Quantcast

Public broadcasting outlets: abolish them?

Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/05/10 19:55:37
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Arguably, journalism began with a government organ: the Roman Senate Journal (Acta Diurna Senatus Romani).
These “Daily Doings” were the minutes of open sessions of the Senate of
Rome. First to publish these was Julius Caesar, in his first term as
senior consul. Today’s Cable/Satellite Public Affairs Networks descend,
at least in spirit, from the Roman Senate Journal. The reason: they
carry the same kind of content. (Had they existed in ancient Rome, they
would have set up cameras inside the Curia of the Senate, and detailed a
permanent crew to stick as close to Julius Caesar as his lictors and
clients normally did.)


Whenever government (usually royal) presses and independent presses
coexisted, they were at odds. The most tyrannical government either did
not allow private presses, or would tell them what they may or may not
print. That is why James Madison, in framing a Bill of Rights for the
Constitution, wrote in part:


Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom…of the press.


But Congress has made such laws. It created the Federal Communications Commission, one of several quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial
agencies. Under its first Chief Commissioner, Newton N. Minow, it set
up the Fairness Doctrine. Under it, no one could say anything for public
broadcast without giving “equal time” to others to respond. As a
result, no radio or television station would show anything
“controversial.” The “equal time” might be dead time, that no advertiser would sponsor. So for decades, the most common radio broadcast format was popular music.


Then President Ronald W. Reagan named several Commissioners who abolished the Fairness Doctrine. Now a station could offer talk,
however controversial, without worrying about “equal time.” Rush
Limbaugh was the first of many talk-show hosts who built their own
networks to broadcast their voices in hundreds of markets.



But the Corporation for Public Broadcasting still exists. It
funds two national networks: National Public Radio, and the Public
Broadcasting Service (formerly National Educational Television).
Technically, the government does not own the CPB. But it subsidizes it, as much as 450 million dollars a year.


The Simpson-Bowles Deficit Reduction Commission recommended defunding the CPB in their report. Government critics still remembered this a year later. But in the excitement of the mid-term election campaign, everyone forgot about that recommendation. Part of the reason is that the putative President disregarded the Simpson-Bowles report. Now Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Representative Doug Lamborn
(R-CO) have proposed bills, each in his own chamber of Congress, to
defund the CPB and its subsidiaries. The Media Research Center has taken up their cause.


CPB. Sponsorship and ownership are only two different degrees of
control. And that control pays dividends. The two organs that CPB funds
typically produce programs that give “The Party Line” from the government.

Read More: http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2012/05/10...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/05/10 19:58:03
    Yes
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +14
    By what right does the government own or sponsor media of any kind? And how can the government afford this when it owes $15 trillion?

    The CPB is the propaganda arm of the government. A free government does not have a propaganda arm.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Dan (Politicaly Incorrect) 2012/05/14 10:16:56
    Yes
    Dan (Politicaly Incorrect)
    +1
    It is nothing but a leftist propaganda tool funded by taxpayers money. It needs to be defunded.
  • wysiwis 2012/05/13 14:45:07
    Yes
    wysiwis
    +1
    I probably should have voted "undecided", but the government should be funding business. If NPR, or the CPB (or any other business for that matter) can't stand on their own, without government intervention, they, maybe they should just "close the door". NPR, and the CPB have proven to be nothing but liberal networks. NO network should be publicly funded.
  • Swampdog PWCM 2012/05/12 15:53:15
    Undecided
    Swampdog PWCM
    +1
    If they are self supporting fine, once they accept government funding they become Whores!
  • Libertarian 2012/05/11 23:07:12 (edited)
    Yes
    Libertarian
    +1
    Strictly a liberal organized networking.
  • Boo 2012/05/11 16:44:37
    Undecided
    Boo
    +1
    I would rather see subsidies to oil companies, mega food producers, etc. eliminated than public radio and television. While NPR is quite liberally slanted in their reporting, public television stations usually present unbiased programming selected by viewer ratings & contributions. I would hate to see PBS falter. NPR would not be such a loss.
  • Temlako... Boo 2012/05/11 17:20:30
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    What subsidies? What government checks does anyone cut to the companies and groups you named?
  • Boo Temlako... 2012/05/11 18:44:21
    Boo
    The oil company subsidies were recently voted on in Congress and continue! Mega food producers (corporate farms) receive payment NOT to grow certain crops. Where have you been? This isn't anything new, but all big issues because of the deficit now.
  • Temlako... Boo 2012/05/11 20:48:48
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    Yes, I recall that President Franklin D. Roosevelt did start paying farmers not to grow crops. That should stop.

