Is Public Broadcasting Needed Anymore?

[Inky_Wretch]

Without the local NPR and PBS stations, there wouldn't have been live coverage of the last senatorial debates or gubernatorial debates. None of the commercial stations carried them, even though they were free for the taking.

 

[Bamadog]

[quote author=Bamadog lin

Funding of NPR is not an essential service of the federal government.

It's time for our government to quit subsidizing activities (like Amtrack, NPR, agriculture, GM, TARP, etc.) that are not part of its constitutionally-limited responsibilities and should be the exclusive province of the private sector. If you can't swim without a fat subsidy taken out of my wallet, you really don't need to be around. Sink or swim.

*actually reads Constitution*

Oh look, the government is not only allowed, but directed to "promote the General Welfare."

And boring documentaries, long-winded, left-leaning hosts who sounded like they just woofed down a couple of Xanax and money-begging funding drives are in the "general welfare?" No.

Let the market decide NPR's fate. Its ratings are miniscule. No, make that non-existent. They make MSNBC's look like a slammer. The only reason that crap (in all fairness, I did like the Ken Burns documentaries, but those could've easily made it on a private sector network considering their following) exists is because they feed at the Federal trough like seemingly everything else. I'm tired of being told the government can't do without a single cent of my hard-earned salary, gobbled up out of my check before I even see it.

As for the rest of government:
The interstate system was designed with military traffic in mind, so yes, that was a legit use of federal funds. But I had my druthers, I'd let the states handle most of the road funding. Why should taxpayers in New York and California pay to build a bridge in Mississippi or a tunnel in Colorado?

When you siphon resources to a great, central clearinghouse like our Federal government has become, it allows them too much power and causes some money to be wasted along the way. Reduce the federal gasoline tax and let states tax gasoline and fund their roads as they see fit. It's a lot easier to complain to your state representative or senator than it is to your U.S. representative or senator. As we learned in the military, things are always handled better lower in the chain of command. It's a shame that more civilians haven't learned that valuable lesson. Your local and state government know much more about your community's issues than a "one-size-fits-all" approach that the Feds often espouse.

The only thing that the Feds should be involved with are: defense, coinage, environmental regulation, some law enforcement, national parks, space exploration (not like we have much of that anymore) and interstates and U.S. highways. The rest needs to be cut. There is no need for a Department of Agriculture, OSHA, Homeland Security, Education, Energy or any of this mess that has piled on layer and layer and layer of useless pencil-pushing bureaucrats who are paid like plutocrats. The Feds have too much power as it is. It needs to be pruned back. The amount of money consumed as a portion of GDP by the Feds needs to be pruned below 20 percent.

Otherwise, we're headed on an express elevator to inflationary hell where the dollar isn't worth squat. NPR is a small part of that, but you have to start somewhere. A thousand cuts can still make you bleed out and die. The beast must be starved. It's either that or we default and that's a **** sandwich everyone will have to take a bite out of. The party's over, folks.

 

[YankeeFan]

As Michael pointed out, in some of the big cities along the East Coast -- he mentioned Boston -- NPR draws a pretty big audience.

I imagine it does in places like Chicago and some of the big cities along the West Coast as well.

Those stations would all survive without federal funding because they have listener support.

 

[deskslave]

You can get local news and traffic on NPR stations, at least some. The traffic's often not as comprehensive as commercial stations, and it's not brought to you by Bill and Marty in KBBL Chopper 4000, but it's there.

Keep in mind, as well, that the small local NPR stations are usually nothing more than a transmitter taking the feed from the bigger station. I can't imagine that costs very much, and it's a pretty valuable service.

 

[Ace]

[quote author=Bamadog lin

Funding of NPR is not an essential service of the federal government.

It's time for our government to quit subsidizing activities (like Amtrack, NPR, agriculture, GM, TARP, etc.) that are not part of its constitutionally-limited responsibilities and should be the exclusive province of the private sector. If you can't swim without a fat subsidy taken out of my wallet, you really don't need to be around. Sink or swim.

