 
|
|
|
|
|
|
cherylpf
crazy cat lady
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 17305
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 06/23/05 - 14:39 Post subject: Save Public Broadcasting
This isn't really a debate so much as an FYI. If you believe in the good that public radio and television do, it might be worth an email or phone call to your representatives and senators.
http://www.pbs.org/takeaction/
Some highlights (from the above website)
Proposed Budget Cuts to Have Damaging Impact on Children, Families and Local Public Television Stations
The House Appropriations Committee has approved what amounts to a 46% cut in funding for public broadcasting. Specifically, Ready To Learn, a major children's educational service, was zeroed out and the overall $400 million budget for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which helps fund local stations and national programming was cut by 25% to $300 million for fiscal year 2006. In addition, the cuts would require CPB to use existing funds to pay for interconnecting local stations and transitioning to digital (the latter mandated by Congress), which are projected to cost a total of $95 million.
If these cuts are implemented, the impact on vital programs and services provided by PBS and its member stations would be significantly damaging:
1. Educational Programs and Services for Children
Ready to Learn funding will be zeroed out
Ready To Learn has assisted more than 8 million children and 1 million parents and teachers with programs and services that build school readiness and literacy skills for children 2 to 8.
Ready To Learn funding has allowed local PBS stations to help educate their respective community's children by broadcasting at least 6.5 hours of educational children's programming each weekday, conducting workshops for parents and teachers that help parents reduce television time and increase reading time, and distributing free books.
Ready To Learn dollars help fund the research and development, as well as online activities, of eight children's series, including Sesame Street and Between the Lions, which teach key literacy skills.
What American parents and kids will lose if Ready To Learn is zeroed out
Children's programming funded by the CPB will be affected by the proposed cuts
A loss in CPB funding would seriously hamper PBS' ability to acquire the top quality children's educational programming that is used in classrooms, day care centers and millions of American households to educate, entertain and provide a safe harbor from the violent, commercial and crass content found in the commercial marketplace.
PBS provides valuable services that improve classroom teaching and assist homeschoolers. These could be reduced or eliminated if federal funding is cut. These services include PBS TeacherSource (www.pbs.org/teachersource), a service that provides pre-K through 12 educators with nearly 4,000 free lesson plans, teachers' guides, and homeschooling guidance; and PBS TeacherLine (www.pbs.org/teacherline), which provides high-quality professional teacher development through more than 90 online- facilitated courses in reading, mathematics, science and technology integration.
2. Gold Standard Programming that Captures American History and Culture
Existing CPB 2006 funding was cut by 25%
PBS is still the 6th most watched media outlet compared to all other broadcast and cable networks. More than 82 million people tune in to PBS each week. More than 70% of American households watch PBS at least once per month.
Direct CPB funding helps support PBS' National Program Service (NPS), including American Experience, American Masters, Great Performances, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and NOVA.
3. Independently-owned Local Stations that Address Community Needs
Funding cuts will hurt the 348 local public stations across the country
67% of CPB funding goes directly to local stations and allows them to acquire national programming, fund day-to-day operations and produce local programs tailored for their communities. This cut will slice between 30-40% out of most stations' overall budgets.
The loss is even greater because stations leverage federal funds to raise additional money from other sources.
In this age of media consolidation, when local media outlets are increasingly part of giant conglomerates, PBS member stations are often the only remaining locally owned and operated outlets available to the public. In many communities, local public stations are often the only source of local public affairs programming.
Public broadcasting serves a valuable purpose in our nation's rural communities and underserved areas. The proposed cuts could force stations to slash the local programming that many Americans depend on for educational, historical, cultural and informational programming in and about their communities.
4. Interconnection System for Stations
No funding was provided to fund the system that connects local stations
Public television must have an interconnection system; it is the glue that connects all local public television stations to the varied program and content material which they receive either from PBS or from other member stations.
With no new funding, the burden of the additional cost (approximately $70 million) would shift entirely to the public television stations, preventing them from focusing funds on mission-critical services such as education, public service, local information, and emergency services.
