6 ms·
I listen to NPR every day and, honestly, I think this might be for the best. It's going to hurt for a while, but in the end, I think public broadcasting will be
by munchler 1y ago
I listen to NPR every day and, honestly, I think this might be for the best. It's going to hurt for a while, but in the end, I think public broadcasting will be stronger when it stands on its own without interference from politicians.
- Pfhortune 1y ago> I think public broadcasting will be stronger when it stands on its own without interference from politicians. What does the "public" in "public broadcasting" mean to you?
- munchler 1y agoIdeally, it would be entirely non-commercial, funded by direct donations from the public.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Eisenstein 1y agoWhat are taxes for, then?
- otterley 1y agoThe American public's attitude towards using taxes to support media has shifted over the past few decades. There's a perception (right or wrong) that public media is liberally biased, and it's getting government attention now, and so we're seeing the consequences of that.
- munchler 1y agoThings that are supported by a durable majority of the population. I wish that included public broadcasting, but it doesn't. Personally, I'm tired of hearing conservatives whine about public broadcasting. This will at least shut them up for good.
- toomanyrichies 1y ago> This will at least shut them up for good. No it won't. The modern GOP is fueled by grievance. It needs an "other" in order to exist. They'll have a new enemy to rail against by this time tomorrow.
- munchler 1y agoYes, of course, but it won’t be public broadcasting anymore. That’s why this might be a win for public broadcasting in the long run.
- anigbrowl 1y agoThis is naive. If conservatives continue to perceive outlets like PBS as a thorn in their political sides, they'll go after their broadcasting licenses or target them with ruinous lawsuits - both actions that have been discussed or taken by conservative politicians already.
- bix6 1y agoI guess we should just support the post office with donations while we’re at it. That’ll work well!
- munchler 1y agoI suspect the post office is still supported by a durable majority. If it isn’t, then it will probably lose government funding as well.
- SoftTalker 1y agoVoluntary vs. Compelled is the difference.
- Eisenstein 1y agoAre you saying that non-commercial broadcasting does not count as a public good, or that taxes should be voluntary, or that it does count as a public good but taxes should not be spent on it?
- pfortuny 1y agoThat is not what "public" means in ordinary language. Public is intended to mean "supported by taxes". Support by donations is always dependent on the largest donor.
- jleyank 1y agoSee Post, Washington to see what "dependent on the largest donor" is revealed to be.
- munchler 1y agoNot going to argue semantics with you. The US government was the largest donor until now. No single non-governmental donor will ever have that level of influence again.
- GuinansEyebrows 1y agoit's not a semantic argument. you misunderstand the term in question.
- munchler 1y agoUntil this change, public broadcasting got 85% of its funding from donations, so whatever the term used to mean, that's what it means now.
- ascagnel_ 1y agoThen it becomes an organization dominated by those who donate the most -- and there have already been cases where a PBS affiliate self-censored and modified its editorial in an attempt to placate a potential donor[0]. [0] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/27/a-word-from-our-sponsor https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/27/a-word-from-ou...
- infamia 1y agoCan we call it public broadcasting when it fails to even dimly reflect the diversity of ideas for the areas it serves? Milk toast conservatives like Juan Williams were deemed intolerable a long time ago, so calling it public radio at this point is a misnomer and a sad farce.
- tayloramurphy 1y agoI think you mean "milquetoast". The wikipedia link led me to "milk toast", which is interesting in itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspar_Milquetoast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspar_Milquetoast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_toast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_toast
- saagarjha 1y agoTIL the etymology for the word
- otterley 1y agoJuan Williams wasn't let go because he's conservative; it's because he's a bigot (unless you think being a bigot is a conservative qualification): "Look, Bill [O'Reilly], I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous." https://www.npr.org/2010/10/21/130712737/npr-ends-williams-contract-after-muslim-remarks https://www.npr.org/2010/10/21/130712737/npr-ends-williams-c... "NPR, like any mainstream news outlet, expects its journalists to be thoughtful and measured in everything they say. What Williams said was deeply offensive to Muslims and inflamed, rather than contributing positively, to an important debate about the role of Muslims in America." https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2010/10/21/130713285/nprs-firing-of-juan-williams-was-poorly-handled https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2010/10/21/1307132...
