Public television is not solely supported by viewers. They do receive some funding from the government and that funding is facing cuts and/or elimination.
Many on-line petitions are worthless, but those which are put together by well known organizations can have an impact.
If you enjoy public television, send funds to your public tv station.
I think it's proper for government to pool our collective resources and accomplish things that no individual or group would do on its own. If done properly [a HUGE if] this benefits society. If broadcasting (which is done via public air waves by the way) were only supported by viewers we'd all be watching nothing but FOX, and I think as a society we'd be poorer for it.
PBS is a parasitic leech on the monies of the U.S. taxpayer. :(-->
I don't pretend to know if any one of their *airings* is from da debul, or not -- but I do know that back in 1998 -- they lobbied congress very heavily to get the salary cap of $148,000 lifted from their executives.
Seems they weren't happy with that *paltry amount*, and felt *entitled* to have more given to them via the U.S. taxpayer money.
Fer instance -- Jim Lerher (I think that is how you spell his name), is not funded at all by PBS -- but rather by private corporations. PBS doesn't need to pay him at all, since his salary is already looked after.
PBS is on the *welfare line* -- looking for any and ever handout they can grab onto. Shoot -- just watch "THIS OLD HOUSE", and see how many corporate sponsors are willing to give money to that show alone.
Why they keep coming to the American Public for their annual *fund-raisers* is beyond me -- since they are getting most of their funding from congress anyway.
Why would a hard-line, left wing activist group like MoveOn be out there lobbying for NPR & PBS? Do we need our thinking cap on this one?
I for one enjoy much of their programming, but I'm regularly offended by some of their blatant, political spin-mongering, in particular on news & talk shows.
"News analyst" Daniel Schorr is but one example on NPR. He's no analyst. He writes his own talking points for Democrats, distributed over public radio.
It was one of the first rules of order of communists, nazis and other oppressive regimes to control and silence dissenting media and restrict the free flow of ideas
--did anyone think that this government with its track record wouldn't move in the same direction?
This government can't stand to have anyone disagree with it, or dare call it into question.
The Corporate media is already in the governments bed, calling screaming heads 'news', and contributing to the corporate/government powergrap.
Th Corporation for Public Broadcasting was created to give the public an alternative to corporate/government controlled media.
The exchange of free ideas has become too threatening to the far right ideologues, and almost looks a little like 'democracy'. Can't have that...
The best bet for the power hungry is to shut it down
I like some of the programs, and seriously dislike others... so what's new there?
Let the government pull the funding. The really good stuff will find a way to move to a different venue. The truly lousy stuff will die off and good riddence.
Anytime anyone starts to look at cutting funding for NPR and PBS, someone brings up Sesame Street, as if it's the only content of both NPR and PBS.
Since that's a show the majority of us watched as children, or our children watch(ed) it, it's got quite an emotional pull.
I think NPR should be treated just like any commercial radio network. If they have listeners, they make money. If they make money, they stay on the air. If they don't stay on the air, it's because they're not making money, and that's because they don't have listeners.
I don't think that I should have to help fund a propaganda machine. I don't think I should have to help fund a national network of radio stations whose viewpoints I generally disagree with.
That would be like forcing me to help fund the Democrat party, or the Ku Klux Klan, or The Way International, simply because they have a right to exist.
It's clear that MoveOn.org is hiding its real motives behind a very big bird, which is the very same thing they are giving to the public with this ridiculous pretense.
Doesn't it bother you, My3Senses, that MoveOn is disingenuous about a so-called campaign to save "Sesame Street, Reading Rainbow, and other children's shows?"
Why are they so shady about their true agenda? Here's my answer: They know the public wouldn't be so ready to "save" (underwrite) their unethical, political exploitation of public TV & radio with taxpayer funds.
You have more integrity than MoveOn's hacks, don't you?
Embedding their political messages in public TV & radio is not much different from Muslim terrorists who hide and fight in "holy" Mosques. Only the tactics differ. How sanctimonious they become when their sacred patch of real estate draws return fire.
"Great Satan, great Satan! How dare they firing bullets at the house of Allah!!"
"Those evil Republicans want to cancel Sesame Street!"
By the way. Who mentioned "the devil?" Is that your own allusion to some connection with the religious right? Didn't see it on MoveOn's website, but I didn't read too much of it either.
Recommended Posts
Zshot
Or better yet...
Public telivesion is viewer supported.
If you enjoy public television, send funds to your public tv station.
Or get scared into signing an online petition from a political action committee.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Online petitions are generally worth the paper they're printed on.
No offense to you, 3Cents.
The reason for this is probably just to get people aware and worked up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Public television is not solely supported by viewers. They do receive some funding from the government and that funding is facing cuts and/or elimination.
Many on-line petitions are worthless, but those which are put together by well known organizations can have an impact.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
My3Cents
I think it's proper for government to pool our collective resources and accomplish things that no individual or group would do on its own. If done properly [a HUGE if] this benefits society. If broadcasting (which is done via public air waves by the way) were only supported by viewers we'd all be watching nothing but FOX, and I think as a society we'd be poorer for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
PBS is a parasitic leech on the monies of the U.S. taxpayer.
:(-->
I don't pretend to know if any one of their *airings* is from da debul, or not -- but I do know that back in 1998 -- they lobbied congress very heavily to get the salary cap of $148,000 lifted from their executives.
Seems they weren't happy with that *paltry amount*, and felt *entitled* to have more given to them via the U.S. taxpayer money.
Fer instance -- Jim Lerher (I think that is how you spell his name), is not funded at all by PBS -- but rather by private corporations. PBS doesn't need to pay him at all, since his salary is already looked after.
PBS is on the *welfare line* -- looking for any and ever handout they can grab onto. Shoot -- just watch "THIS OLD HOUSE", and see how many corporate sponsors are willing to give money to that show alone.
Why they keep coming to the American Public for their annual *fund-raisers* is beyond me -- since they are getting most of their funding from congress anyway.
Here -- let me give you a link ---
PBS FUNDING.
And this was back in 1998. Why do I doubt the situation has gotten *better*
-->
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
As the link suggests --
"ALL THINGS CONSIDERED" -- they are a bad idea, indeed.
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
Why would a hard-line, left wing activist group like MoveOn be out there lobbying for NPR & PBS? Do we need our thinking cap on this one?
I for one enjoy much of their programming, but I'm regularly offended by some of their blatant, political spin-mongering, in particular on news & talk shows.
"News analyst" Daniel Schorr is but one example on NPR. He's no analyst. He writes his own talking points for Democrats, distributed over public radio.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Personally, I like PBS for the kid shows. IT is the ONLY stations that have children's shows that actually have any worth at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron G.
They need tax dollars and donations to keep that baggy eyed Bolshevik, Jim Lehrer, on the air.
The "news" and their idiotic kiddy indoctrination programs could never survive in the free marketplace of ideas.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
This programme has touched the lives of children (including adult ones) of the world.
It's educational - you cannot put a dollar value on that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
It was one of the first rules of order of communists, nazis and other oppressive regimes to control and silence dissenting media and restrict the free flow of ideas
--did anyone think that this government with its track record wouldn't move in the same direction?
This government can't stand to have anyone disagree with it, or dare call it into question.
The Corporate media is already in the governments bed, calling screaming heads 'news', and contributing to the corporate/government powergrap.
Th Corporation for Public Broadcasting was created to give the public an alternative to corporate/government controlled media.
The exchange of free ideas has become too threatening to the far right ideologues, and almost looks a little like 'democracy'. Can't have that...
The best bet for the power hungry is to shut it down
The next move will be to control the internet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheHighWay
I like some of the programs, and seriously dislike others... so what's new there?
Let the government pull the funding. The really good stuff will find a way to move to a different venue. The truly lousy stuff will die off and good riddence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
If this on-line petition existed to INFORM it would contain INFORMATION.
