Here's a simple test to help liberals understand why NPR/PBS should be defunded (1 Viewer)

[Napoleon]

They've been doing this for years in full compliance with FCC rules and guidelines (not that you actually care about law and order). MAGA just hates PBS and NPR. They don't want press that won't report MAGA Propaganda 24/7 and seek to destroy those outlets. That's all. The only thing that has changed is that now MAGA is fully in charge of the government and going after anything they don't like. Nothing more.

Just because somebody has been doing something for years doesn’t mean it’s legal. The bottom line is they’re not supposed to be receiving federal funding while running commercials all day for VRC with a prohibited call to action. They’re just luck there isn’t a clawback.

 

[Deuce]

I'd like to challenge any right winger to link us an NPR segment that is "promoting an agenda" for Democrats, and explain how it is doing that.

 

[Irredentist]

Lol. Don’t complain about law and order while defending PBS for violating federal law and regulations with commercial advertisements.

Funny how the law only ever seems to apply to the political opponents of the man in charge.

 

[Airyaman]

First of all, the original law that created and justified funding these public entities included a crystal clear requirement that they behave in a neutral and unbiased manner. In light of that(which the "news" media are omitying Here's a basic quiz question for libs who think NPR/PBS should be perpetually funded by taxpayers, even in their current ideological state:

**Would you want these public media entities to be funded by taxpayers if they endlessly promoted the agenda and ideology of Republicans and the far right?

Somehow I think the answer would be an unambiguous NO! But somehow we should fund them while they consistently shill for Democrats, promote their agenda, while pushing leftist ideology.

Can you give real world examples of NPR's "leftist ideology"?

 

[Napoleon]

Funny how the law only ever seems to apply to the political opponents of the man in charge.

The Democrats put a target on their back when they started running around saying “no one is above the law” with every other breath.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

They do report the news in an unbiased manner.
What they do not do is broadcast right wing propaganda.
That is the reason, (the only reason), donald wants them stopped.
I also question the Constitutionality of donald ending funding for entities who are funded through Congress by E.O.

It's right there in the Constitution. The president controls the purse strings. One person gets to say where every dime is spent. MAGA loves it.

 

[Irredentist]

The Democrats put a target on their back when they started running around saying “no one is above the law” with every other breath.

Well they were wrong, weren't they? Obviously, there are people who are above the law, like the man in charge and whoever he happens to like.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

Lol. Don’t complain about law and order while defending PBS for violating federal law and regulations with commercial advertisements.

If Viking started doing cruises around the Florida coast, and Mar-a-Lago was one of the stops and Trump could profit off of it, rest assured he wouldn't be having his surrogates say a damn thing about this.

This isn't about PBS violating (strong word, by the way....its more like skirting, something Trump is more than familiar with) federal laws. Its about punishing them because they don't openly worship the ground he walks on.

 

[Ikari]

Just because somebody has been doing something for years doesn’t mean it’s legal. The bottom line is they’re not supposed to be receiving federal funding while running commercials all day for VRC with a prohibited call to action. They’re just luck there isn’t a clawback.

Nope, it was all done within the FCC guidelines. MAGAs are just trying to find reasons to nix it because they hate educational programing. Probably because MAGAs have to live in a world of willfully ignorant.

 

[Questerr]

First of all, the original law that created and justified funding these public entities included a crystal clear requirement that they behave in a neutral and unbiased manner. In light of that(which the "news" media are omitying Here's a basic quiz question for libs who think NPR/PBS should be perpetually funded by taxpayers, even in their current ideological state:

**Would you want these public media entities to be funded by taxpayers if they endlessly promoted the agenda and ideology of Republicans and the far right?

Somehow I think the answer would be an unambiguous NO! But somehow we should fund them while they consistently shill for Democrats, promote their agenda, while pushing leftist ideology.

It’s that damn leftwing bias of reality again. Why do reality and the facts about it have to be so against conservatives?

 

[Stealers Wheel]

The Democrats put a target on their back when they started running around saying “no one is above the law” with every other breath.

