291–300 of 646 posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_for_Public_Broadca...
The Wikipedia page looks almost entirely about politics and funding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not 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.
it's not a semantic argument. you misunderstand the term in question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> PBS only receives about 15% of its funds from federal funding I'm a big fan of PBS, but I wonder if this common stat is misleading. Don't a huge portion of PBS funds come from member stations, which get a portion of their funds from federal funding?
Yes it is so obviously misleading and incorrect that only the mainstream media could have perpetuated this unquestioned for decades. The federal money goes to member stations which then hands it right over to NPR to pay for programming, I believe it’s $500 per hour. It’s 1 layer of indirection but no one seemed to mention this in all of the reporting
The actual PBS and NPR shows you're familiar with are generally developed and produced privately, and then purchased by local PBS stations (streaming access to PBS content runs through "Passport", which is a mechanism for getting people to donate to their local PBS station even while consuming that content on the Internet). This (and other streaming things like it) is how most people actually consume this content in 2025. If your local PBS affiliate vanishes, you as a viewer are not going to lose Masterpiece Theater or Nova, because you almost certainly weren't watching those shows on linear television anyways.
The cuts are bad, I just want to make sure people understand what CPB ceasing operations actually means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apologies for the following snark - it's tragic, so this is more of a reaction comment: > I have found public broadcasting to be one of the least biased sources of headline news and information available > kids programming is the absolute best Fixed that for you: > I USED TO FIND public broadcasting provided the least biased sources of headline news and information available > kids programming WAS the absolute best
CPB is going away, NPR and PBS are not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Concerned by the lack of viewpoint diversity, I looked at voter registration for our newsroom. In D.C., where NPR is headquartered and many of us live, I found 87 registered Democrats working in editorial positions and zero Republicans. None. https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-npr-lost-americas-tru...
Just because conservatives hate kids and don't want to be teachers/educators/work at universities doesn't mean it's biased or bad. It's like if you wanted a diversity of opinions designing a rocket so you decided to pull in flat earth's as well as new earth creationist. You're not getting a better rocket. Perhaps a better fireworks show, though.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-trump-bump-the-republican-fer...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thats expected. In functioning democracies state media is run for the purpose not profit. It doesnt have the corrupting influence of political money. PBS in the US could be so much better. Just look at what BBC is able to do in the UK.
> PBS in the US could be so much better. PBS Newshour is pretty much the best/balanced news programming on US TV at this point. They take deeper dives into issues than most of the other shows out there. And then there's Frontline which is excellent and goes even deeper with a documentary format. The rest of PBS - there are a few good parts like Nova, but a lot of what plays on PBS stations these days is UK crime dram…
Ah yes, the news show that has a weekly politics round table that brings in a balanced approach to see issues from both sides: The side of an anti-Trump Democrat and the side of an anti-Trump Republican.
Good riddance!