There's no link to proposed legislation (that stuff is ONLINE),
and no specifics, like a bill#, a date, or a specific quote from proposed
legislation.
THEREFORE, the people behind this DO NOT WANT you to look this up.
The absence of a specific date or year (like "the Spring 2006 session will be
reviewing this legislation"), allowing this to pose as a general bugbear,
something to link to year after year.
According to this webpage, the organizations running this
"primarily focus on education and advocacy on important national issues"
(You LIE and we see that right on this page)
"educates voters..."
(You LIE and we see that right on this page)
and
" PRIMARILY HELPS MEMBERS ELECT CANDIDATES WHO REFLECT OUR VALUES."
The operative phrase being
"HELP ELECT CANDIDATES".
Is this thing just to alarm?
Well, besides being devoid of content,
it says they will eliminate funding
"STARTING WITH 'SESAME STREET'..."
They will START by cutting funding to Sesame Street?
There are people waiting with paperwork, eager to cut the funding to
Sesame Street?
Am I really stupid enough to believe you if you say
"Yes, there are people eager to do that"?
============
Ok, so this is not about informing or stopping the cutting of funds.
What is it about?
Well, let's see what it does.
The ONLY way it provides for you to help AT ALL is to provide your personal
information and e-mail address.
Its disclaimer-if you keep reading-says
"We may, for example, provide compilations of petitions,
with your comments, to the President and legislators...
We may also make your comments, along with your city, state and country
available to the press and public online.
We will send you updates by e-mail."
So,
secondarily, it's to increase their mailing list.
Primarily, it's to separate your comments from their context and use them
for their own purposes.
Didn't we have enough of this in twi?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zshot
for lack of substantive information...
Trying to use emotional scare tactics...
Lets concider some facts...
Sesame Street has been on for decades.
Sesame Street has clothing and toy sales that are substansial.
All the good programs could find a new home on either cable or network TV.
If something is funded by the Government... Doesn't the government have control of that program? Of course they do!!!
If people want quality and educational TV, they should petition the various stations and actually watch the programs...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Anytime anyone starts to look at cutting funding for NPR and PBS, someone brings up Sesame Street, as if it's the only content of both NPR and PBS.
Since that's a show the majority of us watched as children, or our children watch(ed) it, it's got quite an emotional pull.
I think NPR should be treated just like any commercial radio network. If they have listeners, they make money. If they make money, they stay on the air. If they don't stay on the air, it's because they're not making money, and that's because they don't have listeners.
I don't think that I should have to help fund a propaganda machine. I don't think I should have to help fund a national network of radio stations whose viewpoints I generally disagree with.
That would be like forcing me to help fund the Democrat party, or the Ku Klux Klan, or The Way International, simply because they have a right to exist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
It's clear that MoveOn.org is hiding its real motives behind a very big bird, which is the very same thing they are giving to the public with this ridiculous pretense.
Doesn't it bother you, My3Senses, that MoveOn is disingenuous about a so-called campaign to save "Sesame Street, Reading Rainbow, and other children's shows?"
Why are they so shady about their true agenda? Here's my answer: They know the public wouldn't be so ready to "save" (underwrite) their unethical, political exploitation of public TV & radio with taxpayer funds.
You have more integrity than MoveOn's hacks, don't you?
Embedding their political messages in public TV & radio is not much different from Muslim terrorists who hide and fight in "holy" Mosques. Only the tactics differ. How sanctimonious they become when their sacred patch of real estate draws return fire.
"Great Satan, great Satan! How dare they firing bullets at the house of Allah!!"
"Those evil Republicans want to cancel Sesame Street!"
By the way. Who mentioned "the devil?" Is that your own allusion to some connection with the religious right? Didn't see it on MoveOn's website, but I didn't read too much of it either.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I forgot about the "devil" reference.
Actually, he's wrong.
Sesame Street IS evil.
At least, This guy is.... see?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.