- Joined
- Nov 20, 2013
- Messages
- 65,391
- Reaction score
- 49,418
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
The lying liberal fake news factory sold you another lemon
That story is not true
Winston Churchill on the Arts
Absolutely. Thought you would be a Christian? Help. Your fellow man. Or the good old American way? I'm ok, screw the rest.? Very noble.
Just because you like being an ignoramus doesn't mean we others like to give people the chance for education
Resent 5c / year?
No problem with 1/2 our discretional spending going to the glorified military? That's billions
Unfortunately, your money got spent bribing Fat Leonard. So stop whining.
What?
Thats the guy that spent your money. You can google him yourself.
Rather surprised that you'd on one hand consider it as biased news, and then also call it good news. I kinda always thought that news should be factual and unbiased. But maybe that's just me.
News can still be biased and be high quality. Maybe NPR shouldn't count as good news, but it's less biased than 70-80% of what is out there. I didn't say it was the best of the best, but it IS factual and they cover the important issues well. It isn't my go-to source, but I'll read/listen an interesting article they post from time to time. All news isn't political anyway.
News can still be biased and be high quality. Maybe NPR shouldn't count as good news, but it's less biased than 70-80% of what is out there. I didn't say it was the best of the best, but it IS factual and they cover the important issues well. It isn't my go-to source, but I'll read/listen an interesting article they post from time to time. All news isn't political anyway.
That's tells me 80% of whats out there is biased crap. Just because there aren't good products out there doesn't mean we should subsidize the ones that are supposedly good.
That's tells me 80% of whats out there is biased crap. Just because there aren't good products out there doesn't mean we should subsidize the ones that are supposedly good.
I'd have to agree with OC here. From my view, the vast majority, OK, let's use the 80% figure, of the news reporting is biased left, both at the content level - of how something is reported, as well as at the editorial level - what is reported. Above the fold front page for something that casts Republicans and conservatives in a bad light, retractions of previous untrue claims, corrections, or something that casts Republicans and conservatives in a good like at the back. And vice versa for Democrats / liberals / progressive. Yeah, editorial bias at it's finest.
I never said we should subsidize it, if you read my previous posts I actually said the opposite. I personally enjoy listening/reading it because I'm slightly Liberal and they do actually have good stories and not all news is political, but that doesn't mean I think the government should subsidize a Left-leaning newspaper. I would say NPR is still "good" news, or at least what should be considered OK news. I was implying that 80% of what is out there is crap with my comment. Bias news is still news as long as it's factual, and honestly there are only like 2-3 news sources I know of that come even close to being unbiased.
I am still 110% behind PBS funding though.
I never said we should subsidize it, if you read my previous posts I actually said the opposite. I personally enjoy listening/reading it because I'm slightly Liberal and they do actually have good stories and not all news is political, but that doesn't mean I think the government should subsidize a Left-leaning newspaper. I would say NPR is still "good" news, or at least what should be considered OK news. I was implying that 80% of what is out there is crap with my comment. Bias news is still news as long as it's factual, and honestly there are only like 2-3 news sources I know of that come even close to being unbiased.
I am still 110% behind PBS funding though.
What appears might be an interesting discussion broke out in the cartoons thread.
Not wanting to run afoul of the cartoon thread rules, I thought I'd bring the discussion here.
Kobie, now granted the meme is a bit over the top, but I'd like to understand more of your points "Save me the taxpayer and "marketplace of ideas" garbage. That's not the point of PBS and NPR."
Specifically:
What is the point of NPR and PBS?
Why do you think that the taxpayer and "marketplace of ideas" is a garbage position?
Does not NPR and PBS receive at least some of their funding from the government, i.e. the tax payers?
And do please elaborate as to what is 'point' of NPR and PBS.
Where in my post that you quoted did I speak of subsidizing PBS or NPR?
Fine that you believe PBS should have public funding. Other opinions differ. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, last I recall (or did the left ban that too now?)
You had previously talked about how we shouldn't subsidize it, we've been at this a almost a week I think now
And I by and large agree with your reasons why we shouldn't fund NPR. I'd previously stated why I think we should fund PBS, but that's just an opinion as well, no need to demonize it. I never said any against people with different opinions.
I'm not even that left leaning anyway, and in some areas I'm fairly conservative, like gun control and economics.
Been on vacation...a refreshing escape from all the hustle and bustle of the political world. Ah...
Without going through this poll, I'll simply say PBS and NPR are very important sources of independent, well sourced news and information society needs in order to make well informed decisions. A great majority of the news and information reported on PBS and NPR is unfiltered, non-bias and impartial. Moreover, despite all the accusations that both of these public broadcasting entities are federally funded, most of their reporting comes from "contributions from viewers like you" - John Q Public - as well as a vast assortment of charitable foundations.
Something else people don't seem to take into account is how much the states depend on public broadcasting as well. Here in Alabama, for example, the PBS networks have been expanded. We now have 4 different PBS channels offering very different forms of information: children's programming, local/nationals/international news, cooking/home improvement/self-improvement programming and then their flagship PBS station which airs just about anything for public viewing.
Frankly, I think public broadcasting is a good thing. The only people threatened by it are those who believe they're hidden agenda (whatever it might be) will eventually be exposed through independent journalism.
I agree except for the part about the government being in the broadcasting business. I hope they continue the quality programming as they move to an advertising based revenue model.
Except one of the main reasons I watch PBS is because they don't constantly run adds.
Except one of the main reasons I watch PBS is because they don't constantly run adds.
Then figure out how to run it on private donations. It is not the role of government to operate broadcast networks.
Then figure out how to run it on private donations. It is not the role of government to operate broadcast networks.
Then the government shouldn't run public museums or parks. PBS is a public good that provides educational content for free for everyone. You can sit your toddler to your tween in front of PBS Kids and know they will see high quality content without being indoctrinated with consumerism.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?