5. Station Assistance for Federally-mandated Digital Transition
No funding was provided to fund local stations' conversion to digital technology
The cuts would hinder the digital transition, which was mandated by Congress. Nearly 75% of the stations that have not yet transitioned to digital transmission are located in rural areas and these stations rely heavily on federal funding to complete the transition.
The rural stations that have already made the transition to digital need federal funding to provide informational, educational and emergency services that meet the needs of their local communities.
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 15:04 Post subject:
I don't understand why it isn't funded via a trust. That way it wouldn't have to rely on donations and the gov couldn't alter its terms when it suited it.
|
|
|
|
|
sonnylax
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 15:45 Post subject:
The bigger question is why is PBS publically funded via the federal govt. at all.
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 17:07 Post subject:
the govt should be out of the arts and entertainment business. No Endowments of Arts or Humanities and cut funding of public radio/tv.
Let it all be private.
|
|
|
|
|
cherylpf
crazy cat lady
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 17305
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 17:29 Post subject:
First and foremost, Do either of you contribute to your local PBS? Do you realize its value? Did you watch it as children (Sesame Street, Mr. Rogers, Electric Company, Captain Kangaroo, Reading Rainbow) or do your children watch it?
Here is a scenario. Sesame Street on PBS is the only pre-school education exposure to the alphabet and reading. Those families aren't the ones who can afford to contribute to PBS to keep it on air. Kids with a rough start don't easily overcome that hump (thus we have organizations like Head Start). Kids who struggle in school are much more likely to dropout, dropouts get involved in crime and drugs or at least draw from welfare programs, which, is money from the government, but probably a lot more than what would have been contributed to the ready to learn series. Just thoughts.
Here is a study reflecting the above: http://www.news.wisc.edu/6148.html
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 18:03 Post subject:
Sesame Street is also on Noggin. And if it is not produced there are hundreds of other alternatives.
I do not contribute to PBS. We do not watch it at all in this house.
With the rise of cable and like 6 kids channels along with the internet and dvd's I have numerous of other options and choices.
I support numerous charities on of which is our local theater which I would gladly pay more if they lost their meager stipend from the state.
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 18:26 Post subject:
| sonnylax wrote: | | The bigger question is why is PBS publically funded via the federal govt. at all. |
No, that's really not the bigger question. Many governments have gov-funded TV. This is one of the few govs that doesn't insist on what gets shown. Enter Margaret Spelling.
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 19:58 Post subject:
just because all other countries do it does not mean we neccesarily have to. I just think it means it takes away a lot of independence if the govt is involved. With a free market and subscriber type people can be more specific with the types of programing they choose.
Quality programing means good support without a govt safety net.
I am not sure of the raw numbers but I bet the govt support numbers are small anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 20:09 Post subject:
the local pbs station has only 14% of its revenue as a govt subsidy.
|
|
|
|
|
copteacher
Adjunct
|
|
|
Joined: 08 Jun 2002
Posts: 20588
Location: Teaching in the Halls of Justice
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 20:09 Post subject:
the local pbs station has only 14% of its revenue as a govt subsidy.
|
|
|
|
|
gretriever
Hipster Doofus
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 19385
Location: A moving target in a firing range.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 20:17 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | I don't understand why it isn't funded via a trust. That way it wouldn't have to rely on donations and the gov couldn't alter its terms when it suited it. |
Not necessarily so, Go. Remember, Social Security is supposedly a trust fund, too.
|
|
|
|
|
cherylpf
crazy cat lady
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 17305
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 21:12 Post subject:
| rtpd113 wrote: | | Sesame Street is also on Noggin. And if it is not produced there are hundreds of other alternatives. |
I don't know what noggin is but it is not available via air here. If you do not have access to cable, the alternatives to Sesame Street here are Today Show, Good Morning America and The Early Show. If they stay home from school they could even benefit from Jerry Springer and The Young and the Restless. Not exactly kid fare, and as mentioned previously, the kids who may benefit most from the Ready to Learn shows like Sesame street, are often times the ones who don't have cable or dvds.
