Public broadcasting outlets: abolish them?

Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/05/10 19:55:37
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
    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

  • urwutuis western... 2012/05/11 09:00:39
    Yes, I agree. but it seems a little easier to read between the lines.
    It's not like you can take what they say at face value by any means.
    All of the media is run by the same people and designed to keep us distracted and divided.

    Do you remember when they were showing all the war clips? I thought it was a joke. . It was like watching the Superbowl, right down to state of the art graphics and color commentary. If they had shown the reality of war we would have been out in a month.

    We live in the largest, most prolific propaganda machine on the planet and it's not easy to resist. It's in your face 24-7 from the day you're born.
    I know the media is trying to shape opinion to allow continued corporate control. That's why I'm suspect of everything they say and it's the same with govt.
    I expect them to be lying and they haven't let me down.
  • Defend ... urwutuis 2012/05/11 10:32:30
    Defend Western Civlization
    so next your gonna say the Jews control America?
  • urwutuis Defend ... 2012/05/11 22:01:06
    No, corporations control America. Jews know where to find good Chinese food
  • Temlako... urwutuis 2012/05/11 22:17:32
    Oh, so it's *that* again. Are you going to start quoting "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" here? Everyone who cares to know, knows that those are a fraud.
  • Defend ... Temlako... 2012/05/12 00:30:48
  • urwutuis Temlako... 2012/05/12 16:48:54
    What the hell are you talking about? What's it again and what the hell does Hitler's BS justification have to do with anything I said?
    You're just looking for a fight. Are you guys a tag team or what?
  • TruBluTopaz 2012/05/11 03:18:01
    If there is a true audience for what PBS and NPR present, they will pay for it. It should not be subsidized as there are plenty of other channels that do just as good a job or better with the same material. I can only stand so much Celtic Women and Celtic Thunder.
  • SoCalEx-Dem 2012/05/11 02:13:01
  • U-Dog 2012/05/11 01:42:54
    In a perfect free civil society it would be just as illegal for government to collect taxes to pay for such things as it is for an individual to steal someone else's movie tickets.

    Such entities would either support themselves from the fees they could charge the public or they would seek charity but they have no more moral right to tax payer money than a street thug has to an honest man's wallet.

    ...and You can rest assured that you won't find any of these public minded altruist artists, intellectual types talking and or singing about the real victims of these collectivist crimes.
  • sbtbill U-Dog 2012/05/11 03:58:56
    Paying taxes is morally correct. Check it out it's in the Bible.
  • U-Dog sbtbill 2012/05/11 08:14:51 (edited)
    The people -- who form the government -- agreeing to Collectively fund a federal SERVANT to carry out LIMITED contractual constitutional duties is what is moral. A bunch of Al Capone style mobsters turned top down nannies progressively breaking that contract and ignoring the individual peoples rights and property to serve their own goals in the name of some fuzzy public good is nothing but pure criminality run a muck.

    Check with the founders!

    "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government,
    so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution
    so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."
    - Thomas Jefferson
  • Defend ... U-Dog 2012/05/11 10:33:07
    Defend Western Civlization
  • Defend ... sbtbill 2012/05/11 10:33:40
    Defend Western Civlization
    then when is the liberal leader warren buffet gonna pay the taxes he owes then?
  • The Black Dagger 2012/05/11 01:39:27
    The Black Dagger
    At the very least, abolish their public funding.
  • Elaine Magliacane 2012/05/11 01:35:18
    Elaine Magliacane
    WE ARE BROKE.... no taxpayers dollars should support such liberal drivel as NPR.
  • lee 2012/05/11 01:17:02
    give them MORE money so they are not dependent on their corporate sponsors like ADM which won't let them say anything bad about Monsanto.
  • Defend ... lee 2012/05/11 10:34:22
    Defend Western Civlization
    well give them your money
  • lee Defend ... 2012/05/13 02:02:02
    but i want to make YOU give them yours

    its more fun that way.
  • Defend ... lee 2012/05/13 02:11:52
    Defend Western Civlization
    and there you have it folks from the Mouth if a Liberal Progressive Democrat obama voter
  • Gregaj7 2012/05/11 00:49:09
    Denver's KBDI used to have regular showings of "America: From Freedom To Fascism" by Aaron Russo.
  • Walt 2012/05/11 00:41:02
    It's unclear why liberals think the rest of us are obligated to pay for their programming. Conservatives do not have dedicated networks being paid for at public expense.
  • Defend ... Walt 2012/05/11 10:34:46
    Defend Western Civlization
  • *K'eim*h3reg' *Peh2u *Meg' 2012/05/11 00:36:37
    *K'eim*h3reg' *Peh2u *Meg'
    Waste of money. Power in the wrong hands. Boring as watching paint dry. Three good reasons.
  • *K'eim*... *K'eim*... 2012/05/11 00:46:59
    *K'eim*h3reg' *Peh2u *Meg'
    Oh, and the Roman Senate was not technically a part of the Roman government. It was an aristocratic/oligarchic club. They had no power to enforce law (that is not to say they didn't and couldn't have political or financial sway). But it was considered wise and prudent to follow their advice. These journals were originally kept secret, until Julius Caesar...whats the word...nationalized them. Therefore, journalism was born of the public sector pillaging the private sector. And it continues so today in the form of public broadcasting.
  • sbtbill *K'eim*... 2012/05/11 04:12:04
    You are incorrect under the Republic the Roman Senate was the main governing body of the Roman state. It elected the counsuls, appointed the provincial governors, and controlled the military. The Plebs had the Tribunes and their own assembly but it was not very powerful. The Tribunes mainly had the right to veto specific acts. They were different from military tribunes.

    Starting about 150 BC the Senate lost power to military leaders. Marius was basically the first but didn't end Senate power. Pompey was another. He originally took on Caesar as an Allie. Caesar defeated him and took over control of the Senate but did not end by what was by then the fiction of Senate rule. Augustus Caesar succeeded Julius and governed through authoritas. Over the next 100 years Rome became a military dictatorship. The last attempt at a resurgence of Senatorial control was in 64 AD.
  • goatman112003 2012/05/10 23:59:06
    For the simple reason, they are a propaganda arm of the left in many ways and the original purpose has gone to the wayside.
  • Tennessee3501 2012/05/10 23:58:52
    Let them stand on their own two feet. No public funding! They fired Juan Williams who had worked for NPR! If Congress wants to fund the commies, give an equal amount to Conservative talk show radio.
  • JT For Political Reform 2012/05/10 23:30:09
    JT For Political Reform
    They are past their due date.
  • bob 2012/05/10 23:06:08
    not abolish just stop all government funding it is just a Liberal propaganda Network they cannot operate in the Free market they fail like Air America people don't want to listen to their crap, So they why should the Tax payers fund their socialist communist lies.
  • mike j 2012/05/10 22:51:35
    mike j
    I was just talking this morning with a Grade School Teacher and she was telling me the programming delivered by our local PBS was neither helpful to children or adults as far as education goes , that hour upon hour goes by and it is low ball entertainment stuff that has little educational value for children or adults and no instructional material for young couples to help them with home or job skills. Her discussion with me even included the major shows on our local PBS had little educational value and no real literary value and have been run and rerun to the point of boredom on the part of the viewer. So my conclusion as we as taxpayers are not getting value from PBS and those TV stations might as well be cut loose to stand as normal commercial TV stations and sink or swim in the commercial market place.
  • Icono1 2012/05/10 22:49:20
    I say no for the simple reason they provide an insight into 'what' our current government is thinking and doing. True that most of their political opinions are biased to left wing ideals; yet one only has to listen and discern as to what is the truth and what is propaganda. To that end, they are a very useful tool.
  • Temlako... Icono1 2012/05/11 01:33:28
    I don't care to pay for any of it.
  • Icono1 Temlako... 2012/05/11 19:19:02
  • stevmackey 2012/05/10 22:39:10
    Unlike Fox News they are not fair or balanced. They always attack the conservative point of view. As they said this was not the format under which they were started. Any political broadcast shows had to give equal time to the other view. They have never done this in recent times. So, they have violated their charter.
    If you noticed the big networks always had a time for rebuttal.
  • Prairie Wind 2012/05/10 22:27:09
    Prairie Wind
    Take it with a dash of "Sea Salt" and "Lemon Pepper" ... then consider if what you're hearing is worthy of your financial support.
  • ray 2012/05/10 22:16:47 (edited)
    Public Radio , does offer much information , reports, exposure to culture that is simply not available on any other broadcast medium .
    There is no doubt about at times it is definitely the Socialist station.
    PBS and NPR are probably 85% Valuable public Service and 15% left wing speech.
    The dollar value of the 80% is what is hard to gauge , as when it is gone there is nothing to replace it .
    Have to lean 80 / 20 in favor of it is a worthwhile investment .
  • Temlako... ray 2012/05/10 22:39:18
    I disagree. I put it at 80-20 the other way. Or even 100-0.
  • Defend ... ray 2012/05/11 10:35:57
    Defend Western Civlization
    well then give them your money
  • doofiegirl BTO-t- BCRA-F ~... 2012/05/10 21:59:11
    doofiegirl  BTO-t- BCRA-F ~PWCM~
    Might as well. Not good for much of anything anymore anyway!
  • Jeremiah 2012/05/10 21:57:37
    CPB seems to be considered a threat to the conservatives, but it provides a valuable service to millions of American viewers and listeners. Through NPR and PBS, it offers quality programming not available on any other medium.

    A recent concert in New York's Central Park by Andrea Bocelli is a good example. The program was 2 1/2 hours long and had no commercials, except for occasional appeals for donations. Only those in Central Park that evening and NPR viewers were able partake in this experience.

    This is the sort of thing conservatives want to get rid of? I realize it means less money available for more tax cuts for billionaires, but many of us think it is worth it.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/07 04:05:54

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals