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

471–480 of 596 posts

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#471

Post by triceratops »

transcriptase wrote: post #386
triceratops wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And it’s the party that nearly always campaigns on increasing their funding Sounds like there's an obvious way for any party to get good press from the CBC /s The fact that you think "climate change" is an evidence of bias betrays your own bias.

Inserting it into every conversation is an example of them playing to certain audiences, particularly when it’s being mentioned in a way that appears to be checking a box versus being relevant or substantial. I refrained from including in my original reply that another issue is that those they’ve increasingly tailored their personas/programming to legitimately can’t see any issue with how CBC has changed in the last…

I mean sure the diversity angle could definitely be about playing to certain audiences. Climate change ain't though. You believing it's proof of that tells us about your own biases.

Also I missed this in your original comment

> Combined with things like job listings explicitly but professionally saying “white men need not apply”,

This sounds shockingly illegal. Do you have an example?

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#472

Post by throwawaymaths »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #412
throwawaymaths wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that is why I said more authoritarian. We need to acknowledge other authoritarian or authoritarian-lite practices that have gone under the radar for decades, like funding elite colleges (is that political favoritism?), or political influence through NGOs, or even "doing things for the greater good" through unaccountable NGOs like "broadband equity", where there is no explicit charter for the government to do suc…

Why do we need to? It seems to me that many of these efforts to “acknowledge” other controversies in the past are in fact distraction tactics to sneak in controversial premises about the current ones. Funding research grants is absolutely not political favoritism.

> Funding research grants is absolutely not political favoritism.

It's political favoritism in the same way that giving LMH or BA contracts is political favoritism. There's nothing magically "special" about science. And having been there, its just as corrupt, just as wasteful, and generally not in the public interest. It's mostly in the interest of professors that want to fuck around on their pet topics. look up leo paquette and homme hellinga, if you doubt my insider knowledge on this matter (they are just the tip of the iceberg and easily verified in terms of what I've seen). that's not even getting into more touchy subjects like the maze of conflicts of interest in an actually "politics-al" topic like lab leak investigation. whether or not you believe in the lab leak hypothesis you HAVE to acknowledge that the gatekeepers in the investigation are so entangled that it makes good faith truthseeking basically impossible.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#473

Post by triceratops »

mmastrac wrote: post #336
transcriptase wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue in Canada is that the CBC, despite having excellent journalists, investigative, local, and otherwise, and being an invaluable resource to many small communities, is overwhelmingly (but not entirely) biased in favour of one political party and whatever identity politics are currently the mainstay of their image. And it’s the party that nearly always campaigns on increasing their funding. I love(d) the CBC. I…

Some of this stuff bugs me as well, but there's no good reason to defund an organization with some problems when you can fix it instead.

I read the poster's comment more closely and they sound paranoid tbh.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#474

Post by dotandgtfo »

mike_hearn wrote: post #441
dotandgtfo wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your lighthouse parable is still highly relevant for public broadcasters when you consider that modern public broadcasting heavily subsidize expensive original reporting that for-profit newspapers are free to and happy to republish. A core reason for having a robust public broadcasting system is that it lifts the quality of the entire information ecosystem. Saying this as a Norwegian. I happily pay around 200/300 dol…

Yes, people who enjoy state TV like making other people pay for their enjoyment. That's immoral. Certainly, you cannot argue it's moral because you personally believe it's high quality. Lots of people in any country feel the exact opposite: that state TV damages the entire information ecosystem and is outright malign. Under what consistent moral code should they be forced to pay for it?

I don't enjoy making others pay for my entertainment. What a petty way to frame the discussion.

You'll find broad/majority support for state broadcasters in Northern Europe. The business model of for-profit digital news production is not economically viable outside of certain niches or clickbait/ragebait. Doubly so in small countries with just a few million citizens.

Free, broadly available, non-commercial journalism is a critical part of our society. Some would say paywalling a baseline of local knowledge constricts civic participation and is immoral. But that's a lame value judgement and should rightfully be dismissed.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#475

Post by timmytokyo »

throw7 wrote: post #284

I'm fine with U.S. pulling back funding for CFPB. I always found it ironic that corporate supported CSPAN has done a great job of informative programming while CFPB/NPR is barely listenable/watchable. IMO, it really goes to show, it's not necessarily funding sources, but a matter of leadership/authority. The captain steers the boat so to speak. I've always been impressed with Brian Lamb.

If you want to remove public funding for public broadcasting, do it through the US Congress. The president does not have this authority.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#476

Post by archagon »

next_xibalba wrote: post #67
cyberlurker wrote: post #14

Is it unusual for an executive order to claim something like this without any citation or reference? > The CPB fails to abide by these principles to the extent it subsidizes NPR and PBS. > Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. > What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.

To wit, during the BLM riots of 2020, NPR published a piece on how looting was a legitimate form of protest. I mark that as the moment they lost both my trust and my attention. A very sad, eye opening moment for me.

You don’t have to agree with this take, but it has historical precedent and merits discussion. In popular culture, “Do The Right Thing” (controversially?) posed the question back in 1989. And Black leaders have been talking about it since the 60s: https://jacobin.com/2020/09/martin-luther-king-riots-looting...

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#477

Post by UncleMeat »

pjc50 wrote: post #138
UncleMeat wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FDR's major lasting accomplishments that people praise him for were through legislation. Even things like the threat to pack the court would have happened through legislation. There are some highly visible examples of direct executive action that I hope everyone today sees as authoritarian (japanese internment being the really big one). But FDR's expansion of the executive is the opposite of what Trump is doing. Trum…

The long and the short of it is that FDR did (mostly) well-intentioned things with (mostly) good outcomes that were (mostly) widely distributed. That and winning WW2 secured his place in the historical record. But it was definitely a "move fast and break things" approach. The one that conservatives are still very mad about is gold confiscation, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn is a wild over-inter…

I believe that there is a huge difference between executive authoritarianism and consolidating power within the federal government instead of the states. While this was indeed a huge expansion of federal power through the commerce clause, it expands congress' power, not the president's.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#478

Post by wing-_-nuts »

stackbutterflow wrote: post #327
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If it's true then you know you should resist or you're complicit. Resist how exactly? Protest? We're already protesting. They're barely being covered in the news. Armed resistance? Yeah that's gonna work out so well against a militarized police state. Look through history, from the fall of rome to wwII, and those that came out best during those crises had the good sense to flee to somewhere better.

Educating yourself on resistance. Reading books about it. Talk to neighbors. Buy weapons and ammo. Be ready. Have difficult conversations with yourself about what you're ready to do. Have the same conversations with your partner. With your family, friends, neighbors who you know are also against this.

Yeah, no. I'm getting my passport today. I've started looking at what's required to get a skilled work visa.

My personal line is when the admin starts imprisoning and renditioning people that don't agree with them, and we basically heard a congressional committee make approving comments about that this week. If it starts happening, well, time for me to cash out and move abroad.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#479

Post by siilats »

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 anti trump money groups have infiltrated HN or you really think the government today should be spending money on CBS?

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#480

Post by jimbokun »

DudeOpotomus wrote: post #452
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.

This is an amazing take. You're actually equating his position as a political puppet to being smart. And worse, you actually think he is!

[flagged]
Post reply on HN