.
June 15, 2005 6:08 PM   Subscribe

Public Broadcasting funding targeted by House. This time it's for real, and not a breathless, erroneous chain email. MoveOn.org petition.
posted by loquacious (24 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: I love big bird as much as the next person, but this is a double



 
The GOP is the party that parties!

As long as gays, lesbians and stuffed animals aren't involved.
posted by jperkins at 6:18 PM on June 15, 2005


Considering the meager funding the CPB receives relative to military and other more genuinely controversial spending, and given Senate support for PBS in general, and given the 2006 elections coming up, it will be interesting to see how this cultural issue is used to further polarize and motivate the electoral base next year.
posted by Rothko at 6:21 PM on June 15, 2005


I have a hard time imagining a world without Sesame Street. Or without "This American Life", or NPR, or NOVA.

Whatever happened to art and culture in the USA? Or has it always been just an illusion dangling by the thinnest of threads?
posted by loquacious at 6:27 PM on June 15, 2005


PBS will survive. If anything, lack of government funding might be a good thing. My local station is, for lack of a better term, plump. It shows stale programming that caters to a wealthy subset of the broadcast zone — I suspect that cutting funding would help return it to its more working class roots, somewhat.
posted by Rothko at 6:29 PM on June 15, 2005


That explains why I saw Oscar The Grouch squeegeing cars coming out of the Holland Tunnel. Next, he'll be picking through trash. Very sad.
posted by jonmc at 6:32 PM on June 15, 2005


Was Laura Bush the one to make Cookie Monster into Carrot Monster? This is a dark time.
posted by Viomeda at 6:33 PM on June 15, 2005


Was Laura Bush the one to make Cookie Monster into Carrot Monster?

Well, Cookie Moster can always fall back on his day job as lead vocalist for Korn, so he'll be OK.
posted by jonmc at 6:35 PM on June 15, 2005


loquacious: Whatever happened to art and culture in the USA?

We had to cut it to pay for a war that we can't seem to win and that we should never have started in the first place.

Rothko: If anything, lack of government funding might be a good thing.

I've seen this opinion a lot of late. How the hell can cutting its funding make PBS better? This line only makes sense to those who are--mistakenly--convinced that government funding itself is an evil to be avoided.
posted by wheat at 6:37 PM on June 15, 2005


I've seen this opinion a lot of late. How the hell can cutting its funding make PBS better?

Look, I grew up on PBS. My mom says that if the TV reception went out during Mr. Rogers, I would flip my little wig and pitch a tantrum. But, much of the best programming on PBS would survive quite well on cable, or maybe the funding for PBS would be better spent on the Net, where many people are turning for educational material.

I'm not 100% convinced of this, but I'm not 100% unconvinced either. (my previous jokes notwithstanding, I succumbed to temptation, I'm a slave to humor).
posted by jonmc at 6:42 PM on June 15, 2005


I financially support my local public broadcasting stations, but there is a real problem with them getting government support. Last week "This American Life" ran a long piece by Julia Sweeney describing in great detail how she had come to abandon her Catholic faith and had embraced secular humanism. It was a narrative testimony, of just the sort that one hears from religious people who describe their conversions. But the fact is that NPR would never in a million years run a long piece by a thoughtful, intelligent person describing in great detail how they had converted to Catholicism. I like NPR and PBS, but they shouldn't be funded by the government because they are not open to all viewpoints.
posted by peeping_Thomist at 6:43 PM on June 15, 2005


I like NPR and PBS, but they shouldn't be funded by the government because they are not open to all viewpoints.

I can't recall the actual programs, but I recall seeing documentaries on the history of religion (an extremely worthy topic) that were very even handed and thoughtful on PBS. There's plenty of arguments against PBS, but that's not a particularly good one.
posted by jonmc at 6:51 PM on June 15, 2005


"The CPB funds [i.e. government funding]...account for about 15 percent of the public broadcasting industry's total revenue."

I'd be for public broadcasting finding alternate sources of revenue for that 15%, thus removing the potential threat from politicians. After all, it is a minority financial position - yet one wrought with peril.
posted by ericb at 6:55 PM on June 15, 2005


But, much of the best programming on PBS would survive quite well on cable.

*head explodes*
posted by mlis at 6:58 PM on June 15, 2005


Care to explain that beyond a cute wisecrack, MLIS?

Sesame Street, Barney, McNeill-Lehrer, and other programs have attracted very loyal audiences, and cable has changed the playing field to the point where a huge audience is not required to keep a show aflota, is what I'm saying.
posted by jonmc at 7:01 PM on June 15, 2005


jonmc, I know about and appreciate the good programming you're talking about. But I'm talking about pieces that are testimonial in nature, that take a very strong point of view and present the case for secular humanism in a first-person way that simply has no analogue in other NPR or PBS programming.