*actually reads Constitution*

Oh look, the government is not only allowed, but directed to "promote the General Welfare."

And boring documentaries, long-winded, left-leaning hosts who sounded like they just woofed down a couple of Xanax and money-begging funding drives are in the "general welfare?" No.

Let the market decide NPR's fate. Its ratings are miniscule. No, make that non-existent. They make MSNBC's look like a slammer. The only reason that crap (in all fairness, I did like the Ken Burns documentaries, but those could've easily made it on a private sector network considering their following) exists is because they feed at the Federal trough like seemingly everything else. I'm tired of being told the government can't do without a single cent of my hard-earned salary, gobbled up out of my check before I even see it.

As for the rest of government:
The interstate system was designed with military traffic in mind, so yes, that was a legit use of federal funds. But I had my druthers, I'd let the states handle most of the road funding. Why should taxpayers in New York and California pay to build a bridge in Mississippi or a tunnel in Colorado?

When you siphon resources to a great, central clearinghouse like our Federal government has become, it allows them too much power and causes some money to be wasted along the way. Reduce the federal gasoline tax and let states tax gasoline and fund their roads as they see fit. It's a lot easier to complain to your state representative or senator than it is to your U.S. representative or senator. As we learned in the military, things are always handled better lower in the chain of command. It's a shame that more civilians haven't learned that valuable lesson. Your local and state government know much more about your community's issues than a "one-size-fits-all" approach that the Feds often espouse.

The only thing that the Feds should be involved with are: defense, coinage, environmental regulation, some law enforcement, national parks, space exploration (not like we have much of that anymore) and interstates and U.S. highways. The rest needs to be cut. There is no need for a Department of Agriculture, OSHA, Homeland Security, Education, Energy or any of this mess that has piled on layer and layer and layer of useless pencil-pushing bureaucrats who are paid like plutocrats. The Feds have too much power as it is. It needs to be pruned back. The amount of money consumed as a portion of GDP by the Feds needs to be pruned below 20 percent.

Otherwise, we're headed on an express elevator to inflationary hell where the dollar isn't worth squat. NPR is a small part of that, but you have to start somewhere. A thousand cuts can still make you bleed out and die. The beast must be starved. It's either that or we default and that's a **** sandwich everyone will have to take a bite out of. The party's over, folks.

Why are you comparing NPR (radio) with MSNBC (television)?

 

[Bamadog]

[quote author=Bamadog lin

Funding of NPR is not an essential service of the federal government.

It's time for our government to quit subsidizing activities (like Amtrack, NPR, agriculture, GM, TARP, etc.) that are not part of its constitutionally-limited responsibilities and should be the exclusive province of the private sector. If you can't swim without a fat subsidy taken out of my wallet, you really don't need to be around. Sink or swim.

*actually reads Constitution*

Oh look, the government is not only allowed, but directed to "promote the General Welfare."

And boring documentaries, long-winded, left-leaning hosts who sounded like they just woofed down a couple of Xanax and money-begging funding drives are in the "general welfare?" No.

Let the market decide NPR's fate. Its ratings are miniscule. No, make that non-existent. They make MSNBC's look like a slammer. The only reason that crap (in all fairness, I did like the Ken Burns documentaries, but those could've easily made it on a private sector network considering their following) exists is because they feed at the Federal trough like seemingly everything else. I'm tired of being told the government can't do without a single cent of my hard-earned salary, gobbled up out of my check before I even see it.

As for the rest of government:
The interstate system was designed with military traffic in mind, so yes, that was a legit use of federal funds. But I had my druthers, I'd let the states handle most of the road funding. Why should taxpayers in New York and California pay to build a bridge in Mississippi or a tunnel in Colorado?