Because they are wrong, isn't that right? SCOTUS has ruled that Donald Trump is above the law.

 

[Napoleon]

Because they are wrong, isn't that right? SCOTUS has ruled that Donald Trump is above the law.

Well, it’s always been difficult to square with a number of their platform positions. Not to mention their own behavior.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

Just because somebody has been doing something for years doesn’t mean it’s legal. The bottom line is they’re not supposed to be receiving federal funding while running commercials all day for VRC with a prohibited call to action. They’re just luck there isn’t a clawback.

Just because the new guy in a position is making shit up as he goes along to reinterpret shit that has been going on for decades doesn't make it illegal either. Unless its your contention that every person that proceeded him in his position was an idiot and allowed something illegal to be going on for this long, you really have no leg to stand on. You have repeatedly been shown that both your and his interpretation are incorrect....sometimes an ad isn't an AD.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

It's right there in the Constitution. The president controls the purse strings. One person gets to say where every dime is spent. MAGA loves it.

I'm wondering, what do we need Congress for, now that donalds at the helm?
He can just rule by E.O.
After all, his word is "law" anyways, right?
For that matter, what do we need Judges for? We could just use individual "A.I. donalds" in all our courts.
Just think of the savings!!

 

[BirdinHand]

Lol. Don’t complain about law and order while defending PBS for violating federal law and regulations with commercial advertisements.

You’re wrong - again.

They are a corporate sponsor. Which is allowed.

But spin away.

 

[BirdinHand]

They've been doing this for years in full compliance with FCC rules and guidelines (not that you actually care about law and order). MAGA just hates PBS and NPR. They don't want press that won't report MAGA Propaganda 24/7 and seek to destroy those outlets. That's all. The only thing that has changed is that now MAGA is fully in charge of the government and going after anything they don't like. Nothing more.

that’s a dishonest poster who repeatedly posts false claims and then double and triples down on them.

This is just another instance of that.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

You’re wrong - again.

They are a corporate sponsor. Which is allowed.

But spin away.

I already pointed out to Napoleon the difference between advertising and sponsorship, but what you have to realize, there are those of a particular demographic, once they become convinced of something, especially when exposed to ideas planted in their minds by rightwing media and Trump, no amount of reasoning will get through to them.
Once that lot gets a burr in their saddle they have to scratch it and scratch it and scratch it. PBS is a favorite target of the Right, so of course if they are told that their sponsors are "advertising" then that is what they are going to believe.

I painted a picture for Napoleon #49 but because he has been programmed to detest PBS or because his idol the honorable Donald Trump has a bone to pick with PBS, no amount of picture painting is going to help. Sad, isn't it?

 

[cpwill]

No, it means that reality tends to differ significantly from MAGA commies propaganda.

and is going to begin reflecting MAGA commie propaganda if it is kept. PBS and NPR played to the NYT crowd - leftwingers who think of themselves as "respectable". Anyone who thinks Trump (or those who follow in his footsteps) wouldn't be willing to turn state run media networks to explicitly supporting governing agenda's isn't paying attention domestically or internationally.

OP is correct. the US Government shouldn't be funding media outlets to begin with. States - which have a wider range of authorities - are free to do so, and probably shouldn't.

 

[Craig234]

Republicans are radicalized to support lies, then think that the truth is 'liberal lies'. That's all there is to it. NPR and PBS are biased to the *right*, frequently giving a platform to right-wing lies, and less often for Progressives telling the truth. It's a bad habit that's gotten worse since Bush corrupted their management. They'll do stories when the only person interviewed is from a right-wing media organization and they just let them talk.

 

[Ikari]

and is going to begin reflecting MAGA commie propaganda if it is kept. PBS and NPR played to the NYT crowd - leftwingers who think of themselves as "respectable". Anyone who thinks Trump (or those who follow in his footsteps) wouldn't be willing to turn state run media networks to explicitly supporting governing agenda's isn't paying attention domestically or internationally.

