Save NPR and PBS (again)

Thursday, June 8, 2006, 14:30 —by Declan
This item was posted in San Diego News and Local Media, San Diego Politics category and has 5 Comments so far.

This is from a Television Archiving list I’m on:

Everyone expected House Republicans to give up efforts to kill NPR and PBS after a massive public outcry stopped them last year. But they’ve just voted to eliminate funding for NPR and PBS — unbelievably, starting with programs like “Sesame Street.”

Public broadcasting would lose nearly a quarter of its federal funding this year. Even worse, all funding would be eliminated in two years–threatening one of the last remaining sources of watchdog journalism.

Sign the petition telling Congress to save NPR and PBS again this year:

Last year, millions of us took action to save NPR and PBS, and Congress listened. We can do it again if enough of us sign the petition in time.

This would be the most severe cut in the history of public broadcasting. The Boston Globe reports the cuts “could force the elimination of some popular PBS and NPR programs.” NPR’s president expects rural public radio stations may be forced to shut down.

The House and Senate are deciding if public broadcasting will survive, and they need to hear from viewers like you. Sign the petition at:


P.S. Read the Boston Globe story on the threat to NPR and PBS at:

tig mailing list

Popularity: 3% [?]

Voice Your Opinions. Join Today.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

5 Responses to “Save NPR and PBS (again)”

  1. JeSais said on Thursday, June 8, 2006, 15:28

    AAAAAAAAAAAAAACK not again! How often do we have to go through this anyway??? Just earlier this week we had the failed ban-gay-marriage ammendment, now this… What is the next hot button topic to come up and keep our collective eyes off of what is really going on in the world? Marx said religion was the opiate of the masses… seems to me that Congress is the drug dealer here.

  2. Joe Crawford said on Friday, June 9, 2006, 13:27

    If only Mr. Rogers were still around to articulate the public good of public media.

  3. MAS said on Friday, June 9, 2006, 15:14

    The average NPR/PBS consumer is highly educated and makes an above average income. They are a valuable demographic for marketers. If they lost their support from the government, they could easily raise funding via sponsers.

    If they severed their ties to the government, there would be a line of sponsors waiting to throw money at them. And then they could finally end the beg-a-thons they do every quarter.

    Public broadcasting is commercially viable, which is why both XM and Sirius have some variant of it on their pay networks.

  4. Craig said on Wednesday, June 14, 2006, 18:03


    How can watchdog journalism really work when it’s funded by the organization it should be watching? If it’s meeting the needs of its audience, why can’t it support itself?

  5. Joe Crawford said on Thursday, June 15, 2006, 8:16

    Craig, is your comment an argument about PBS, because the “how can journalists investigate their owners” question really is more apropriate to apply to those employees of the more traditional media. Here’s a lighthearted take.

    As to your other question: “If it’s meeting the needs of its audience, why can’t it support itself?” — simple: because we don’t require this of other things that we think are important for the common good. For example, roads and highways are rarely self-sustaining; libraries another; and schools another. We decide (or not) as a society what we might want to fund without respect to whether it earns a dollar.

    I definitely understand that reasonably people may disagree with me, but I feel the public good associated with public broadcasting is worth the price.

Leave a Reply