Another reason I like public radio and television is the lack of commercials. Did you realize the US is one of the only countries where advertising targeting minors is perfectly legal? I personally don't like the likes of corporate America getting into the heads of and influencing our kids. I personally like to avoid commercials myself. Additionally this means sponsors views won't sway or censor programming as is the case on the rest of broadcasting, which is important to me as well. Talk about actually fair and balanced.
I think public broadcasting has an important place in our society and in order to stay in that place it needs government subsidies to survive.
The link above was updated some time this afternoon, thought I'd post it
| Quote: | June 23, 2005
Dear Friends,
After an unprecedented mobilization by supporters, parents, educators and "viewers like you," the House of Representatives has voted overwhelmingly and in a bi-partisan way, to partially restore cuts made earlier this month by a House Committee. Having spoken with many members of Congress myself, I know it was your voices that made the difference for them in this difficult budget year.
We are enormously grateful to the members of the House who supported this critical, though partial, restoration of funding for public broadcasting. We want to thank Representatives David Obey (D-WI), Nita Lowey (D-NY), Jim Leach (R-IA) and a bi-partisan group of members for their diligent efforts on our behalf. We are also delighted that our PBS member stations were able to generate the support of their communities who weighed in effectively with their members of Congress.
Despite this victory, we remain very concerned that essential federal funds were nonetheless eliminated for our Ready To Learn service which helps low-income parents and caregivers, for the interconnection system that links PBS with local stations and for the transition to digital broadcasting mandated by Congress.
With these cuts, the financial burden of maintaining these operations will fall entirely to local public television stations, decimating their ability to finance local programming, educational outreach and even to air PBS programming. In terms of the digital transition, without restoration of funds, many local PBS stations, especially those in rural areas, will be unable to complete the transition and will go dark when their analog signal goes off.
With the future of the public broadcasting system still at stake, we will continue to work with APTS and NPR to ensure that full funding will be restored as the bill moves through the U.S. Senate and to conference committee in order to ensure the future of public broadcasting, the only media devoted to editorial independence, to local community service and to educational children's and prime time programming.
We thank you for all of your efforts to preserve PBS and your PBS stations, and ask you to stay with us as we work to protect funding for public broadcasting through the end of this year's legislative process.
Warm regards,
Pat Mitchell
|
|
|
|
|
|
cherylpf
crazy cat lady
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 17305
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 21:17 Post subject:
I also found this relevant, from PBS.org
| Quote: | PBS Budget
PBS' operating revenue in fiscal year 2004 was $333 million. Leading sources of revenue included: station assessments (47%); CPB and federal grants (24%); royalties, license fees, satellite services and investment income (14%) and educational product sales (12%).
Leading expenditures for PBS in fiscal year 2004 included: programming and promotion (72%); member and educational services (15%); satellite interconnection and technical services (9%); general and administrative (4%).
|
|
|
|
|
|
sonnylax
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 22:32 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | No, that's really not the bigger question. Many governments have gov-funded TV. This is one of the few govs that doesn't insist on what gets shown. Enter Margaret Spelling. |
I don't really care about other governments and how they do things. Only ours and how our Constitution is interepted. Sorry to be harsh, but just because other countries do it, doesn't make it right (or even legal) here in the US.
|
|
|
|
|
sonnylax
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/23/05 - 22:52 Post subject:
Putting aside constitutional issues, government run news programming is a horrible idea. The governement is using public airwaves (TV and radio frequencies) to produce/distribute news programming. I think it's funny that many left-leaning people who scream seperation of church and state & freedom of the press, think that it's OK for the govt to do this. But I guess, whatever floats your boat. Especially when 95% of the stuff coming from NPR/PBS is overwhelming liberal in nature.
Cheryl -- If you (and others) enjoy the programming available on PBS/NPR, then support it with your eyes/ears/wallets. To force me & other taxpayers to support commercial endeavors like news programs (that otherwise couldn't/wouldn't exist) isn't fair. And yes, I would say the same thing if say Rush Limbaugh was on NPR.
|
|
|
|
| |
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
Related topics: | |
|
|
