Few critics of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting have anything bad to say about Big Bird or Arthur or any of the children’s characters that entertain and educate young people on public television. Yet it’s clear these are no ordinary times and Congress and President Barack Obama should take a long hard look at the roughly $400 million in federal tax money that public radio and television receive annually. That federal support is being debated in Congress this week.
In television’s infancy, when there were only a few commercial broadcast networks, a stronger case could be made for government support of public broadcasting for news and educational programming. The proliferation of channels now available through cable and satellite makes this a distinctly different landscape
Public broadcasting offers first-rate programming and many citizens, including some employees at this newspaper, choose to support it with donations. But we think it’s time public broadcasting should be weaned off its reliance on tax dollars.
As much as we might enjoy public television and radio, those entities clearly compete for advertising dollars with economically challenged print and broadcast companies that do not receive government subsidies — including this newspaper. The public television and radio stations are non-commercial in name only as they increasingly give their sponsors more leeway in advertising their products or services.
The Brainerd Dispatch sells advertising and charges for subscriptions to its print product. It does not conduct pledge drives or ask for contributions from the public or the government. Keeping our doors open in what we consider a privately owned public service is a challenge these days. It’s inherently unfair when independent, private sector news organizations must compete with news organizations that are subsidized by government funding.
The money the Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives from the government is not going to balance the federal budget but it’s an example of the type of government spending that is going to have to be reconsidered if the government is ever going to get its house in order.
Comments (22)
Add commentWhen they succeed in
When they succeed in silencing public broadcasting our only source of news will be the corporate media that has kept our attention diverted away from the criminals on Wall Street.
PBS
The only real news on TV
yeh kill Big Bird?
left wing ranting? pleaazzzeee, I heard a talk show on MPR yesterday afternoon on gun rights with BOTH sides talking (calmly) and all callers welcome and treated very respectfully, that's what I want to hear...try THAT on Faux News
I think Rupert Murdoch's Fox
I think Rupert Murdoch's Fox News thrives because it stirs emotions instead of delivering facts. If you want accurate information you have to go elsewhere but most people are satisfied with getting their emotions aroused.
Thinking requires work.
FYI:
Broadcasting a signal into rural areas such as Brainerd costs roughly 11 times more than it costs to broadcast a signal in the Twin Cities area - this means Lakeland will cease to exist as we know it. Small communities are the ones that are going to be hit hardest by this, as any local programming will no longer be financially feasible.
If you believe that you have a right to news that isn't influenced by ratings/sales or corporate interest (and judging by harsh words used against the Dispatch on these very forums, most of you do), that children have a right to programming that is educational and not a half hour commercial for sugar and toys, that small town and rural communities have as much right to arts and cultural programming as large cities do, then you need to write your congressperson today asking to save public broadcasting.
It's no surprise the Dispatch is in support of defunding them - if public broadcasting goes away, they get to be one of the only sources of news or information in the area. Enjoy!
Hannah
The difference is that even if a news source is influenced by corporate interests, I can also turn them off. With the advent of the internet, I can go to literally hundreds of news sources. It is not so much about rights as it is control. I often go to RealClearPolitics where I can read the NYT and the Wall Street Journal.
With PBS, I don't want to pay for it because I don't have to. I can get my news elsewhere.
If liberals want to push for equality on the airwaves, then let's force PBS to include some Christian programming. I'm sure, in the interest of diversity, you wouldn't mind paying for that, right?
Trip-
I'm not sure how strictly Christian programming promotes diversity - doesn't it only promote Christianity? Nonetheless, there are many public television stations that do offer religious programming! KSMQ in Southern Minnesota devotes every Sunday at 12:30p to a show called Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, followed by an hour of Classic Gospel music. I wish I was more familiar with Lakeland's current line up, but I moved from Brainerd down to the Twin Cities a few years ago. It should also be noted that each local station is responsible for their own programming - so if you want this type of show to be added to their line up, get in touch with them! The beauty of public television is that its programming is dictated by what the public wants, because it's your station!
