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

[Dis]

Is PBS like NPR? If so then

but I fail to see how having crappy British sitcoms is educational.

[LoneWolf]

Re: double...no, more..triple the funding.

Originally posted by Jac de Molay


Sounds good. I certainly don't want my public funding going to build cluster bomblets that little Iraq kids can play "kick the can" with. That's not good at all.

On the other hand, the educational programming is still second to none. The "world" perspective that PBS brings into the programming mix is still second to none. Nova is still the best science show on tv. No 24-hour commercial news channel covers issues with the thoroughness that NewsHour or Frontline does.

It's the best tv there is. The ratings are just as high, if not higher, in an increasingly saturated market. It's a cultural institution that deserves far more than it gets.

http://www.pbs.org/insidepbs/news/1Q2003.html

Well then, what the hell does it need a subsidy for?

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Who needs education when you have big bombs ?

Or for that matter big boobs.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
PBS. TV stations that are not viable on the market deserve to sink.

They seem very viable to me. They make a product that I like, I send them money.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by GePap
What do you pay? about 2 bucks a year.

given that we have one of the highest per student spending rates in the industrialized world (no, we have the highest) the problem with education is not needing more money.

I'm getting nervous, we seem to be agreeing more often these days.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"We all know Imran and Shi love Reality TV. and sitcoms. God Bless the market!"

Ah GePap, always going into a condescending fury whenever he hears something he doesn't like. I don't watch TV, except for when I watch CNN in the Student Union waiting for class. I however, don't demand the government subsidize putting on something I would want to watch.

The government has been subsidising your entire education. If you're too pure to accept that money, then we should both head up to capitol hill and get me a refund.

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
We already do have educational programing on TV which can survive the Market, check out History Channel, Discovery Channel, The Learning Channel, etc. The government does not need to subsidize educational TV.

I think the pittance that public television eats up is much better spent than the vast sums wasted on k-12 and university education. If the commercial stations were offering what PBS does, then I'd be happy without it. But they don't. I make money, and I am willing to pay for public television, and do. Your argument is just as easily applied to the public schools, which IMO offer far less bang for the buck. PBS should be well down on the list of things the government wastes money on.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Public schools teach useful things, which are needed for people in getting work. If PBS suddenly started to show lectures on computer science or something, then I'd start backing it. But PBS doesn't really teach. Most of its programming is elitist entertainment like operas, etc. The 'childrens programming' is a very, very small portion of their schedule.

Ah, so you really don't know what you are talking about. My local PBS stations have college telecourses on Algebra, Statistics, Western Civilization etc. Plus the Children's programs, the Newshour, the political debate shows, the business shows, the science shows, the archeology shows, and the history shows. There is very little fat in that schedule.

But go ahead, I await the imminent Imranization of the thread. But black is white, you're disingenuous, and besides, they were offside! Tenacity is no substitute for a grasp of the facts.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"Public schools teach useful things, which are needed for people in getting work. If PBS suddenly started to show lectures on computer science or something, then I'd start backing it. But PBS doesn't really teach. Most of its programming is elitist entertainment like operas, etc. The 'childrens programming' is a very, very small portion of their schedule."

No, I don't want to smell you're thumb. Judging by the quality of your arguments, Iknow exactly where it's been.

[LoneWolf]

This is the most seductive, yet most lame, argument for a subsidy. If everyone in the US gave ME $.10, they would hardly notice. So what could be the objection?

[Nubclear]

Thread revival!