PBS - unbiased?

[OregonAlex]

How many people watch and believe what they see and hear on PBS because they think it is unbaised.

Can we do an on-line survey?? I don't know how to set up one yet.

A. Unbiased
B. Biased towards the left
C. Biased towards the right
D. Unsure


EDIT by B_Skurka -- A poll with your question has been added to this thread as per your request.

 

[OregonAlex]

apparently there recently has been a scandal at PBS on this exact subject.
Here is some background from the washington post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/03/AR2005110302235.html

 

[Melensdad]

Alex, I'd say the departure of Tomlinson is for due cause, and I'd also say that it is totally unrealted to the left leaning shows on the network.

 

[OregonAlex]

Bob.

did you skim through the article?

 

[Archdean]

OA,
"I don't know how to set up one yet."

I take it that I no longer have to answer your q. to me "what would I think, knowing that you made all your money being a Dot Com Guy"

Your turn,
Dean

 

[OregonAlex]

OA,
"I don't know how to set up one yet."

I take it that I no longer have to answer your q. to me "what would I think, knowing that you made all your money being a Dot Com Guy"

Your turn,
Dean

Dean,

if you are trying to bait me you got to make sense first. I really didn't understand what you said.

 

[Junkman]

Dean speaks in a cryptic language that only he and a few other pilots understand. I believe that this is a result of trying to keep everyone in the dark about what they were discussing prior to any reason someone should decide that the cockpit voice recorder should be analyzed. I have a strong suspicion that it is a hybrid version of Esperanto....

 

[OregonAlex]

roger that

 

[Melensdad]

Bob.

did you skim through the article?

Nope, I actually did one better, I read the whole thing. Seems pretty apparent that Tomlinson is a political appointee with far right beliefs and he saw PBS as an organization with far left beliefs. Seems he also was hell bent on proving the bias, in addition to abusing is powers to fund things that were clearly not within the charter or scope of CPB. It also seems rather clear that the guy's philosophy is quite different from most of PBS. And reading the article certainly showed me that PBS does lean to the left, while the Tomlinson and CPB leans to the right.

It should also be pointed out that Tomlinson worked for the CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting) but you asked about PBS (Public Broadcasting Service). CPB funds PBS with tax dollars.

The thing I don't understand is why the US government even funds PBS? 50 years ago we funded it because we believed that it was necessary to fund educational TV. It has been proven that educational TV is commercially viable. Yet we still fund it. The History Channel, TLC, and Discovery don't need our funding but we fund PBS through the CPB. Further, channels like WGBH and WTTW are PBS channels that easily compete in against the network channels and could live without government funding, yet we still fund PBS.

$400 million per year.

I think that money could be better spent by paying down our debts and reducing the size of our government. We need to get the US back to providing essential services and stop the funding of every program that people dream up.

 

[XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq]

As always Bob makes some great points.

In general I like PBS since it has a few good shows and some of the better children's programming. I also only have rabbit ears so it's one of about 5 channels we get.

I'd say that there is a left leaning tint to most of it's political oriented evening programming. That "now" show was really bad during the election. If they had something right leaning to counter that show then it would more fair.

 

[Melensdad]

Bear in mind, if we stop funding the CPB which in turns funds PBS, the TV and radio stations will likely remain on the air. At least most of them. PBS is only partially funded by the CPB. Most stations now recieve income from commercials, auctions, pledge drives, etc. The stations would have to adapt to stay on the air, some won't. But why do we spend nearly $450 million to fund an organization that gives $400 million to fund another organization that could likely survive and perhaps thrive without suckling on the government's teat?

 

[Archdean]

Dean speaks in a cryptic language that only he and a few other pilots understand. I believe that this is a result of trying to keep everyone in the dark about what they were discussing prior to any reason someone should decide that the cockpit voice recorder should be analyzed. I have a strong suspicion that it is a hybrid version of Esperanto....

Not so cryptic Junk!

"If I told you that I was a tree hugging flag burning homosexual draft dodger hippie that graduated from an ivy league school and made his fortune during the dot come days and has never worked a day in his life ........ would that push the right buttons?
eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:: Peace:eace:eace:"

I'll bet Alex remembers now!!

Dean

 

[thcri]

I am not tryng to steal this thread at all but just a question, does PRS public radio get their money from the same place as PBS?

murph

 

[BoneheadNW]

I also only have rabbit ears

They have surgery to correct that these days.

Dean speaks in a cryptic language that only he and a few other pilots understand. I believe that this is a result of trying to keep everyone in the dark about what they were discussing prior to any reason someone should decide that the cockpit voice recorder should be analyzed. I have a strong suspicion that it is a hybrid version of Esperanto....

Either that or those oxygen masks didn't drop down when they should have!
Bonehead

 

[BoneheadNW]

"If I told you that I was a tree hugging flag burning homosexual draft dodger hippie that graduated from an ivy league school and made his fortune during the dot come days and has never worked a day in his life ........ would that push the right buttons?
eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:: Peace:eace:eace:"

I'll bet Alex remembers now!!

Dean

That's me! That's me! Except I never dodged the draft- I have in-floor heat. Oh, and I'm not gay, but I do watch Queer Eye for the Straight Guy (does that count?). And my schools weren't ivy league- that stuff won't grow very well on buildings on the west coast.

Bonehead

 

[BoneheadNW]

The thing I don't understand is why the US government even funds PBS? 50 years ago we funded it because we believed that it was necessary to fund educational TV. It has been proven that educational TV is commercially viable. Yet we still fund it. The History Channel, TLC, and Discovery don't need our funding but we fund PBS through the CPB. Further, channels like WGBH and WTTW are PBS channels that easily compete in against the network channels and could live without government funding, yet we still fund PBS.

$400 million per year.

Boy, that is alot of money. What is that, a couple of fighter jets?
I think our president should take that money and use it to fund his pet project- Let's send a man to Mars!
Bonehead

 

[Junkman]

Not so cryptic Junk!

"If I told you that I was a tree hugging flag burning homosexual draft dodger hippie that graduated from an ivy league school and made his fortune during the dot come days and has never worked a day in his life ........ would that push the right buttons?
eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:: Peace:eace:eace:"

I'll bet Alex remembers now!!

Dean

You and Alex were roomates in college..... OK.... Now I got it...

 

[Melensdad]

Boy, that is alot of money. What is that, a couple of fighter jets?
I think our president should take that money and use it to fund his pet project- Let's send a man to Mars!
Bonehead

Ah a tactic of the left, trivialize things and then minimize them.

In the grand scheme, $400 to $500 million is a drop in the bucket. A bit more than $1 per year for every man, woman, child and illegal alien living here in the US. The point, however, is not that it is a small sum in the grand scheme of our budget. Nor is the point what it costs in relation to another thing we spend money on. The point, my nemesis friend, is that the government is funding something that is not within the original intent of the government to fund, and beyond that, is something that no longer require funding to exist because it is commercially viable and can easily continue on without the funding. So we have something that is classic pork barrel to begin with, and we perpetuate it for no good economic logic.

I am not saying that there are not 1000 other programs that fall into the same category, I am not comparing it with anything else. I am simply pointing out that it is what it is, and that is within the overall theme of this thread's topic. If you would like to discuss airplanes or other expendatures, I will gladly do that, but perhaps we should move those discussions to a new thread.

 

[Junkman]

..................
I think our president should take that money and use it to fund his pet project- Let's send a man to Mars!
Bonehead

Bonehead........ are you up for a trip???????

 

[BoneheadNW]

Bonehead........ are you up for a trip???????

My in-laws are in town right now. I will go anywhere.
Bonehead

 

[BoneheadNW]

The point, my nemesis friend, is that the government is funding something that is not within the original intent of the government to fund, and beyond that, is something that no longer require funding to exist because it is commercially viable and can easily continue on without the funding.

Where did you find this original intent of the government funding of PBS? I tried searching for it but could not find it.
As far as being "commercially viable", having PBS funded by business seems to be counter to the purpose of "public television". In my opinion, corporations should not dictate what is shown on PBS as it would lead to less objective reporting/broadcasts. I actually think that PBS has become too commercial as it is with everything from Juicyjuice to kids cereal commercials being hurled at the kids between episodes of Sesame Street.
Bonehead

 

[Gwill]

Where did you find this original intent of the government funding of PBS? I tried searching for it but could not find it.
As far as being "commercially viable", having PBS funded by business seems to be counter to the purpose of "public television". In my opinion, corporations should not dictate what is shown on PBS as it would lead to less objective reporting/broadcasts. I actually think that PBS has become too commercial as it is with everything from Juicyjuice to kids cereal commercials being hurled at the kids between episodes of Sesame Street.
Bonehead

As you well know already, there was no original intent.

Commercially viable doesn't mean funded by business... it just means privately funded by those who think it is worthy of funding. Even illegal aliens can fund programs if they wish.

Objective reporting/broadcasts... are you kidding??? We're talking television here. If you want objectivity you're looking at the wrong medium. For objectivity you can go on the internet and look at liberal lefty sites or go to sites where sensible opinions are voiced... your choice. Anywhere on TV you will find left bias... no exceptions.

 

[Melensdad]

Bone . . . original intent. . . as in the original intent of the founding fathers of this nation. Somehow I don't think any of them intended to have government fund any medium (which at that time was limited to newspapers, posters, flyers, standing on soapboxes, etc.) In fact I am pretty firm in my belief that they would have strongly objected to government funding of the press (see the 1st ammendment).

As for businesses telling TV/Radio what to broadcast, Gwill summed it up very clearly with his statement about commercial viability. And given that they already raise money through various channels, that is unlikely to stop, and likely would be escalated.

murph . . . to answer your question about NPR being funded, yes, the CPB profides funds for both National Public Radio and PBS.

