Save PBS (and more importantly, NOVA)!

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: acemcmac
If there is no PBS, what will the parents who use the TV to babysit their kids set the dial to?

Think of the children.

that is why there are 4 disney channel and nickalodian and noggin and animal planet , etc etc
not to mention all the DVD's , kid DVD's are like $4

screw PBS, it should be a subscription channel just like HBO

It is. PBS has a cable channel called PBS Kids.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Jadow
let them die if they can't survive in the free market, they deserve death!

See Toyota thread.

 

[apologetic]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Public television should not be political. PBS is too political therefore should not be funded by the taxpayers...

there are a lot of art programs that I would like to see cut, too.

Food and medicine for poor kids is a lot more important to me.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Public television should not be political. PBS is too political therefore should not be funded by the taxpayers...

there are a lot of art programs that I would like to see cut, too.

Food and medicine for poor kids is a lot more important to me.

Which part of it is politically biased? As far as I can tell, it's one of the most balanced broadcasts available anywhere.

Originally posted by: virtueixi
WTF they get half a billion dollars in public funding to air shows that cost $100 to produce, and yet they still have those stupid pledge drives.

Perhaps you'd like to pull some more numbers out of your ass?

Is it ok to force taxpayers to foot the bill for stuff they dont agree with...

Obviously. Take Iraq for example. Nearly 60% of the nation disagrees with it. I'd much rather have my tax dollars go to PBS.

Government funds only encourage PBS to weaken and politicize its content. Making it rely on viewer support only will force it to improve its content.

If by improve you mean reality TV shows, all that other LCD appeal crap, 1\3 of the time being consumed by advertisements, etc... sure, it would improve.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: aplefka
Fvck man, I just emailed Lungren about the Broadcast Flag, he doesn't want to hear from me again.

The broadcast flag is an emergency. PBS can always be reborn, but if the broadcast flag gets out of the can, there's no going back.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: pinkeywear
I used to love watching Mister Rogers, Teletubbies, and Arthur

Wait. So apparently you're 12? I knew it.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: pinkeywear
I used to love watching Mister Rogers, Teletubbies, and Arthur

Wait. So apparently you're 12? I knew it.

 

[acemcmac]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Originally posted by: acemcmac
If there is no PBS, what will the parents who use the TV to babysit their kids set the dial to?

Think of the children.

that is why there are 4 disney channel and nickalodian and noggin and animal planet , etc etc
not to mention all the DVD's , kid DVD's are like $4

screw PBS, it should be a subscription channel just like HBO

Yeah, that's why I would refuse to subscribe to cable TV if I had kids.... have you actually flipped through some of that smut latley? It's like adult swim, but on 24/7

 

[Goosemaster]

Just emailed it

NPR> *.*

Mr. Wolf,

It has come to my attention that a $220M spending cut to public broadcasting is being proposed.

I am far from the most successful American, but even I can see the grievous impact that such an action would have on our beautiful nation. Public broadcasting provides citizens with some of the absolute best programming and sources of enriching material available today. From government related information to hometown life, the effective diffusion of information is what public radio is best at.

The beauty public radio is highlighted by the simplicity of Frequency Modulation. With simply a small radio, this nation's citizens have access to unbiased news, rich culture, and education almost equivalent to what and educated person could find on the internet.

That said, those who stand to benefit the most from the beauty that is public radio are this nation's poorest citizens. The loss of public radio would rob many of the spotlight that public radio can offer them in the stories that public radio cover, not to mention the wealth of knowledge that can be learned from a resource that is free nationwide.

It is my prerogative as a citizen of these United States and a resident of the great state of Virginia to plead that you do your very best to oppose this bill. I love this country so very much for what it has given me and my family, and I would hate for it to do away with one of its greatest resources.

Thank You for your time.


Just another citizen who loves this great land too damn much,

David Trejo

 

[edro]

Oh wow... this is one online petition that I might actually take part in. PBS is one of the best stations on the air.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Get private funding.