I am talking about the equivalent of religious testimonies. You simply do not find religious testimonies or altar calls on NPR, but you _do_ find testimonies for secular humanism. There's just no denying that NPR and PBS privilege expressions of secular humanism over religious statements. And I don't have any problem with that, except that the government shouldn't be funding it. The fact that they often have documentaries about that are even-handed does not address this point. Julia Sweeney's hour-long narrative was not a documentary. It was a first-person testimony for secular humanism (I think the title was "saying goodbye to God"), and you simply don't find religious testimonies on public broadcasting.
posted by peeping_Thomist at 7:02 PM on June 15, 2005


But I'm talking about pieces that are testimonial in nature, that take a very strong point of view and present the case for secular humanism in a first-person way that simply has no analogue in other NPR or PBS programming

And there's whole networks devoted to making testimony on behalf of religion and it's role in society. And quite frankly, I'm cool with that. It's part of the beautiful agora of free speech. I have mixed opinions on PBS, but like I said political bias is probably the weakest argument against it.
posted by jonmc at 7:07 PM on June 15, 2005


Quality programming, unevenness and occasional snottiness aside, is one half of the PBS contribution. (Especially, for grownups, longform news programming like Frontline and News Hour, as wimped out as that has become, and for kids, programming somewhat attuned to the science of educational psychology instead of shock and awe, though if anyone has seen "Monsters' Playhouse" on *Sesame Street,* you know what's happened there too.)

However, the other side of the coin is *advertising-free* programming, which is the argument for a publicly funded television network as the only choice of its kind on the market. If any of you have kids, you know what I am talking about. The ads on corporate TV for kids are a parent's worst nightmare and don't get enough blame for their evil effects on childhood in this country. Now, PBS has gotten more dosed with corporate pitches than it once was -- my kid knows all about different breakfast cereals and fast food joints just from the "underwriting spots" she sees between shows. But it's nowhere near the incessant barrage of aimless desire inducement that she'd see on Nickleodeon or Disney. Insidiously, like Disney, PBS has made its shows themselves into total commercial products and thus, like Disney, on one level it's constant advertising. But it's different by a degree.
And beloved.

Which makes me think "bring it on." I think this could alienate a lot of moderate Republican parents in tonier suburbs to be sure, and mostly in blue states, but it could matter a lot in the Philadelphia area (interesting therefore to see how Santorum stands on PBS).

But if we save PBS somehow, we who get behind this protest (and I am one) ought to demand payback *from* PBS, which is a stop to the creeping corporatization of its kids' programming, and its recent efforts to pander to the right at the expense of quality (they could do more with quality conservative voices, I think, instead of fools like David Brooks and Tucker Carlson, though offhand I've forgotten who the quality conservatives are anymore and maybe they are extinct). And they ought to reach out to working-class parents and communities more smartly. Happy to discuss how.
posted by realcountrymusic at 7:09 PM on June 15, 2005


There's tons of art and culture in the US -- probably more now than at any other period:

All Culture, All the Time
posted by StewV at 7:11 PM on June 15, 2005


I've seen plenty of religious testimonies on public broadcasting. They just aren't all Christian testimonies. What's wrong with an aetheist/humanist testimony?

Also, look at children's programming on cable some time. If it's not vapid and condescending, it's a thinly veiled shill to sell branded crap of all manner to children.

Compare "The Elegant Universe" or any of NOVA's offerings to any of the drivel being put out by The Discovery Channel or The Learning Channel these days. What's so enlightening about Monster Garage? It's like comparing The Smithsonian magazine to Popular Mechanics.

Further, it's for those that cannot afford cable TV that broadcast-TV PBS is so valuable. It's not just for the middle class, or even a financially elite class. Imagine being stuck without satellite or cable, think of the quality (and more often, lack of quality) of the offerings on broadcast TV.

Imagine that there was no PBS, no Sesame Street, no Reading Rainbow, and all that a poor, young kid had available to watch during the daytime was either soaps, Jerry Springer, broadcast "news" or Oprah.

I certainly was that poor kid, growing up. If it wasn't for PBS (and books, and libraries of course, but not everyone is so voracious and inquisitive) I'd have gone firmly out of my skull.
posted by loquacious at 7:14 PM on June 15, 2005


Cable is not free, jonmc. The whole point of PBS is public broadcasting, not necessarily the specific programs themselves.

And there's lots of religious programming on PBS. And while I didn't see the Julia Sweeney program you're talking about I would assume that a reasonable way to educate an audience about a topic like secular humanism that is not an organized religion would be with a first person story. How else would they do it?
posted by mexican at 7:15 PM on June 15, 2005


realcountrymusic: Well put, and valid concerns and points.
posted by loquacious at 7:15 PM on June 15, 2005


(they could do more with quality conservative voices, I think, instead of fools like David Brooks and Tucker Carlson, though offhand I've forgotten who the quality conservatives are anymore and maybe they are extinct)

agreed. the first place I recall seeing William F. Buckley and Goerge Will (two men I usually disagree with but deeply respect) was PBS.

and all that a poor, young kid had available to watch during the daytime was either soaps, Jerry Springer, broadcast "news" or Oprah.

well, then he'll learn thow to deal when his babymama is creepin' behind his back.

Cable is not free, jonmc. The whole point of PBS is public broadcasting, not necessarily the specific programs themselves.

no, but it's gotten to the level of cheapness that it's positively ubiquitous. I know project raised people who grew up with cable.
posted by jonmc at 7:20 PM on June 15, 2005


I was sure that we had just talked about this on June 10th and sure enough, I was right.

I can't believe I'm the first person to mention this....
posted by anastasiav at 7:25 PM on June 15, 2005


those damn secular humanism preachers on PBS.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 7:26 PM on June 15, 2005


« Older Competitive rabbits.   |   yubnub Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments