Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

cpb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 596 posts

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#201

Post by jampekka »

mike_hearn wrote: post #72
hadrien01 wrote: post #2

I suppose this is in response to this executive order: ENDING TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZATION OF BIASED MEDIA https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/05/endi... I would add that PBS has this to say about public media funding: > The U.S. is almost literally off the chart for how little we allocate towards our public media. At the federal level, it comes out to a little over $1.50 per person per year. Compare that…

PBS would say that. Back here in reality the BBC is trusted by only about 40-44% of the British population, and actively distrusted by around a quarter. The true number who trust it is probably lower, as those polls suffer volunteering bias and other problems that push responses to the left when there's no ground truth to weight to. There's a profound moral problem with forcing people to pay money for media they acti…

Perhaps a relevant context is that the 44% is highest of any UK media.

As for other public broadcasters, in e.g. Finland Yle is trusted by 82%, by far the highest for any media.

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45744-which-media-out...

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#202

Post by andrewblossom »

afavour wrote: post #29
bhouston wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain and reference sources? Otherwise it is a pretty vague comment.

I would imagine Project 2025 is a good source here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 Every American owes it to themselves to familiarize themselves with the project and its aims, because a number of its authors are the ones wielding power right now.

And a good way to keep track of their "progress" here: https://www.project2025.observer/

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#203

Post by pjc50 »

xienze wrote: post #140
pjc50 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, one piece of free speech justifies deleting the entire station.

I suppose you’d feel the same if Fox News said J6 was a legitimate political protest, right.

Which branch of government is Fox News taking EOs from again? Ah, no, it's the other way round.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#204

Post by DonHopkins »

arcbyte wrote: post #30
bhouston wrote: post #3

The US is so weird right now. You have a President who is ordering the defunding of tons of groups (universities, media, aid, institutes) while not clearly having that authority and often doing so for what he views as ideological crimes. Also arresting and trying to deport people for things that are not clearly crimes (newspaper op-eds, etc) and without due process. Very strange times. Right now I have some faith the…

I say this as a firm conservative. The courts have so far been outstanding, despite all the inappropriate pressure. I have no doubt they will continue to be. I'm also quite impressed with conservative voters who are speaking out to their conservative representatives. Ultimately though, despite many many calls not to do so, Congress has goven the executive branch unheard of powers. Executive power needs to be reigned…

[flagged]

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#205

Post by mike_hearn »

yladiz wrote: post #102
mike_hearn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PBS would say that. Back here in reality the BBC is trusted by only about 40-44% of the British population, and actively distrusted by around a quarter. The true number who trust it is probably lower, as those polls suffer volunteering bias and other problems that push responses to the left when there's no ground truth to weight to. There's a profound moral problem with forcing people to pay money for media they acti…

What profound moral problem are you talking about? If you take your point even further, you could argue there’s a moral problem with forcing people who are distrusting of or despise the government to pay taxes at all, but it’s generally agreed that the health of a country in part does depend on revenues generated by taxes (since you need money to pay for things that benefit many people, like roads, public transit, et…

Yeah, the morality of taxation and the role of the state is a deep topic that has been debated for thousands of years.

Nearly everyone accepts that taxation is justified for some cases where you can't really avoid benefiting from the expenditure, the textbook example being public goods like defense (you can't opt-out of benefiting from the defeat of an invading army) or a lighthouse (you can't stop a sailor who didn't pay from seeing it).

And post-communism most people accept that taxation is not justified for many other cases, for example, using tax money to gift the president a private golf club would not be moral (he can buy golfing time with his salary or prior wealth). The benefit only accrues to the user in that case, and they can easily pay for it themselves.

In the past you could argue that state media was more like a lighthouse, because signals were broadcast from towers unencrypted and there was no way to restrict reception to people who paid. So, pass a tax and make everyone pay if they own any kind of receiving device at all.

But technological progress has changed everything. It's now easy to restrict broadcasts to only people who paid for them. TV/radio is no longer like a lighthouse, it's now more like a magazine and therefore it's immoral to tax fund them because they're not public goods anymore. You wouldn't be happy to find the government had forcibly subscribed you to the Wall Street Journal, right? You'd point out that people who want to read it can just buy a copy themselves. Same thing for TV/radio.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#206

Post by snarf21 »

ujkhsjkdhf234 wrote: post #90

If he actually cared about unbiased media, he would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine which he won't do because that would kill Fox, Newsmax, and the rest of the Republican propaganda outlets.

Agreed. This is the root of the rise of evil in our country. I'm mostly pissed that Democrats were so short sighted to not reinstate it during Clinton or Obama. Now it is too late.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#207

Post by Sindisil »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #70
alabastervlog wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As with the Project for a New American Century douchebags, they just straight-up told us the bad things they were going to do to the country, and now they're doing them, and people still manage to be all, "hey, where'd all this stuff come from?!". Our news media are terrible .

This was all widely reported, I'm not sure why you're criticizing the news media.

What was widely reported was that he disavowed Project 2025. Those denials were seldom challenged, nor were the many Heritage Foundation related people that were also in Trump's inner circles reported upon in any critical way.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#208

Post by softwaredoug »

bhouston wrote: post #3

The US is so weird right now. You have a President who is ordering the defunding of tons of groups (universities, media, aid, institutes) while not clearly having that authority and often doing so for what he views as ideological crimes. Also arresting and trying to deport people for things that are not clearly crimes (newspaper op-eds, etc) and without due process. Very strange times. Right now I have some faith the…

The current administration is politically powerful in one sense, they're also not particularly adept, making them increasingly unpopular and hardening others against them.

For example, they if they were reliable negotiators they could be leveraging power to get historic wins over how Universities are structured. But because they're not reliable negotiators, these universities have to fight like cornered animals.

Similarly, deporting people with the Alien Enemies Act might have snuck by a conservative supreme court. But the administration seems completely unwilling to show that there is room for remediating mistakes. They've annoyed even conservative Supreme Court members who don't seem eager to support the power grab.

If they were smart they'd also be doing things that made the economy strong, not intentionally harming people and creating a fairly universal thing to bitch and moan about - tariffs/high prices.

On the one sense GOP has had a strong negotiating position historically, as they're the party willing to burn it all down. But eventually you get to a point of unreliability as negotiating partner, that there's no appeasement to be had, and you have to go all in on opposing them.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#209

Post by Eextra953 »

laborcontract wrote: post #18
bhouston wrote: post #3

The US is so weird right now. You have a President who is ordering the defunding of tons of groups (universities, media, aid, institutes) while not clearly having that authority and often doing so for what he views as ideological crimes. Also arresting and trying to deport people for things that are not clearly crimes (newspaper op-eds, etc) and without due process. Very strange times. Right now I have some faith the…

All the while, I don't think I've ever loved our country as much as now because I think this is a time where our system of checks and balances can come to shine. I do hope this experience will lead to people re-evaluating their love of FDR. You can like what he stood for, but he was an equal if not (much) greater abuser of the executive office.

I feel this way as well. It's a great test to see if the founding fathers got the constitution right and more importantly to see if the people are willing to assert their right to a democracy with the powers spelled out in our constitution.
Post reply on HN