- BeetleB 1y ago> I think public broadcasting will be stronger when it stands on its own without interference from politicians. What does the "public" in public broadcasting mean to you?
- dpe82 1y agoHasn't it been largely free of interference up until now? And would you prefer it suffer from corporate interference like all other media?
- munchler 1y agoIt's been a political football for decades. Conservatives use it as an example of liberal spending run amok, so public broadcasting has had to constantly look over its shoulder during that time. No, I would like to eliminate corporate influence as well, but that might not be possible in a capitalist society.
- asadotzler 1y agoTake a tax supported public good, remove the public support and then claim to worry about corporate influence? What do you think was holding that corporate influence at bay?
- munchler 1y agoUnfortunately, the necessary level of public support doesn't exist, so relying on government money isn't viable. I hope public broadcasting will get enough money directly from individuals to resist excessive corporate influence, but we'll have to see.
- saagarjha 1y agoWho do you think the individuals donating will be?
- unethical_ban 1y agoIt hasn't been interfered with until now, what are you talking about about?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- dralley 1y agoNPR can also be a bit of a meme sometimes. Maybe it's just circumstance but every time I hear NPR for any period of time longer than about 20 minutes they do a segment on a topic like polyamory, how women are proudly reclaiming the word "bimbo", or people protesting the administration using interpretive dance. It is certainly not programming with much mass market appeal.
- Pfhortune 1y agoPerhaps not every form of media needs to be engagement-driven? The beautiful thing about public media is that it can broadcast things that don't have a profit-motive for being broadcast.
- frumplestlatz 1y agoShouldn’t publicly funded media at least be representative of the wide diversity of views and interests that the public holds?
- autoexec 1y agoWhat topics and interests do you think they've never covered?
- swed420 1y ago> The beautiful thing about public media is that it can broadcast things that don't have a profit-motive for being broadcast. True, so one would expect to have heard much more about Bernie Sanders when he was making runs for president. Unfortunately the only coverage he usually got on likes of NPR was when it was something negative about him. So much for straying from profit motive.
- radiofreeeuropa 1y agoMost of NPR's news programming has been terrible for many years. Pay attention to how many segments—even that are sort-of connected to an actual news event, which, many aren't—revolve around political strategy, poll numbers, and (in season, which is now like three years out of four) electoral race polling. It's, like... a lot of them, outside the human-interest and arts coverage stuff. They consistently divert into talking about political media messaging strategy and poll numbers and crap, and they do it so very much that it's got to be something they're doing on purpose. This isn't news reporting, it's lazy, safe (because you don't have to engage with substantive questions of policy and outcomes, nor even questions of fact) horse-race bullshit. It's a complete waste of the listener's time, if they're there for actual news reporting. On the flip side, though, I'm not seeing a lot of "sink or swim in the market" US media doing much better, so I wouldn't bet on them shifting to anything better (though shift they might).
- arrosenberg 1y agoI wonder how the people at NPR feel about all those donations they took from the Koch Foundation over the years...
- otterley 1y agoThey feel fine about it. They're run plenty of pieces that run counter to Koch Industries' interests. (Also, did you mean the Charles Koch Foundation or the David H. Koch Foundation? The Koch Foundation is a different entity with a different mission.)
- arrosenberg 1y agoYou obviously know which ones I mean.
- gizzlon 1y ago> when it stands on its own without interference from politicians Why on earth do you think it will be free of interference? Obviously they will find other ways to pressure and censor them. As they have done in many cases already.
- jfengel 1y agoYou prefer interference by corporations?