OP is correct. the US Government shouldn't be funding media outlets to begin with. States - which have a wider range of authorities - are free to do so, and probably shouldn't.

It's not "state run", though. It's partially funded with government funds, but it's not "state run", nor should it be.

 

[cpwill]

It's not "state run", though. It's partially funded with government funds, but it's not "state run", nor should it be.

Then let us free it from the government control (and risk of even greater government control) that comes with government funds.

 

[Ikari]

Then let us free it from the government control (and risk of even greater government control) that comes with government funds.

There are plenty of things that run independently from the government while receiving some amount of funding from government. That's a piss poor argument.

 

[Jezcoe]

It's not "state run", though. It's partially funded with government funds, but it's not "state run", nor should it be.

I think a lot of it is a misunderstanding about how PBS actually operates.

There are a few powerhouse stations across the country that produce quite a bit of public TV media.

Years ago I worked on a show called “Between the Lions” which was a fantastic kids show.

It was produced by WGBH out of Boston but I as produced in NYC. The way the deal went… not sure if this is still the model.. WGBH would commit to two years of production but after that the show had to be self sustaining. That means that in addition to PBS stations across the country buying the content, they had to find alternate revenue streams like Books and merchandise.

Sadly the show… as great as it was… never really took off. A station in Louisiana I believe (could be mistaken) took up the production costs and produced more episodes for a couple more season but at noticeably diminished production value.

The only government money involved is for the local affiliates to purchase the show if they wanted to air it.

This model has been good and bad.

People point to Sesame Street… another show I worked on until 9/12/2001…. Long story… but production of that show was briefly taken on by HBO but that arrangement has ended and now all of the sets are in a couple of studios in Queens while they look for money to produce more episodes.

Even then, the production schedule for Sesame Street which used to me measured in months has been measured in weeks for quite a while now.

 

[cpwill]

There are plenty of things that run independently from the government while receiving some amount of funding from government. That's a piss poor argument.

No it's not. The government has no business funding or running a media enterprise, and appealing to donor-drives doesn't change that, nor does it change the reality that (as our States well know and as Colleges are finding out) taking Federal Funds comes with Federal Control.

If you honestly - now, of all times - can't see how this sets the stage for abuse, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Diving Mullah]

First of all, the original law that created and justified funding these public entities included a crystal clear requirement that they behave in a neutral and unbiased manner. In light of that(which the "news" media are omitying Here's a basic quiz question for libs who think NPR/PBS should be perpetually funded by taxpayers, even in their current ideological state:

**Would you want these public media entities to be funded by taxpayers if they endlessly promoted the agenda and ideology of Republicans and the far right?

Somehow I think the answer would be an unambiguous NO! But somehow we should fund them while they consistently shill for Democrats, promote their agenda, while pushing leftist ideology.

Would you want these public media entities to be funded by taxpayers if they endlessly promoted the agenda and ideology of Republicans and the far right?

Oh my dear esteemed uninformed citizen, but we are funding the right media networks...

Under FCC Chairman Ajit Pai during the Trump administration, the FCC reinstated the "UHF discount," a regulatory loophole that allowed Sinclair to expand its reach beyond the congressionally imposed nationwide audience cap of 39%. This move enabled Sinclair to potentially reach 72% of U.S. households after acquiring Tribune's stations. The New YorkerAxios+2POLITICO+2Teen Vogue+2


Sinclair's influence extends through its ownership of numerous local television stations across the United States. The company has been known to mandate "must-run" segments with conservative viewpoints, including editorials and commentary that align with right-wing perspectives. This practice has raised concerns about the objectivity of local news and the potential dissemination of biased information.

Also, ultra-right Christian organizations that promote ultra-right political views. Not just the region, have enjoyed tax exemptions, so by your argument, they should be on the chopping block, and yet I doubt you support.
that!?!

Your argument seems to say Hey, let's cut funding to those institutions that I am against!

This does shine a bright light on the type of dogma you subscribe to

Diving Mullah