This is not something to joke about.

PBS is truly one of this countries saving graces.

If you continue to joke about his, I will be the first o grab the chainsaw.

I'm serious🙂

 

[QuitBanningMe]

Subscription or public funding.

 

[MisterCornell]

In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Hundreds of millions of dollars are not chump change. There are better ways to spend or save that money, rather than wasteful big government programs that have long outlived their usefulness.

Those here on this thread who claim to enjoy PBS but don't support it (or don't pay enough money to the CPB) are part of the "free rider" problem. They're benefitting from something that's paid for by someone else. That's another reason to abolish public funding for PBS.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Because it helps the poor?

 

[MisterCornell]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Because it helps the poor?

Yeah PBS has helped so ghetto kids become geniuses. :roll:

I think you've drank too much of that Democratic party Kool-Aide. I wish I could be as delusional as you. Must be pretty fun.

 

[everman]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Because it helps the poor?

How does it help the poor?

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Public television should not be political. PBS is too political therefore should not be funded by the taxpayers...

there are a lot of art programs that I would like to see cut, too.

Food and medicine for poor kids is a lot more important to me.

Poor people having too many children (children at all) should be fixed first..not that it can. I don't want a communist setup or anything..but these poor kids shouldn't "exist". The wrong people are having the kids. Goddamnit.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: MisterCornell

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Because it helps the poor?

Yeah PBS has helped so ghetto kids become geniuses. :roll:

I think you've drank too much of that Democratic party Kool-Aide. I wish I could be as delusional as you. Must be pretty fun.

STFU you elitest prick.

Public broadcasting taught me english ( not typing thankfully😉 ), taught me a lot about life, and is responsible for a large portion of my information repository.

<--was poor.

 

[Safeway]

NoooOOOoooOooooo! (va)

 

[QuitBanningMe]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Because it helps the poor?

Yeah PBS has helped so ghetto kids become geniuses. :roll:

I think you've drank too much of that Democratic party Kool-Aide. I wish I could be as delusional as you. Must be pretty fun.

STFU you elitest prick.

Public broadcasting taught me english ( not typing thankfully😉 ), taught me a lot about life, and is responsible for a large portion of my information repository.

<--was poor.

I was poor too and PBS didn't teach me sh!t. The only thing kids learn from PBS is the Sesame Street theme.

It was the only channel we could pick up though.....

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: QuitBanningMe

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: MisterCornell
In an era where there are hundreds, if not thousands of TV channels, and the largest health problem facing Americans is couch potatoism, brought on in part by watching too much TV, I see no reason why the government should subsidize television channels.

Because it helps the poor?

Yeah PBS has helped so ghetto kids become geniuses. :roll:

I think you've drank too much of that Democratic party Kool-Aide. I wish I could be as delusional as you. Must be pretty fun.

STFU you elitest prick.

Public broadcasting taught me english ( not typing thankfully😉 ), taught me a lot about life, and is responsible for a large portion of my information repository.

<--was poor.

I was poor too and PBS didn't teach me sh!t. The only thing kids learn from PBS is the Sesame Street theme.

Your loss then. It is quite a valuable resource nonetheless.

 

[PowerMac4Ever]

$220 million? F that... hopefully they'll end the NASA channel while they're at it.

 

[QuitBanningMe]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever
$220 million? F that... hopefully they'll end the NASA channel while they're at it.

No sh!t....I haven't flipped to it in a while but every time I do......nothing.

 

[everman]

<devil's advocate> Why not spend those tens, or hundreds of millions on libraries? Even the poorest people can afford to borrow a book for free, you don't even need a tv </devil's advocate>

 

[QuitBanningMe]

Originally posted by: everman
<devil's advocate> Why not spend those tens, or hundreds of millions on libraries? Even the poorest people can afford to borrow a book for free, you don't even need a tv </devil's advocate>

Reading is hard.......