OT: U.S. Congress to axe PBS, NPR

BrianStanding wrote on 6/14/2005, 12:12 PM
There were some phony rumours to this effect circulating around the 'net a while back. This time, it's for real:

Billboard Radio Monitor

If the congressional subcommittee has its way, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (which funds the lion's share of all U.S. public television and radio) will cease to exist in 2 years.

Comments

beerandchips wrote on 6/14/2005, 12:48 PM
We are gearing up for a fight here in Southern Illinois. Well, maybe not a fight. But, a lot of phone calls and letters to Congressmen and Women.
johnmeyer wrote on 6/14/2005, 1:17 PM
Fight away if you want, but I really don't think this is going to be all that big a deal. If PBS gets defunded, they may still decide to continue using only viewer support. If they are smart, they will figure out how to do that via the Internet.

If defunding results in PBS going away, most of the programs that have an audience will find new homes on A&E, Bravo, History Channel, Discovery, etc. The news programs, with their current long format, may be more problematic, but my guess is that, given the large number of dedicated viewers, that one of the channels will pick it up. Siskell & Ebert started on PBS and moved to commercial, syndicated TV, so there is some precedent for this.
Coursedesign wrote on 6/14/2005, 1:37 PM
The only thing that is wrong is the reason for doing it.

CPB commissioned two polls, one done by a GOP polling firm that worked for the Bush-Cheney campaign, and one done by a Dem polling firm.

Excerpt from Center for Digital Democracy:
CPB board Chair Ken Tomlinson and his cronies have kept the results of two “National Public Opinion” surveys under wraps. These documents, buried in an annual report to Congress but neither released to the press nor shared with PBS and NPR, reveal that the overwhelming majority of the U.S. public is happy with PBS and NPR programming. Such conclusions are bad news for the GOP-led CPB board, which is pushing an agenda designed to reshape public broadcasting programming to suit their own ideological biases. Consequently, CPB has refused to make the poll data public.
PossibilityX wrote on 6/14/2005, 1:42 PM
Hey, maybe with all the money Congress will save us by killing the CPB, they'll be able to afford to fund another fifteen minutes in Iraq.
BrianStanding wrote on 6/14/2005, 2:30 PM
There seems to be a misperception out there that PBS has teams of video production crews on staff. In fact, most of the product PBS puts out is produced by independent producers: people like many of us.

Sure, some programs might get picked up by cable. But, the dirty little secret of cable is that only 70% or so (maybe less) of TV viewers have cable. The people who don't are likely to not be able to afford to pay for TV they used to get for free.

And besides, it's not "Antiques Road Show" or "Mystery" I'm worried about. I'm much more concerned about "P.O.V., " "Front Line" and "Independent Lens." If PBS goes, so will shows like this, and one more potential market for independent producers will disappear with it. That means that all your television will be produced by large corporate studios. That's bad for diverse television programming, bad for up and coming independents, and ultimately bad for democracy.
vitalforce2 wrote on 6/14/2005, 2:36 PM
As I told my wife after the November elections, about 51% of the country is going to have to get their brains beaten out for the next 4 years before they catch on...(and the rest of us with them).
Bob Greaves wrote on 6/14/2005, 2:48 PM
Yes and an added plus is that without PBS news in depth we will not know we should not have been their for an additional 15 minutes.
riredale wrote on 6/14/2005, 2:49 PM
There was a great article in this month's DV Magazine about how a guy got his documentary on many PBS stations. The process was not at all straightforward.

I'm all for dropping government sponsorship of PBS. I had to laugh when they ran commercials a couple of years ago, asking "If PBS doesn't do it, who will?" I'd reply, "Well, let's see... Discovery, A&E, Lifetime, Nickelodeon, History Channel..."

I'd agree with those who say there is more than a hint of a left-wing bias at PBS, but even if there weren't, it just is not needed any more. The information-delivery world is vastly different now than when PBS was first conceived.

One thing's for sure, however--just like any bureaucracy, PBS will fight tooth and nail to stay alive. It might turn out that it survives and prospers just on viewer contributions alone. I'm all for that.
David_Kuznicki wrote on 6/14/2005, 2:58 PM
I'm the Production Manager for the PBS affiliate in Toledo, Ohio.

For all of the talk about how PBS will survive, let me tell you-- we're currently in panic mode right now. The money coming in from the state really started to dry up about 3 years ago (about 20% of our staff got laid off-- needless to say, that hurt!), and the federal money has been dwindling since then. But this still comes as a terrific blow to us, so we're on pins and needles at the moment.

For the record, CPB does NOT provide the largest share of money for us, although that was true years ago (I think it's in the 35% range at the moment, but don't quote me on that). CPB encouraged everyone to break away from that model & for each station to be truly independent.

POV & Independent Lens are in trouble, no doubt about it. Those are, indeed, independent productions-- I know, as my boss is one of the 8 people on the selection commitee.

Frontline, however, is strongly backed by PBS as memory serves. Unless PBS goes under, I see a long life for that show.