    Now you still haven't shown that anyone DRAWS A GOVERNMENT CHECK and marks it PAY TO THE ORDER OF EXXON-MOBIL or any other such company. A tax deduction for the expense of exploration and equipment is not the same as cutting someone a check. You haven't even shown that the oil industry has any more tax deductions than has any other industry that spends a similar amount of money to bring in money.
  • Boo Temlako... 2012/05/11 21:10:53
    Boo
    It's still money in their pockets when they don't have to pay taxes! Not something we should be doing. How much do you think taxing oil companies like other industries would help the Federal budget?? Another ridiculous piece of crony legislation that responsible representatives would never have passed.
  • Temlako... Boo 2012/05/11 22:16:50
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +2
    The kind of taxes you mentioned, would not help. Not. At. All.

    If it's deficit reduction you want, then cut out all "specific welfare" services, and change the tax code to a consumption tax, so that everybody would pay a tax on new equipment, and everyone would pay a tax on new goods at the same rate.

    And what makes you think that the oil companies are NOT taxed "just like other industries"? Who has told you the lie that they get any special treatment?
  • Ron in ... Temlako... 2012/05/12 17:34:42
    Ron in Oregon
    +1
    You are right.
  • Boo Temlako... 2012/05/14 20:46:17
    Boo
    Per Consumers Union "big oil companies receive $4 billion in subsidies and tax breaks" and its been going on for decades. Maybe it seems too small a figure to you to make any difference, but its certainly a place to start. We need to make all cuts where it makes no sense to be giving breaks, such as this. At that rate, ending subsidies and tax breaks would add up. It currently just adds to the Federal deficit. If we refuse to cut anything that doesn't make a huge immediate impact, we'll never make any head way!
  • dave s 2012/05/11 16:31:11
    Yes
    dave  s
    +3
    there is no need for pbs. they now run commercial advertisements in addition to receiving millions from the govt., and if they cannot succeed per industry standards, they should close down.
  • jimmy dave s 2012/05/11 16:43:06
    jimmy
    +2
    TOTALLY AGREE
  • Boo dave s 2012/05/11 16:46:46
    Boo
    Most of their programming is commercial free. I do see ads for local and other PBS programs between programmed shows, but it is nowhere on the scale of commercial television and radio.
  • dave s Boo 2012/05/11 17:42:10
    dave  s
    +2
    i agree that they do not run as many commercials as for profit stations, but the fact that they take millions of dollars from taxpayers should eliminate any commercials on their station. don't get me wrong, i enjoy some of the programs on pbs, and I was happy to hear the new ceo say last year that he will work to ensure that the reporting gets back to being more neutral rather than so one-sided. I am waiting to see if this actually happens
  • **Bessie** 2012/05/11 16:28:28
    Yes
    **Bessie**
    +1
    A big waste of our money. So biased...nothing for the public about it!
  • Old Soldier 2012/05/11 15:48:47 (edited)
    No
    Old Soldier
    +2
    No, however, it is past time for the Public to abolish the liars and politicians from the Public broadcasting outlets, and that's a fact.
  • firebird 2012/05/11 15:25:07
    No
    firebird
    +1
    We really need them. That way it insures we are getting the possibility of some media info that is NOT EDITED ..
  • DJPanicDC 2012/05/11 14:00:10
    No
    DJPanicDC
    +1
    We need something besides corporate media
  • jimmy DJPanicDC 2012/05/11 16:44:50
    jimmy
    WE DON'T NEED PULBIC BROADCASTING TO BE BIAS AND AT THE PRESENT THATS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS
  • DJPanicDC jimmy 2012/05/11 17:50:23
    DJPanicDC
    Public Braodcasting is no more bias than Corprate broadcasting
  • jimmy DJPanicDC 2012/05/12 12:26:53
    jimmy
    +1
    thats true but corp. broadcasting isn't funded by the fed. govt.
  • DJPanicDC jimmy 2012/05/12 13:30:09
    DJPanicDC
    +1
    actually neither is NPR if you look into it 50% comes from members 14% from universities but only 6% comes from government and thats fedral and state combined
    PBS does get 40% of revenue from a fedtal state mix but do you realize The subsidies for oil and agriculture are more but we dpon't call them "government run"
    I'm for all media being available Listener supported (like Citizen Radio) Corprate (MSNBC, Fox) and Public (like BBC)
    It's all gonna have Bias but if you get enough views you can find the truthThe more
  • jimmy DJPanicDC 2012/05/13 12:50:41
    jimmy
    i can go along with that
  • Will Advocate of PHAET 2012/05/11 13:26:48
    No
    Will Advocate of  PHAET
    +1
    No, just stop paying for it.
  • Clyde 2012/05/11 12:53:41
    No
    Clyde
    +3
    No, I'm not in favor of abolishing anyone's speech, but I am also not in favor of funding one of America's versions of PRAVDA, so we should just cut off the public funding and let Soros pay for it if he wants to.
  • seadog6608PWCM 2012/05/11 12:51:57
  • DS in Oak Ridge NC 2012/05/11 12:24:46
    Yes
    DS in Oak Ridge NC
    +2
    PBS and NPR have been overtaken by events and expanded programming choices that were not foreseen in the days when AM Radio and a few Over-the-Air TV broadcasters and networks ruled the airwaves. Game over, and money wasted
  • Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA 2012/05/11 12:00:44
    Yes
    Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA
    +3
    Let is stand on its own merits, as Air America, and it will go away in a hurry. I get sick and tired of hearing my liberal friends tell me how PBS is 'unbiased' while, at the same time, telling me how that PBS said this and that about conservative policies.