 

[OregonAlex]

someone asked for a balance of conservative shows on CPR. Here is a list:

" Such debates usually fail to acknowledge the many shows with conservative hosts and perspectives carried on PBS stations over the years. For decades, William F. Buckley’s Firing Line was practically synonymous with public broadcasting, ending a record-setting 33-year run when the conservative National Review founder retired it in 1999. A rival to Fox News Channel could be launched with the list of conservatives who have hosted or produced shows on public television over the years: John McLaughlin (The McLaughlin Group, McLaughlin’s One on One), Peggy Noonan (On Values), Ben Wattenberg (Think Tank and Values Matter Most), Laura Ingraham and Larry Elder (National Desk), Tony Brown (Tony Brown’s Journal), William Bennett (Adventures From the Book of Virtues), Milton Friedman (Free to Choose, Tyranny of the Status Quo), Fred Barnes (National Desk, Reverse Angle), Morton Kondracke (Reverse Angle, American Interests) and Tony Snow (The New Militant Center). (With the exceptions of McLaughlin’s and Friedman’s shows, all of these received CPB funding.)

More recently, the progressive journalism of Bill Moyers’ Now inspired the CPB to fund two right-wing programs in response (FAIR Action Alert, 9/17/04): the uniformly right-wing Wall Street Journal–produced Journal Editorial Report, which currently airs on PBS, as well as Unfiltered, hosted by conservative pundit Tucker Carlson (who left the program in June 2005 to host an MSNBC show)."



I happened to watch the McLaughlin Group .. its is a very good show.
If you have never seen it I should point out that [size=-1]Pat Buchanan is on it.
Or would you consider Pat too far too the left also?
[/size]

 

[OregonAlex]

Not so cryptic Junk!

"If I told you that I was a tree hugging flag burning homosexual draft dodger hippie that graduated from an ivy league school and made his fortune during the dot come days and has never worked a day in his life ........ would that push the right buttons?
eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:eace:: Peace:eace:eace:"

I'll bet Alex remembers now!!

Dean

Dean,

I am only 33 years old.. my memory has not started to decay just yet..

but I still don't understand your point to your reference.
maybe you can "explain it to me" because you sure are not "understanding it to me".

 

[OregonAlex]

But why do we spend nearly $450 million to fund an organization that gives $400 million to fund another organization that could likely survive and perhaps thrive without suckling on the government's teat?

Bob,

I see your point. I suggest if you want things to change you should use your voting power. This is the best time to do it as we have Conservative White House and a Conservative Congress. Should be easy to do.

And there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that CPB is left biases and allowed to be that way, right? no matter that it is government funded and officials like Tomlinson are appointed by the President (at least that is what I understood from that article).

 

[XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq]

someone asked for a balance of conservative shows on CPR. Here is a list:
<snipped for brevity>
I happened to watch the McLaughlin Group .. its is a very good show.
If you have never seen it I should point out that [size=-1]Pat Buchanan is on it.
Or would you consider Pat too far too the left also?
[/size]

I've only ever seen the McLaughlin Group show on PBS, I haven't seen any of the others. I find the times that the McLaughlin Group is shown to be fairly obscure and constantly shifting. It seems to me that "Now" is always on during prime time. Perhaps just the scheduling/programming dept. at PBS (or OPB in my case) needs to have some conservative balance.

The McLaughlin Group also does a good job of letting the left leaning panelists voice their opinions eventhough John McLaughlin may cut them off - he cuts everyone off.

Pat Buchanan is hardly a mainstream conservative. He has some valid points and a lot of really kooky points.

 

[OregonAlex]

Bone . . . original intent. . . as in the original intent of the founding fathers of this nation.

I think the founding fathers would want something "for the people, by the people". If you don't think it is for the people, then vote/lobby against it.
Let the people decide.

 

[Junkman]

The founding fathers are spinning in their graves when they look down and see the type of perks that the legislatures have provided for themselves. I doubt that the founding fathers had any intention of the pork barrel politics that our nation has become. I know of no other job that people will willfully spend millions of their own $$$$ to get elected to a job that pays a measly $250,000. It isn't the salary, but the perks that they get for life that make it a worth while investment.......pension..... health care.... etc.

 

[BoneheadNW]

Bone . . . original intent. . . as in the original intent of the founding fathers of this nation.

What I was actually asking is, what is the origin of the governments funding of PBS? It was an honest question, really. What I am probably asking is, how did PBS get started in the first place?

For objectivity you can go on the internet and look at liberal lefty sites or go to sites where sensible opinions are voiced... your choice. Anywhere on TV you will find left bias... no exceptions.

Off topic for a second. Before I started reading the posts on the D&D forum, I never really knew that people believed what some of you believe. I am not putting you down, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I guess I must have led a very sheltered life to this point. It is very surprising.
Bonehead