Comments on: US Public Broadcasting in Danger This Week – Really

By: think again - Ideascape is advanture

think again - Ideascape is advanture — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 12:38:17 +0000

One Del.icio.us Ideascape
A week or so ago, I was exploring del.icio.us to learn what was new in the blogosphere. I usually start with my own tags (bookmarking, folksonomy, taxonomy, content management, knowledge management, idea management, enterprise blogging, innovation, etc.)

By: Timothy

Timothy — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 04:12:49 +0000

> and total public funding for elections. …

We have that. Haven’t you noticed the gasoline prices lately?

By: Amy Gahran

Amy Gahran — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 03:54:23 +0000

OK, I’ve got to say it:

I WANT my tax dollars to support quality public broadcasting, at the state, national, and local levels. Free-market extremist arguments for cutting PBS and NPR funding ignore the fact that the most lauded public broadcasting shows which they praise would never have seen the light of day had they been launched VIA a commercial process.

Anyway, Gwen Ifill kicks Bill O’Reilly’s pompous, egocentric, semi-literate butt. ‘Nuff said on that front.

Personally I believe we need publicly-funded media as much as – if not more than – free public education available to all, and total public funding for elections. After all, democracy is mainly a matter of the mind. Dulled, drowning minds don’t stand much of a chance against tyranny.

That’s my opinion. Feel free to disagree. But if you want to disagree here, let’s avoid the tired, lame, and FALSE left-right polarity. That’s such a red herring. The real issue is quality and diversity of information and communication, training human minds – and how essential those tasks are to any free society.

- Amy Gahran
Editor, CONTENTIOUS

By: Poster

Poster — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 02:40:21 +0000

Nova would do well on commercial TV, judging by all the people that say that they love it (in response to this article and elsewhere). Sesame Street would too. In fact, anything that PBS has — that is worth keeping — is worth marketing (an unknown concept to government trough-feeders). Oh my geez. Obviously. I mean, it’s stark raving, brain-dead obvious. So why does the government need to fund these things if they are that worthy and that successful? Or do you think that everyone else but you is a stupid Neathadral unwilling or unable to discern quality and pay for it? What a joke. I say defund PBS and defund it now. Let them market their ideas and compete like everyone else has to. Stop taking my money and using it for leftist agitprop. I’ve been to rural areas and they don’t need or want PBS and wouldn’t miss it if it was gone. Of course it is funny how the rural folks are only useful to liberals when PBS or the NEA shows up — and then they’re held up as cultural niggers to be kept on the plantation by the big-city liberals. Oh! What would all you dumb hicks do without the civilization that PBS bestows so eloquently upon you? Spare me the sanctimonious and pedantic lectures. I say take the self-flagellating liberalism off the air and take the government’s hands out of my wallet. Freedom is worth spending money on. PBS? Puhleaze.

By: Kathy Blair

Kathy Blair — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:17:35 +0000

Thanks for the info on public broadcasting. I wanted to let you know that this
decision will affect us in Canada too. My 6-year-old son refuses to watch
public television anymore, Treehouse, the kinds of shows he feels are for
little kids. Instead, he wants to watch action shows all the time – lots of
fighting, battles, etc. Some months ago, we happened across Between the Lions, a wonderful show with an amazing set of writers, obviously some of my generation. There are so many hysterical references to things I grew up with (Dick and Jane readers, Wayne’s World…) plus Ryan just loves it. It took him a while to admit it, but he does. It’s become a key part of our weekend
mornings. And it’s actually helping him learn to read – he sings the vowel
song to remember which letters are vowels. I’ve told a number of friends they should get their reading-ready kids to watch it.

I read on the link you posted that the proposed cuts include cancelling the Ready to Learn grants which fund Between the Lions, Arthur and other shows. I’m just so appalled that the Bush administration, which seems to have enough money to fund foreign wars and develop silly space weapons that will never work, doesn’t see the point in funding educational broadcasting. I have no congressman to complain to but I did drop a note to the public broadcasters.

Good luck to you all in fighting the cuts and please keep us updated!

By: Amy Gahran

Amy Gahran — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 07:37:48 +0000

Thanks Doug. Here are my reasons:

1. I love public broadcasting. I think in general the quality of the programming is vastly superior to what is available through commercial non-cable/satellite radio and TV.

2. Public broadcasting is a vital resource for people who have few resources — and thus can’t afford cable TV, satellite radio, internet access, etc.

3. Public broadcasting currently is one of the rare worthwhile uses my tax dollars are funding. I don’t want that to stop. I think we could do with a few less subsidies to private industry and put even more money toward public media content and infrastructure, in fact.

4. Now!, Nova, NPR, and Sesame Street rock!

- Amy Gahran

By: doug

doug — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 07:31:09 +0000

I’d have to say that this is one of those issues where I have to respectfully disagree with you.

Yet, in that attitude of mutual respect, I would be interested to learn why you feel that public broadcasting needs to be saved.

Why do you feel that there is a compelling interest for government to fund media outlets when so many alternative media sources are available today?

Or would you frame the question in a different way?