    If it receives tax dollars we should be able to vote on whether or not to allow it on the air.
  • westernslope~PWCM~JLA 2012/05/11 07:19:38
    Yes
    westernslope~PWCM~JLA
    +2
    PBS has some great stuff .... should be able to sustain itself by now.
  • Pm 2012/05/11 05:57:15
    No
    Pm
    Of course not...Another typical lib against free speech?
  • Wolfman 2012/05/11 04:56:13
    Yes
    Wolfman
    +3
    Yes. Public broadcasting has become a shill for the Progressive movement. De-fund it.
  • Christopher Kirchen 2012/05/11 03:58:01
    No
    Christopher Kirchen
    Why?
  • sbtbill 2012/05/11 03:57:38
    No
    sbtbill
    I've often listened to public broadcasting it's a great service
  • Defend ... sbtbill 2012/05/11 10:31:23
    Defend Western Civlization
    +1
    then it should be able to survive without Tax Payer dollars
  • Boo Defend ... 2012/05/11 16:49:19
    Boo
    They still beg for private donations regularly!
  • Defend ... Boo 2012/05/12 00:30:12
    Defend Western Civlization
    +1
    yes they do
  • urwutuis 2012/05/11 03:42:48
    No
    urwutuis
    +1
    There are only 4 companies that control ALL of the US media and they're brainwashing America. All US media is run through the same filters and slanted in favor of the govt.

    That's how the wars were sold to an unsuspecting public. When they "reported" on the wars it was more like watching the Superbowl than the reality of war.
    From state of the art graphics to color commentary it was all packaged to sell to the public who ate it up as if it were sugar coated. Had the shown the real effects of war we would have been out of there in a month.
    There were hundreds of broadcasters embedded with troops who were only allowed to report what the military saw fit and only 3 independent reporters who were not handcuffed.

    Public media is the only place that can and does broadcast the things that aren't sensational enough for network news and the only one who comes close to unbiased information because they're not pressured by corporate advertisers.
    The public radio audience is consistently the most well informed of all news outlets.


    This is just more service reduction to get the working class to pay for tax breaks and the deficit.
  • western... urwutuis 2012/05/11 07:21:04 (edited)
    westernslope~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    NPR is bias a well .... it's been shown several times with their own actions.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/24 09:35:00

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals