Can someone tell me why PBS no longer recieves government funding?

[Al B. Sure!]

I dont get why PBS needs gov't funding... they got numerous fund-raisers (let people who enjoy the programming pay for it... duh), corporate donations, and even though they claim to not have commercials, they do got numerous commercials between shows.

And several educational cable networks have done pretty well for themselves...

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Shi :
This is the kind of conceptions that let the quality of TV sunk completely. In this domain, competition and market demands kill creativity and quality rather than helping it, because the channels need a regular audience they are sure to bring only through a combo of used methods and brainless programs.

Actually, the granting of airwave monopolies to the Big Three did far more damage to the quality and diversity of American television than anything "market demands" accomplished.

It is only with the advent of cable television (another "market demand") and the proliferation of specialized channels (once again brought about by that evil devil "market demand") that the overall quality of television programming started to rise again.

If the government wants to fund their own TV channel, fine. But don't tell me it is necessary because it's because there's nothing else worth watching. This argument would've floated in 1973, but not 2003.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Becuase we realy don;t need any new planes to mainitan air superiority.

Eventually we do. You can't have F-15s in 2050. You have to have a gradual process to improve planes. You can't simply jump from a F-15 to an F-40 (assuming each number is a newer model, etc).

Oh, and if you see more than one PBS show a year then you probably have gotten more out of PBS than you ever out in as tax revenue, so attacks against PBS are not based on money, but ideology (like Floyd's libertarian assault)

Perhaps... but I believe the last PBS show I've seen was back in 1985 or something... so I haven't gotten my money's worth in a while .

[GePap]

PBS had to get corporate commercials and increase the time for fund raising because Gov. aid was cut severely. They didn;t have any corporate commercials until the mid-90's, though they did have a few things sponsored by corporations, like Mobil Masterpiece Theater.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Perhaps... but I believe the last PBS show I've seen was back in 1985 or something... so I haven't gotten my money's worth in a while .

Well, then you have missed some great programing. Frontline is always good, the News Hour excellent, and various short series, like The Civil war or The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow are great.

[Spiffor]

Indeed JohnT, the context is different when there is pay-per-view specialized TV around (I am still traumatized by the latest time I watched a private general channel in Germany a few days ago, so it explains where my thought process comes from).
But IIUC, the very interest of PBS was to bring quality education / children programs / news without having to pay for the network, except through taxes ? In this case, I think it is great, because it gets rid of one financial barrier to reach a better education

[Al B. Sure!]

to add onto what Imran said considering military technology, the United States Air Force is not as far ahead of the rest of the world as you would think... The Su-31, Mirage 2000, the Eurofighter... all these aircraft are just as capable as our F-15's, F-16's, and F/A-18's...

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000 So if you say "Well, PBS can't be funded cause they don't have enough viewers" can easily be applied to public schools.

Bottom line: If students dont want to go to school, then public schools will fail. If people dont want to watch PBS, then it will fail. They both are educational, thats their primary reason for both of their existences.....

Public TV vs. Public Schooling is a quite inapt analogy in that children under the age of 16 are forced by law to attend schools. Until such a law passes for the viewing of TV, please stop with this silly line of reasoning.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
to add onto what Imran said considering military technology, the United States Air Force is not as far ahead of the rest of the world as you would think... The Su-31, Mirage 2000, the Eurofighter... all these aircraft are just as capable as our F-15's, F-16's, and F/A-18's...

And yet, few of those states have the ability to knock out ground radar, spot their aircraft much sooner than they can ours, and thus shoot, so forth and so on, the things that make our airforce trully superior.

If the North koreasn bought 200 Su-31's tommorrow, we would still wipe the floor with them in the air, with few if any American loses. Its not the coffin that matters but the guy inside (and all the systems outside helping him along as well).

[Imran Siddiqui]

But one day, GePap, the other countries will have similar radar to ours. If we stand still, we will be passed.

[GePap]

and one day they will also have stealth tech, making an overpirced turkey like the F-22 worthless (or no better in relative terms than what we have).

just look at the new name given the F-22, the F/A-22, sicne now the pentagon is syaing we can use the F-22 as a strike craft, just like we turned the F-15 into one. Only probem, to do so means adding all these external bomb pylons 9or whatever they are techincally called), just making this wonderful F-22 NON stealth.

Each F-22 is far too expensive (the program is already far too overbudget), and given that we also plan to bring the JSF in, what the hell is the point!?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by JohnT


Public TV vs. Public Schooling is a quite inapt analogy in that children under the age of 16 are forced by law to attend schools. Until such a law passes for the viewing of TV, please stop with this silly line of reasoning.

I was waiting for someone to say this

This is WHY public schools are alive. Quite a big percent of children dont even attend school even though its law. Do you think they would if they knew they would have "no consequences" if they could get away with it?

Not to mention government funding, of course

[Al B. Sure!]

I do think that private contractors are taking advantage of the government sometimes though... When the F-16 was produced, General Dynamics (that was the company right?) sold each plane for a mere 4 million a piece if i remember correctly.

[JohnT]

Uhm, GePap/Imran, isn't this line of reasoning getting a bit off-topic?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by JohnT
Uhm, GePap/Imran, isn't this line of reasoning getting a bit off-topic?

It's just as entertaining to watch as the original debate, though