David M. Kuznicki
Production Manager, WGTE-TV 30
busterkeaton wrote on 6/14/2005, 3:07 PM
David,

I made a comment before about regional flavor being lost if PBS didn't exist. I believe there are rules about providing local programming. Am I correct?
busterkeaton wrote on 6/14/2005, 3:20 PM
My opinion is that the $100 million figure is a bargaining position and will not survive the legislative process. Remember this is a House Panel and not "Congress."

When pollsters ask this question: "Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?" The trend has been increasingly disapprove. I would be very surprised if House and Senate Leadership would add this unpopular idea to their agenda at a time like this. The reason that they didn't defund PBS under Gingrich was that PBS is too popular and the opposition claimed Congress was trying to kil Big Bird.

My hunch on this, is that this is a rope-a-dope manuver or good-cop-bad-cop, where the argument will be is that all that is standing between PBS and the abyss is if Ken Tomlinson gets his way. So the funding will not get cut by $100 million and Tomlinson will gain more power inside PBS.

My theory only works if there is coordination between the White House and this House panel. It could be that a faction of the party genuinely wants to push this through. We shall see where it goes.
winrockpost wrote on 6/14/2005, 3:54 PM
Not that I want PBS to go, but i will say thaat in my market we have a pbs station with complete HD equipment , studios, staff and all the equipment I dream of having. Which is great except that they are competition to local houses like us, they hire out for commercials, rent gear , edit suites, etc, and as you can imagine their prices are pretty good.
johnmeyer wrote on 6/14/2005, 4:17 PM
in my market we have a pbs station with complete HD equipment

Nothing can beat state funding, eh?
JJKizak wrote on 6/14/2005, 4:46 PM
I don't have cable and can't have satellite because of the trees so when the absurd crap on the other channels is too prolific I switch to PBS and watch the mountains and the animals. If PBS goes I will have to watch "Son of Gulardi".

JJK
je@on wrote on 6/14/2005, 5:15 PM
Hate to say it but I think both PBS and NPR are past their prime. But maybe this is the next wave... http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/061405O.shtml
rextilleon wrote on 6/14/2005, 5:21 PM
I see this as another attempt of the radical right wing to silence any opposition. Unfortunately, in attempting to crush people like Moyers, they also catch children's programming, some fascinating apolitical documentary work, great cultural programming like Live From Lincoln Center---To tell you the truth, this right wing junta is frightening---I can't wait for the 2006 elections. Its time we sent these corporate fascists packing.
TheHappyFriar wrote on 6/14/2005, 6:16 PM
so this is the reward a PBS donator gets, huh? :)

Let's not forget that CPB is also the radio station sponcer too. I don't know about any of you but I like listening to my classical music on the radio.
rstein wrote on 6/14/2005, 6:23 PM
Spot on, Rex.

Bob.
johnmeyer wrote on 6/14/2005, 6:30 PM
I see this as another attempt of the radical right wing to silence any opposition.

Sure worked with Howard Dean, didn't it?
Coursedesign wrote on 6/14/2005, 8:45 PM
I see this as another attempt of the radical right wing to silence any opposition.

Sure worked with Howard Dean, didn't it?

So where's the radical right wing now that we really need them?

:O)
rmack350 wrote on 6/14/2005, 9:57 PM
Stations in major urban areas may be able to tread water but stations in more isolated areas may founder because much, much more of their funding is from the government. It would be a shame for these stations to go because those areas of the US largely get right wing media. There aren't many options except for NPR and PBS.

If they want something that's actually on the left they could channel money to Pacifica Radio.

Rob Mack
rmack350 wrote on 6/14/2005, 10:15 PM
My poor old father just can't stand the network programming any more but he will still watch PBS.

This all started for him when the reds were trying to impeach Clinton. He quit the Republican party over that and has just been grinding his teeth over the mainstream media's right-wing snugglefest. He swear's he'll never vote Republican again. They're certainly not friends of the elderly.

I suppose if he can't get the very moderate KCET then he'll just stop paying for the satellite service.

Rob Mack
rmack350 wrote on 6/14/2005, 10:23 PM
Now, although I am a fan of my PBS stations and usually end up there after channel surfing, I wouldn't go so far as to say that they report the news as thoroughly as you think.

Here's the example that's bugged me for a few years now. Remember the Japanese fishing vessel we sank while playing grab-ass with a sub off Hawaii? Did anyone, even PBS, mention that the boat was chartered by a Japanese technical high school and that it was full of high school aged kids?

Well, NHK sure reported it. It was more than a year before I heard that little tidbit mentioned on All Things Considered, and even then they kind of rushed by it. I found it really odd that I never heard that detail mentioned. Pretty insensitive to the nation of Japan, it seemed.

Rob Mack
rmack350 wrote on 6/14/2005, 10:26 PM
Sacramento does classical programming but KQED Radio in San Francisco is all news and talk.

Rob Mack