cable TV and over 100 channels to chose from PBS has become a dinosaur long overdue it's tar pit ending.

[iopscusa]

Turn about is fair play, it would take about 10 years of Conservative broadcasting on PBS to even begin to balance the scales!

[skip_intro]

There's conservative broadcasting on PBS? I mean blatant conservative broadcasting, like Bill Moyer's blatant left wing broadcasting.

Where?

[Bullish]

Just defund the whole thing. If it's worth more then a bucket of warm spit, which I doubt, then it can survive on it's own merit.

That's the capitalist, American way.

[FreeKeys]

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."
– Thomas Jefferson, Statute of Religious Freedom, 1779.

...and all taxes are ultimately collected at gunpoint.

[smoothsailing]

PBS should not be subsidised by the taxpayers.

Defund it and it can do whatever it wants.

[Maceman]

If it's worth more then a bucket of warm spit, which I doubt, then it can survive on it's own merit.

As much money as I spent on Barney and Sesame Street toys and other merchandise when my kid was 2 years old, I would think Barney and Big Bird could fund the entire PBS budget and then some out of their pocket change (or Big Bird's "nest egg.")

The late Boston talk show icon Jerry Williams, referring to all the fundraisers, called PBS "the Home Shopping Network for Yuppies."

[traderrob6]

I guarantee, if they would become more fair their viewership would surge.

[Vince Ferrer]

I would like to defund it, so lets make it as "right wing" as possible. Given the choice between a conservative PBS and a defunded PBS, Democrats will choose to help us defund it.

[MoralSense]

b

[smoothsailing]

Good point. The dems would actually be in favor of cutting spending.

It would kill them.

[EQAndyBuzz]

"I guarantee, if they would become more fair their viewership would surge."

As would the Washington Post, NY Times and the MSM.

Marxist ideology takes precedence over Capitalism. Like the Soviet Union, the MSM is coming to its end.

[moose2004]

PBS and the BBC, two liberal, conservative bashing bastions funded by public tax Dollars and Pounds.

[ViLaLuz]

Get rid of PBS and NPR. Why should our money pay for that?

[WhiteGuy]

Yeah,

The gop talked big about zeroing out the waste that is pbs.

That was 10 years ago.

I stopped believing them a while ago.

[Hank Rearden]

"If PBS doesn't do it, who will?"

how about:

FreeRepublic.com
The Internet
Fox News Channel
C-SPAN
C-SPAN2
C-SPAN3
History Channel
A&E
National Geographic Channel
Discovery Channel
The Learning Channel
House&Garden TV
CNN
CNN Headline News
CNBC
MSNBC
CNNfn
Disney Channel
Bravo
Spike
Wings
HBO
Showtime
Starz
IFC
AMC
Turner Classic Movies
Nickelodeon
USA Network
Cartoon Channel
Comedy Central
Sci-Fi Channel
Lifetime
ABC Family
TechTV
ESPN
ESPN2
Fox SportsNet
the lamestream See-B.S., ABS, NBS
crummy local stations
even crap like MTV and VH1

and many more . . . .

[smoothsailing]

You left out the CARWAX CHANNEL. :)

[Hank Rearden]

You left out the CARWAX CHANNEL. :)

Intentionally. If they run that Peter Paul 'n Mary fundraising special one more time, I'm gonna puke.

[highlander_UW]

PBS should not be subsidised by the taxpayers. Defund it and it can do whatever it wants.

I agree entirely. It may have had a day when it had value (although I'm not 100% convinced), but that day is long gone.