It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bills would defund public broadcasting

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Bills would defund public broadcasting


www.upi.com

WASHINGTON, Jan. 7 (UPI) -- Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., introduced legislation that would end funding for public radio, saying it was a luxury the federal government can't afford.
Lamborn said federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was "unnecessary," noting funding rose 26 percent during the past decade to $430 million per year, The Hill reported Friday. "This effort to cut government spending should be part of the larger push from this new Republican Congress to cut spending
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 06:31 AM
link   
This is long over due. In a country that is at least 50% conservative, why should our taxes support a liberal shill like this. Liberals already control most of the spew from the lame stream media. Additionally, even if it was unbiased news, we just cannot afford it. The government needs to trim the fat from it's budget and this definitely qualifies. Now we need to end foreign aid and arts funding as well as getting the heck out of the UN.

www.upi.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 06:44 AM
link   
Such a relief to see that your take wasn't "No! We have a right to that radio! That is what the constitution was about, having radio, even when the government was warred itself into debt!"

I wish the British government would stop privatising industries that actually make money (e.g. transport, postage if it wasn't managed so completely stupidly) and privatise something non-essential and expensive to run (e.g. television, radio).



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWill
 

Thanks. They need to privatize npr. If people want their "product" let them pay for it. I suspect npr would quickly tank though.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


It has always seemed to me a conflict of interest that broadcasting of any sort be funded by the federal government.

2nd line



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Completely agree here. I dont mind public radio or tv, but not how its set up now. Its like the Childrens television network (think sesame street) where its funded by public dollards 100%, while all proceedes from the adertising and sale of items went to the pockets of the people who put the show together.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Actually people do donate to NPR. The local station broadcasts three channels of classical music and a regular NPR station featuring "all things considered". en.wikipedia.org...



In 2009, NPR revenues totaled $164 million, with the bulk of revenues coming from programming fees, grants, contributions and sponsorships.[14] According to the 2009 financial statement, about 40% of NPR revenues come from the fees it charges member stations to receive programming. Typically, NPR member stations raise funds through on-air pledge drives, corporate underwriting, and grants from state governments, universities, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In 2009, member stations derived 6% of their revenue from direct government funding, 10% of their revenue from federal funding in the form of CPB grants, and 14% of their revenue from universities.[14][15] NPR receives no direct funding from the federal government.[16] About 1.5% of NPR's revenues come from Corporation for Public Broadcasting grants.


Sorry, those dirty liberals will still be broadcasting as they raise pretty much all of their money by themselves.

As for it being "Liberal", that's kinda funny. NPR is accused by Liberals of being too conservative. They are accused of almost every bias in the book. I think a lot of you are paranoid. I don't think the Toll Brother Opera Matinée on a Saturday afternoon makes people communists. Nor do I think that cooking show on Sunday will convert people to Lenin. It's plainly obvious many ATS members have never listened to NPR.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 
I refer more to their so called "news" broadcasts. Very left wing imo. I am glad to know that they can be self supporting, thus I assume you are onboard with cutting public funding?



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by antonia
 
I refer more to their so called "news" broadcasts. Very left wing imo. I am glad to know that they can be self supporting, thus I assume you are onboard with cutting public funding?



Have you ever listened to their news broadcasts? They aren't left wing. They are pretty centrist. Of course, if you are really far to the right EVERYTHING that isn't what you think is left wing.

I don't care if they cut public funding.



posted on Jan, 8 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I don't think their news broadcasts, per se, are "left wing," but certainly their commentary, which is a large part of what they do, is clearly leftist. NPR has actively reduced their dependence on government funding though the CPB, but there is a big backdoor here. CPB funds local stations who turn around and buy NPR programs. You don't see this in the NPR budget charts because it looks like they receive funding from 'local stations' who, in turn, receive funding from CPB. There's lots of hidden money here.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join