Re: [Swprograms] [BULK] Re: Protest cutting funding for public broadcasting

[Richard Cuff <rdcuff@xxxxxxxxx>]

Interesting perspectives.  We have, to some extent, treated PBS / NPR
/ PRI all as "public broadcasting", but all three entities have taken
on more of a corporate appearance in recent years.  NPR is positively
mainstream, largely because the commercial radio networks abandoned
serious newsgathering and reporting.  There really isn't much true
"independent" public radio any more.

I am biased more towards Joe's solution, because this removes a level
of aggregation from the process and improves accountability and
connectedness.  Let those who value the service pay for it.  It
appears NPR has generally kept disciplined with a wall of separation
between its corporate funders and its content producers. 
"Marketplace" did an interesting series on that wall of separation
about two years ago.

What amazes me -- bringing this back to international broadcasting --
is that no broadcaster has attempted to contact the listener community
or create a multi-country advocay organization that allows the
listeners to have a direct financial input into their favorite
broadcasters.  Yes, we get incited to stomp our feet and write howls
of protest, but since we aren't taxpayers we have no say.  Only one
broadcaster has acknowledged that people external to the country have
"a dog in the fight" -- that's the BBC, acknowledging that it seeks to
reach us opinion formers.

Some might broadcasters might feel put off that they have to pander to
listener wallets in order to stay on the air, but there are seismic
changes afoot -- in part brought about by the fact that the
demographics of most first-world countries are unfavorable --
populations are growing by immigration, not by birth -- such that
social welfare systems and their attendant prioritites are facing
harsh challenges.

All around the globe, public broadcasting institutions are being
challenged based on the fact that broadcasting is a lower public
priority than, say, health care, retirement, or economic development. 
The existence of "unlimited bandwidth" of alternate distribution
methods further rubs salt into this wound.  Public broadcasters have
to line up at the public  trough behind other priorities.

We shortwave listeners were lucky - we were able to be freeloaders for
60 years.

Rich C


On 6/19/05, Joseph Buch <joseph.buch@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> 
> Sacrificing 15% of the system's budget is a small price to pay to get overt political influence out PBS and NPR.  Each affiliate station kicks money back NPR or PBS to pay for the programming they air.  Some of that money finds its way to new program development.  I think the assertion that if federal funds are removed from the equation the system would crumble is "crying wolf".  Most new development comes not from the "corporate world" but rather from foundations like MacArthur, Annenberg, etc.  While one might argue that the Ford Foundation could steer watchers of Nova to buy a Mustang, I really doubt the connection is very strong.
>

_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.