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

431–440 of 596 posts

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#431

Post by CodeMage »

mh8h wrote: post #187
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…

Theoretical question: what happens if he doesn’t do what the courts order, and the congress is too afraid to impeach him?

What happens? This. This happens, the things we're seeing.

He's already defying multiple court orders and the Congress is not impeaching him. Oh, some of the politicians are introducing articles of impeachment, but you can see quite clearly that this won't go anywhere.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#432

Post by kaishiro »

nataliste wrote: post #387
kaishiro wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but exactly what point are you trying to make here? Are you suggesting that NPR has never interviewed - say - Christian fundamentalists (they have)? Are you suggesting that they should interview more of them? What, precisely, would make you happy here?

As I've been told for the last decade, "everything is political" therefore NPR can't provide unbiased or neutral coverage of anything, therefore there should be no federal funding of NPR or PBS. Ideologues and corpirations donate more than enough money to sustain both without the pretense of impartiality provided by federal funding.

If "everything is political", then eliminating federal funding from NPR and PBS doesn’t solve the problem - it guarantees that only corporate and ideological interests shape the narrative. Public funding exists not to claim perfect neutrality, but to create a space where journalism isn’t entirely driven by profit motives or partisan agendas. Strip that away, and you’re not removing bias - you’re institutionalizing it.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#433

Post by kwere »

Eextra953 wrote: post #262
HamsterDan wrote: post #195

I guess you can applaud Trump for taking the high ground here, but what he should have done is fired NPR and PBS's leadership and replaced them with rightwing equivalents. Maybe then Democrats would finally understand why it's so offensive to use taxpayer money to fund political propaganda.

He doesn't have the power to fire NPR or PBS leadership. Just because he's president doesn't mean he can make decisions for independent organizations.

if you would cease to exist without public funding you are not and indipendent organization

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#434

Post by ty6853 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #420
chii wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

separation of powers require the people in gov't to enforce the separation. If the whitehouse is using federal agents to force an action that is directly contrary to court judgement, those agents should have refused orders tbh. They need to know what separation of power is, and the citizens need to also be outraged regardless of political affiliation. The problem is that some citizens _are not outraged_ (at least, no…

Like I said, that's the point of the separation of powers. Enforcement isn't a power the judiciary has. I'm not quite clear on how your comment responds to mine?

Supreme court and many other courts have judicial armed officers of the court that are part of the judicial branch; they can enforce contempt or orders of the court. But of course they are way overpowered by the number of LEO in the executive.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#435

Post by Tadpole9181 »

jimbokun wrote: post #419
DudeOpotomus wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you listen to him speak, he is not a smart person. What baffles me is how and why you'd think he was anything but an idiot. Everything about him and his actions and words reek of stupidity. He does not hold any understanding of the complexities of anything. He does not write. When he does, he misspells and uses incorrect grammar. He does not read. He has rudimentary understanding of basics. Etc. So why is it that…

And none of that has kept him from achieving his goals. He has a genius for communication and persuasion that is undeniably effective. He understands the weak points in our political system and attacks them directly. He's dumb when it comes to things educated people care about. But he's smart when it comes to getting what he wants.

Did you consider that 30% of Americans are complete lunatics? Trump isn't clever or smart, he's batshit insane and appeals to the barely literate and *-ists that have been programmed with a bloodlust by Fox for two decades.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#436

Post by Tadpole9181 »

jmclnx wrote: post #6

I heard of a study done in trump's first admin. It said this will hurt rural communities far more than urban. So as usual Trump supporters will be punished more than non-trump supporters.

And they'll blame liberals for it anyway. Why does Trump care?

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#437

Post by nataliste »

kaishiro wrote: post #432
nataliste wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I've been told for the last decade, "everything is political" therefore NPR can't provide unbiased or neutral coverage of anything, therefore there should be no federal funding of NPR or PBS. Ideologues and corpirations donate more than enough money to sustain both without the pretense of impartiality provided by federal funding.

If "everything is political", then eliminating federal funding from NPR and PBS doesn’t solve the problem - it guarantees that only corporate and ideological interests shape the narrative. Public funding exists not to claim perfect neutrality, but to create a space where journalism isn’t entirely driven by profit motives or partisan agendas. Strip that away, and you’re not removing bias - you’re institutionalizing it…

Journalism, and specifically NPR, is already driven entirely by corporate and ideological interests. Your supposition that federal funding helps remove bias is trivially disproven by the last decade of coverage of NPR, where I literally (literally!) have not been able to turn it on without race, gender, or Trump being mentioned within a minute (it became a game). To be fair, there was one exception. and that was a replay of a David Foster Wallace interview from 2003. Which was immediately followed by a current interview with two women talking about white men's obsession with Infinite Jest and how their podcast was helping deconstruct toxic masculinity or something like that. The comparison in quality was stark.

The time for caring about and preserving civic-level notions of neutrality and objectivity was a decade ago. I don't care anymore. If wingnuts want to unduly influence Americans through broadcasting, they can do it like everyone else--without taxpayer dollars.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#438

Post by dragonwriter »

ty6853 wrote: post #434
thaumasiotes wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said, that's the point of the separation of powers. Enforcement isn't a power the judiciary has. I'm not quite clear on how your comment responds to mine?

Supreme court and many other courts have judicial armed officers of the court that are part of the judicial branch; they can enforce contempt or orders of the court. But of course they are way overpowered by the number of LEO in the executive.

> Supreme court and many other courts have judicial armed officers of the court that are part of the judicial branch;

The Supreme Court, but not lower federal courts, has its own police department, but its legal authority is limited to security for the Supreme Court building and grounds and the Supreme Court justices, and to make arrests for violations of federal law as necessary to those two functions. They do not enforce orders of the court unrelated to those functions.

(For lower federal courts, these functions are performed by the US Marshals Service, a DoJ agency, which also does enforce other court orders; but, that's an executive not a judicial-branch agency.)

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#439

Post by mistrial9 »

Tadpole9181 wrote: post #435
jimbokun wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And none of that has kept him from achieving his goals. He has a genius for communication and persuasion that is undeniably effective. He understands the weak points in our political system and attacks them directly. He's dumb when it comes to things educated people care about. But he's smart when it comes to getting what he wants.

Did you consider that 30% of Americans are complete lunatics? Trump isn't clever or smart, he's batshit insane and appeals to the barely literate and *-ists that have been programmed with a bloodlust by Fox for two decades.

35 percent of all statistical quotations are made up

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#440

Post by mike_hearn »

yladiz wrote: post #267
mike_hearn wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

Maybe your argument makes sense in the US, but in many countries (like here in Germany) there do exist TV and radio that are publicly funded, trusted, and good, so yes I’m more than okay that I have to pay monthly, and in your words, “forcibly subscribed” to the ARD and ZDF. I think having trustworthy news that is accessible to everyone is extremely useful and important so even if I didn’t use them myself I’m glad to…

The argument makes sense everywhere. There exist in Germany TV and radio that maybe you trust and think are good, and maybe you enjoy forcing other people pay for them against their will. But there are many people who would profoundly disagree with you on that in Germany: ask any AfD voter.

Again, to see this, just consider how you'd feel if FOX News launched a German version and you were forced to pay for that against your will. Would you find that moral? Don't try and claim subjective quality judgements make a difference; obviously plenty of people think FOX News is high quality, that's why they watch it.

Post reply on HN