When you siphon resources to a great, central clearinghouse like our Federal government has become, it allows them too much power and causes some money to be wasted along the way. Reduce the federal gasoline tax and let states tax gasoline and fund their roads as they see fit. It's a lot easier to complain to your state representative or senator than it is to your U.S. representative or senator. As we learned in the military, things are always handled better lower in the chain of command. It's a shame that more civilians haven't learned that valuable lesson. Your local and state government know much more about your community's issues than a "one-size-fits-all" approach that the Feds often espouse.

The only thing that the Feds should be involved with are: defense, coinage, environmental regulation, some law enforcement, national parks, space exploration (not like we have much of that anymore) and interstates and U.S. highways. The rest needs to be cut. There is no need for a Department of Agriculture, OSHA, Homeland Security, Education, Energy or any of this mess that has piled on layer and layer and layer of useless pencil-pushing bureaucrats who are paid like plutocrats. The Feds have too much power as it is. It needs to be pruned back. The amount of money consumed as a portion of GDP by the Feds needs to be pruned below 20 percent.

Otherwise, we're headed on an express elevator to inflationary hell where the dollar isn't worth squat. NPR is a small part of that, but you have to start somewhere. A thousand cuts can still make you bleed out and die. The beast must be starved. It's either that or we default and that's a **** sandwich everyone will have to take a bite out of. The party's over, folks.

Why are you comparing NPR (radio) with MSNBC (television)?

They both have ratings that don't scrape the bottom of the barrel. They're beneath the barrel, digging a hole to China. That's why. No other reason.

 

[Ace]

I think you are wronger than wrong about that. NPR isn't one nationwide radio station, ya know.

 

[micropolitan guy]

The only thing that the Feds should be involved with are: defense, coinage, environmental regulation, some law enforcement, national parks, space exploration (not like we have much of that anymore) and interstates and U.S. highways. The rest needs to be cut.

Yes, the FAA and air safety are highly overrated. So is the FDA. And the Social Security Administration. Among other things.

 

[J-School Blue]

I think most NPR stations in urban markets would survive through donations and their present fund-raising mechanisms.

The smaller rural stations I am less sure about.

 

[YankeeFan]

You can get local news and traffic on NPR stations, at least some. The traffic's often not as comprehensive as commercial stations, and it's not brought to you by Bill and Marty in KBBL Chopper 4000, but it's there.

Keep in mind, as well, that the small local NPR stations are usually nothing more than a transmitter taking the feed from the bigger station. I can't imagine that costs very much, and it's a pretty valuable service.

It's also not every 10 minutes throughout the entire day like it is on a lot of all news stations. They do a quick -- sponsored -- traffic report during drive time.

And, to an earlier point, the sponsorship is more than just a corporate mention, but it's also not a full fledged ad.

The one I heard yesterday was sponsored by McDonalds (which is sort of odd, since I don't think of NPR's audience being the right demo for McDonalds) and they got a mention and a tag line.

 

[Bamadog]

The only thing that the Feds should be involved with are: defense, coinage, environmental regulation, some law enforcement, national parks, space exploration (not like we have much of that anymore) and interstates and U.S. highways. The rest needs to be cut.

Yes, the FAA and air safety are highly overrated. So is the FDA. And the Social Security Administration. Among other things.

Air traffic control could be privatized. They do that in Canada, of all places, and that works just fine and dandy.

The FDA's drug approval process takes way too long and costs drug companies way too much. An operation, run by the private sector, like the Underwriters Laboratories, would be more efficient and find more problems with drugs than the FDA does. The conceit that government always does things better than the private sector is just that, a conceit. There are obviously things that the private sector can't do (national defense, etc). And those are things government should stick to. TV and radio isn't one of them.

As for public broadcasting (I meant to say public broadcasting in place of NPR, forgive the error), the ratings, except in the NYC and other big markets, are miniscule at best and non-existent at worst. Why pay the freight on something that very few use and enjoy? I don't watch a lot of public broadcasting, so why should I have to pay for it anyway?

Social Security is a great, big pyramid scheme. Bernie Madoff went to prison for the same offense. It's as laughable as the case full of IOUs from Dumb and Dumber. Raise the retirement age, engage in some means testing (Bill Gates shouldn't get a Social Security check) and allow people to funnel that money into private accounts that they can take with them and pass on to heirs.

 

[RickStain]

As for public broadcasting (I meant to say public broadcasting in place of NPR, forgive the error), the ratings, except in the NYC and other big markets, are miniscule at best and non-existent at worst. Why pay the freight on something that very few use and enjoy? I don't watch a lot of public broadcasting, so why should I have to pay for it anyway?

Because it makes society a better place. It promotes the general welfare, as the Constitution directs.

 

[J-School Blue]

So no one should broadcast state gubnatorial and Congressional candidate debates because only PBS and the local county access cable channel bother (there's no incentive for regular broadcast networks to do that, it makes no money). Clearly, because the local ABC station can make more money off a night of sitcom reruns, the public does not need this service? What?

Whether public broadcasting should in general more closely resemble C-SPAN all the time than Prairie Home Companion is, perhaps, a legitimate question (though Sesame Street and Car Talk not only pay for their damn selves, the extra money they bring in allows PBS and NPR to do other things). But it goes beyond OMIGOD TEH LIBRUL NPR and should be looked at as a total service.

 

[micropolitan guy]

Air traffic control could be privatized. They do that in Canada, of all places, and that works just fine and dandy.

Does this private corporation oversee all aspects of airline safety, not just the controllers?

Social Security is a great, big pyramid scheme. Bernie Madoff went to prison for the same offense. It's as laughable as the case full of IOUs from Dumb and Dumber.

Bernie Madoff went to prison because he didn't pay his investors as promised, and made off with their money.

Please to tell me about the millions who have paid SSI taxes over the years who money went "Poof!" like those who invested with Madoff.
Please to tell me of the millions who did not get the exact SSI benefit that the government guaranteed them.





[/quote]

 

[Deskhack]

As for public broadcasting (I meant to say public broadcasting in place of NPR, forgive the error), the ratings, except in the NYC and other big markets, are miniscule at best and non-existent at worst. Why pay the freight on something that very few use and enjoy? I don't watch a lot of public broadcasting, so why should I have to pay for it anyway?

Ummmmmm...Given that most NPR stations don't subscribe to Arbitron and therefore aren't generally rated, how the hell would you know that their ratings are "minuscule at best"? Because no one you know listens to them? I lived in about as rural a part of Oregon as there is once upon a time, and the NPR station was actually fairly popular, though I have no way of knowing exactly how popular...

This is the problem of living in a world where you can pick any media you want and ignore everything else. You just completely discount everything that doesn't fit in with your narrow world view.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

As for public broadcasting (I meant to say public broadcasting in place of NPR, forgive the error), the ratings, except in the NYC and other big markets, are miniscule at best and non-existent at worst. Why pay the freight on something that very few use and enjoy? I don't watch a lot of public broadcasting, so why should I have to pay for it anyway?

Ummmmmm...Given that most NPR stations don't subscribe to Arbitron and therefore aren't generally rated, how the hell would you know that their ratings are "minuscule at best"? Because no one you know listens to them? I lived in about as rural a part of Oregon as there is once upon a time, and the NPR station was actually fairly popular, though I have no way of knowing exactly how popular...

This is the problem of living in a world where you can pick any media you want and ignore everything else. You just completely discount everything that doesn't fit in with your narrow world view.

Just a short step to: "I don't have any kids, so why should I pay school taxes?"

Yee-haw.

 

[Bamadog]

As for public broadcasting (I meant to say public broadcasting in place of NPR, forgive the error), the ratings, except in the NYC and other big markets, are miniscule at best and non-existent at worst. Why pay the freight on something that very few use and enjoy? I don't watch a lot of public broadcasting, so why should I have to pay for it anyway?

