PBS, CSPAN, Cut?

[0zzy]

They get money from federal dollars.
Would Ron Paul cut it?
If so, he needs to watch Mr. Rogers himself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a41lJIhW7fA

[tekkierich]

C-SPAN gets no government funding. It is paid for by cable operators and runs as a non-profit

[Dustancostine]

PBS should probably go, but I think they should keep CSPAN because it broadcast the House and Senate, who are working for the people, this is really important.

--D

[Perry]

I don't think Ron Paul is concerned about getting rid of pbs. He only has two terms remember. That's hardly enough time to get around to a lone tv station.
As tekkierich stated C-span is private. Thank God for that. For the record i would greatly miss pbs if it disappeared but if it meant Ron Paul was in the White House so be it. Anyway under a Paul presidency other networks might just start to resemble PBS a little more.

[0zzy]

PBS should probably go, but I think they should keep CSPAN because it broadcast the House and Senate, who are working for the people, this is really important.

--D

Hm... PBS is the only company that isn't biased with the best reporting! :X
I think they get a lot of local funding from states, cities, and foundations too, though.

[fletcher]

CSPAN would stay because it doesn't get government funding. PBS would, and should, stop receiving funding. This doesn't mean it would go away. It would just have to collect more in donations or add some commercials. There is no reason that a PRIVATE CORPORATION should be getting taxpayer money just because people like the programs. If PBS is a valued service it will have no trouble raising the funds, just like every other station.

[0zzy]

CSPAN would stay because it doesn't get government funding. PBS would, and should, stop receiving funding. This doesn't mean it would go away. It would just have to collect more in donations or add some commercials. There is no reason that a PRIVATE CORPORATION should be getting taxpayer money just because people like the programs. If PBS is a valued service it will have no trouble raising the funds, just like every other station.

I'm not even going to mention it anymore. It might get to Ron Paul, I'd rather him ignore it. I like my non-biased media thank you very much :]

[buffalokid777]

Hm... PBS is the only company that isn't biased with the best reporting! :X
I think they get a lot of local funding from states, cities, and foundations too, though.

With Funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, and Ford Foundation, PBS Is DEFINATELY Gloabilst biased.

[0zzy]

With Funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, and Ford Foundation, PBS Is DEFINATELY Gloabilst biased.

ahm? Evidence? They are the only ones who expose the government on a lot of their BS. But no one watches it, so they call us "conspiracy theorist on your internets!"

[hard@work]

Ron Paul would want PBS to go, but the people won't let it happen. That is what we have democrats for anyways.

[buffalokid777]

ahm? Evidence? They are the only ones who expose the government on a lot of their BS. But no one watches it, so they call us "conspiracy theorist on your internets!"

Watch PBS for proof especially the credits at the end, you'll see the sponsered by the Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation all the time.

I saw a Global Climate Change Fluff piece about a week ago....Sure enough, Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation funding, just like many news programs on there.

[fletcher]

I'm not even going to mention it anymore. It might get to Ron Paul, I'd rather him ignore it. I like my non-biased media thank you very much :]

I like PBS too. That doesn't mean the government should take money from the taxpayers so I can watch it. I like the history channel, but the government shouldn't give them money. Why should people that don't watch PBS pay for it? I'll sit through commercials, I'll donate money, but I won't let the government steal my money for their unconstitutional hobbies. Imagine PBS was MTV. Would you still support the government giving it money? Do you really think that the government should should be spending $400,000,000 a year on a tv and radio station?

[0zzy]

I like PBS too. That doesn't mean the government should take money from the taxpayers so I can watch it. I like the history channel, but the government shouldn't give them money. Why should people that don't watch PBS pay for it? I'll sit through commercials, I'll donate money, but I won't let the government steal my money for their unconstitutional hobbies. Imagine PBS was MTV. Would you still support the government giving it money? Do you really think that the government should should be spending $400,000,000 a year on a tv and radio station?

I was going to say yes...but,

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/9/100111.shtml

mainly because


He points out that PBS receives only 15 percent of its funds from the federal government, and if PBS and National Public Radio lost all their federal money, they wouldn't disappear.

Which is what I thought anyways.


Nah I lied, I saw Mr. Rogers again. Mr. Rogers is ownage :[.
I dono.

I'd have to do more research into it.

[fletcher]

I was going to say yes...but,

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/9/100111.shtml



Yes to what?

You should read the actual article. It's good.

http://www.liberty-watch.com/volume01/issue06/givemeabreak.php

[saku39]

I like PBS, I have many great memories watching Sesame Street, 321 Contact, Mister Rogers, etc. Nowadays, I sometimes watch their documentaries and news shows. My dad ALWAYS used to watch nature shows on PBS.

It shouldn't be federally funded, however. I would be sad to see it go, but I wouldn't have a problem cutting it.

If it was cut, within a year somebody somewhere would create something similar to it to replace it. It would be on cable/satellite though. That's not such a bad thing, if I remember correctly only 10% of the country doesn't have either.

[erowe1]

PBS is largely funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is itself largely funded by the feds. Yes, obviously this has to go. Paying for this is ridiculous. Whatever slight justification ever existed for it is completely gone now that all of the options of cable exist for people who see educational and children's programs as necessities for their lives.

And for those of you who think PBS would disappear without federal funds, you're mistaken. Its most popular shows, such as Sesame Street, are extremely profitable and would do just fine without relying on government funds that are extorted from the public by the state.

[angelatc]

Here's another thing: We're now publically financing crap liek Boo Bahs and Teletubbies, both programs designed for kids under 3.

There's just something wrong and self-serving about planting babies in front of the TV.