And while it's lovely that you have the access to other news sources, that's a privilege not afforded to everyone. If you had to choose between Internet access and food for your children, which would you support? And furthermore, if you're in support of paying less taxes to strip away social services - shouldn't the people dependent upon those social services have a right to know why? Also, as I stated in my previous comment, this is going to affect local programming the hardest - how is the coverage of the Minnesota state legislature and BSU Hockey in the Wall Street Journal? I'm assuming those coasties don't know Minnesota quite like Minnesotans do ;-)
Hannah
I am not interested in PBS carrying Christian programming. But, if someone did ask for it, can you imagine the howls of protest that would erupt? There would be a constant braying of people invoking the separation of church and state. My point was that those on the left of the political spectrum love to point at Fox News as a reason why we need PBS to balance things out. But then, they don't have to pay for Fox News, do they? If PBS could support themselves, like Fox does, have at 'er. Air America anyone?
WHO WROTE THIS EDITORIAL?
As much as I enjoy the Brainerd Dispatch newspaper, it is most certainly NOT in competition with Public Television.
It would not surprise me to find out that this editorial was the work of the Morris Communications Corporation -- which has its own corporate agenda.
The folks at Morris have every right to lobby for the demise of public television and radio if they wish -- its their newspaper -- but Morris' gain of a few advertising dollars would be a major loss for the community.
Trip-
I'm not sure I understand your point. You asked what would happen if PBS carried Christian programming, and I pointed out they do, and then you asserted that you're not interested in it and then asked again what would happen if they carried it. Once again, I'll point out, they do!
I agree that PBS is a balancer, but not just to FOX. I'd argue that it's a balancer to any corporate funded news channel - the liberals over at MSNBC, and the technology obsessed over at CNN (Who needs content when you have a Black Eyed Pea in hologram form?)
Also: I feel it needs pointing out again that this doesn't just affect the news programming on PBS, this also affects arts and cultural programming as well as children's programming on both television and radio. I personally don't agree with you on PBS' being biased in their political coverage, but taking that out of the equation, I'm sure we can both agree on the benefits of educational programming for children. Super Why! helps develop early literacy skills and encourages a love of language; Sid the Science Kid builds on kids natural curiosity by fostering critical thinking skills; and Martha Speaks teaches children new vocabulary and has been endorsed by nationally recognized literacy experts. Certainly more useful than watching a bunch of cartoons beat each other up?
Sesame street=Easy street
Over 10 million Tickle Me Elmo dolls have been sold,I'm pretty sure Oscar can stay in his trash can without handouts from a broke government.
advertising dollars
This opinion piece is write about competing for advertising dollars. I do a little bit of marketing and choose MPR over the BDD.
I love local news
I get state and national news, or metro-centric news EVERYWHERE. Lakeland PTV @ 10 has real local news.
They show up for all local events and put them on. Love it!
((AND I am a member!!!)
Now that's funny!
"It’s inherently unfair when independent, private sector news organizations must compete with news organizations that are subsidized by government funding."
Please explain to me how the Brainerd Dispatch is in competition with public radio/tv. I'm willing to bet that you could poll every salesperson in the last 20 years who has worked for the Dispatch, that none of them have ever been turned down from a potential advertiser based on the reason that they were supporting public radio/tv instead.
"The money the Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives from the government is not going to balance the federal budget but it’s an example of the type of government spending that is going to have to be reconsidered if the government is ever going to get its house in order."
Spoken like a true republican editorial board. Let's just cut everything out of everything.
NPR is great!
MPR and NPR news are great programming for anyone looking for the most un-biased information on the planet. (notice the word MOST, didnt say they were un-biased, they just try harder then everyone else) I can come up with about 500 things that deserve to be cut before Public Broadcasting and if those get cut I can up up with 500 more. This all stems from conservatives (I am moderate conservative) being upset over Juan Williams getting fired for saying dumb things about muslims on an airplane. While he had a right to say it, I dont want my news from someone that says things without thinking and neither did NPR. I know I have done my part and contacted my representatives to keep funding and I encourage others to do the same. I hope the negative comments about NPR are coming from an educated position and not just from a political bias based on perception.
Not only do they get Govn funds
but they are so blatantly left wing that the home stereo about falls off the stand when I have it on their stations.
Edited and added: I just read the post above me: UNBIASED? Holy crap, are you deaf?
The unspoken words .....
The unspoken words ..... "I've chosen Faux News as my source of 'fair and balanced' information" ...... ooze laughably from the spaces in My Brainerd Dispatch's comments.
How strange it must be to go about daily life 'knowing' that virtually all media outlets are considerably biased against one's own peculiar belief system? Maybe similar to having one's politics be the long-standing and continual brunt of most every comedian's jokes.