Ummmmmm...Given that most NPR stations don't subscribe to Arbitron and therefore aren't generally rated, how the hell would you know that their ratings are "minuscule at best"? Because no one you know listens to them? I lived in about as rural a part of Oregon as there is once upon a time, and the NPR station was actually fairly popular, though I have no way of knowing exactly how popular...

This is the problem of living in a world where you can pick any media you want and ignore everything else. You just completely discount everything that doesn't fit in with your narrow world view.


Just a short step to: "I don't have any kids, so why should I pay school taxes?"

Yee-haw.



No. Public "education" is a fairly recent event in our history and was never intended to produce productive citizens who could think for themselves, but compliant drones who wouldn't question their plutocrat masters who owned the factories where they worked.. Ppublic (government) schools are corrupt, underperforming and taking more and more money to run than ever. It's a crying shame that we don't have school choice in much of this country. Why should someone pay taxes to support failing public schools and have to pay double to educate their children if they send them to private schools or home school them? Have the government give you a tax break if you're a taxpayer, give you a voucher if you can't afford it and let people choose. Make the public schools compete instead of being a monopoly.

As for NPR and public broadcasting, do you really have to think hard that, except in deep blue states riddled with ridiculous debt, there is little to no market for "public" broadcasting? I'm not saying that all of the programming is crap, but if viewers want it bad enough, they should have to pay for it rather than making me give up more of my hard-earned money to pay for something I don't want or use. What's wrong with wanting to keep more of my own money? The way the government acts, it belongs to them and I should be happy to have what is left after they gobble up a chunk of it to redistribute. By your rationale, the leftward leaning folks should tune in to Fox and the rightward leaners should tune into MSNBC, CNN and of course, despite denials to the contrary, NPR. I don't think so. I have to pay for MSNBC and CNN as part of my satellite package, but why should I have to pay for NPR too? Ridiculous. If you want that content, you pay for it. Simple as that. We'll see how long that lasts.

You've got to stop the bleeding somewhere. This isn't the role of the federal government that the Founders intended. They didn't intend for the Feds to bankroll art. Or subsidies. Or bailouts. Or a whole host of other things beyond their Constitutional purview. The "general welfare" clause has been used to justify all sorts of ridiculous spending for far too damned long and that's why we're in the financial spot we're in, with neither party willing to do what it takes to get this country back into sound financial shape.

Until we get out of this mentality that everything can be solved with a government "program" that goes on and on into infinity, we are screwed as a nation. When the real financial collapse comes and our government defaults on everything, we will be forced to live within our means.

 

[Johnny Dangerously]

Stop the bleeding, yes. You're talking about something that doesn't even draw blood, if I am to stick with your metaphor. You want your money back for what you've contributed to public broadcasting? Calculate it, and I'll send you a check.

 

[Bamadog]

Stop the bleeding, yes. You're talking about something that doesn't even draw blood, if I am to stick with your metaphor. You want your money back for what you've contributed to public broadcasting? Calculate it, and I'll send you a check.

That's not the point. Everything has to be cut. The big entitlements must be cut. Public broadcasting as a whole isn't a huge part of the pie. But all of those slivers add up to something. It's not a business like railroads that our government needs to be involved in.

 

[Stitch]

Stop the bleeding, yes. You're talking about something that doesn't even draw blood, if I am to stick with your metaphor. You want your money back for what you've contributed to public broadcasting? Calculate it, and I'll send you a check.

That's not the point. Everything has to be cut. The big entitlements must be cut. Public broadcasting as a whole isn't a huge part of the pie. But all of those slivers add up to something. It's not a business like railroads that our government needs to be involved in.

Then cut something meaningful. Lawmakers should have the backbone to cut something like defense or social security in the name of cutting deficits. Anything less is cowardly.