3 ms·
> Their programming features a clear and unmistakeable liberal* bias, and the fact that you seem to be unaware of this probably just means that you share this w
by jballanc 9y ago
> Their programming features a clear and unmistakeable liberal* bias, and the fact that you seem to be unaware of this probably just means that you share this worldview.
"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."
All joking aside, I definitely acknowledge NPR's liberal bias. My main point was to "follow the money". More traditional liberal (and conservative) media outlets have funding that is much more "active" (for lack of a better term) than NPR.
- humanrebar 9y agoOn the other hand, NPR and PBS exist partly because they are effective at lobbying Congress for funding.
- dragonwriter 9y agoNPR and PBS are extremely ineffective at lobbying Congress for funding; what federal funding NPR gets is indirect through member stations, but federal funding is far behind listener support and corporate sponsorship in the revenue streams reaching the member stations; the CPBs federal funding, adjusted for inflation, is basically flat for 40 years.
- humanrebar 9y agoYou're saying that PBS and NPR get nontrivial amounts of money from the federal budget. Their ability to maintain that despite challenges (which have been effectively countered with pleas Mr. Rogers and Big Bird) is notably effective lobbying. Extremely ineffective lobbying would be having elbow-patched public intellectuals testifying about federal funding's benefits on the broader Hegelian dialectic.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> You're saying that PBS and NPR get nontrivial amounts of money from the federal budget. No, I'm not.