Time to revisit the issue of funding NPR...

[CHNOPS]

Do you even know how this funding works?

If not, I will give you a quick breakdown.

The CPB was created by Congress 1967 and tasked with the job of handing out funding for public broadcasting entities. These entities include, but are not limited to, NPR, PBS and PRI.

So when people talk about defunding NPR, that also includes PBS, PRI and several smaller public broadcast organizations.

In larger markets, this won't be that much of an issue, but in smaller markets this will be a huge problem. NYC, Chicago, Atlanta, LA, Miami, and cities like them will have no problem finding replacement funding, but PBS and NPR stations will disappear from smaller markets.

You are not helping yourself.

 

[run_silent]

Rush Limbaugh gets to spout crap about the C-in-C and his wife directly to the troops. That is obscene.

If the government got out of the media business such obscenities would not happen.

 

[phrodeau]

If the government got out of the media business such obscenities would not happen.

If Rush Limbaugh got out of the media business such obscenities would not happen.

 

[LongPenStroke]

Sounds like you are saying they is no listener support for a product they are not interested in.

To the contrary, the CPB budget is quite small. The overwhelming majority of their budget comes from underwriting and private donations, but small or poor communities, where ratings are actually the highest per capita, would not be able to support their local stations with the money required.

Here's something else to remember, a lot of what you hear on NPR, PRI or see on PBS, are not directly created by those entities. The Children's Television Network create and produce Sesame Street, not PBS. PBS buys the rights to air Sesame Street, but they don't own it.

What people don't seem to understand is that even for it's minute budget, the CPB partially funds some of the best and oldest television.

The right isn't trying to just defund NPR, they want to defund the CPB, but they don't want the public to know because they know the backlash would be too much. They use NPR as a scapegoat to cut a piece of the budget that costs every tax payer about 3 cents a week. I lose probably 10 times that amount every time I was my jeans and forget to empty my pants pockets.

 

[run_silent]

If Rush Limbaugh got out of the media business such obscenities would not happen.

Changing the subject of government funding?

 

[LongPenStroke]

You are not helping yourself.

I am doing just fine, but I honestly believe that you have no idea what YOU are talking about.

 

[CHNOPS]

I am doing just fine, but I honestly believe that you have no idea what YOU are talking about.

I told you that NPR gets almost no funding from the government, so you switched to PBS. I told you that PBS was not the same thing as NPR, so you switched to CPB.

Shall we start again?

CPB accounts for less than 2% of NPR's funding. The rest comes from private sources (94%) and state and local governments, often via bandwidth at state universities (4%).

Please explain how that makes NPR a government-sponsored anything.

Leave PBS out. Leave made-up statutes or incorrect interpretations of must-carry laws out. Simply describe how an organization that derives two percent of its income from the federal government, and 6% from government of any form, is a "quasi-government-sponsored" entity.

It was your phrase. I'm simply asking you to reconcile it with fact. If you can't, and would rather change the characterization than have to defend it, then just say so.

 

[run_silent]

To the contrary, the CPB budget is quite small. The overwhelming majority of their budget comes from underwriting and private donations, but small or poor communities, where ratings are actually the highest per capita, would not be able to support their local stations with the money required.

Here's something else to remember, a lot of what you hear on NPR, PRI or see on PBS, are not directly created by those entities. The Children's Television Network create and produce Sesame Street, not PBS. PBS buys the rights to air Sesame Street, but they don't own it.

What people don't seem to understand is that even for it's minute budget, the CPB partially funds some of the best and oldest television.

The right isn't trying to just defund NPR, they want to defund the CPB, but they don't want the public to know because they know the backlash would be too much. They use NPR as a scapegoat to cut a piece of the budget that costs every tax payer about 3 cents a week. I lose probably 10 times that amount every time I was my jeans and forget to empty my pants pockets.

Everyone likes to talk about it only costs 3 cents a week. However there are at least 10 million projects that cost the same. There is no magic bullet to get out of deficit spending. You have to look at everything

You bring up Sesame Street. It's a great program. Do you think if CPB funding was lost that some entity like the Disney channel wouldn't pick it up in a heartbeat?

 

[LongPenStroke]

I told you that NPR gets almost no funding from the government, so you switched to PBS. I told you that PBS was not the same thing as NPR, so you switched to CPB.

Shall we start again?

CPB accounts for less than 2% of NPR's funding. The rest comes from private sources (94%) and state and local governments, often via bandwidth at state universities (4%).

Please explain how that makes NPR a government-sponsored anything.

Leave PBS out. Leave made-up statutes or incorrect interpretations of must-carry laws out. Simply describe how an organization that derives two percent of its income from the federal government, and 6% from government of any form, is a "quasi-government-sponsored" entity.

It was your phrase. I'm simply asking you to reconcile it with fact. If you can't, and would rather change the characterization than have to defend it, then just say so.

It is quasi-government because it gets part of its funding from Congress. True, it is a small amount, but tied to that small amount are huge amounts of restrictions that for profit stations are not tied to.

And as far as the statute concerning PBS, yes it is true that the FCC requires communities to carry PBS stations. This was actually a bone of contention during the last round of budget talks. The CPB was worried that if the funding was cut, then they would have to change FCC regulations that require them to serve smaller markets that can not find private funding to make up the difference.

In the end, this is all tied together.

 

[LongPenStroke]

Everyone likes to talk about it only costs 3 cents a week. However there are at least 10 million projects that cost the same. There is no magic bullet to get out of deficit spending. You have to look at everything

You bring up Sesame Street. It's a great program. Do you think if CPB funding was lost that some entity like the Disney channel wouldn't pick it up in a heartbeat?

First, your ten million projects is a gross exaggeration. There is a magic bullet to get out of deficit spending, and you could cut every government program except the big three and you wouldn't even put a dent in the federal budget. It would be like dipping a bucket in the Gulf of Mexico and then saying, 'well only 1.9 trillion more to go.'

The biggest dent and fastest way to hit the deficit is to raise taxes and cut defense spending and medicare and medicaid.

As far as Disney picking up Sesame Street, I highly doubt they would. It would be a bad business decision to buy a license to air something that directly competes against your own product. Disney's business model depends on tie in merchandise, which they would lose by promoting a competitor.

 

[run_silent]

First, your ten million projects is a gross exaggeration. There is a magic bullet to get out of deficit spending, and you could cut every government program except the big three and you wouldn't even put a dent in the federal budget. It would be like dipping a bucket in the Gulf of Mexico and then saying, 'well only 1.9 trillion more to go.'

So you are basically there is no reason to try?

The biggest dent and fastest way to hit the deficit is to raise taxes and cut defense spending and medicare and medicaid.

Raising taxes. So you want to feed a government that really can't say no to anything including programs that are 50 years out of date. After all it's just 3 cents a week.

As far as Disney picking up Sesame Street, I highly doubt they would. It would be a bad business decision to buy a license to air something that directly competes against your own product. Disney's business model depends on tie in merchandise, which they would lose by promoting a competitor.

Do you have any idea how much of Sesame Street depends on merchandise?
Disney just bought the right to Marvel characters even though Universal still have the exclusive rights on the east coast.

 

[LongPenStroke]

Do you have any idea how much of Sesame Street depends on merchandise?
Disney just bought the right to Marvel characters even though Universal still have the exclusive rights on the east coast.

Yes, I do know how much Sesame Street depends on merchandise, and that is why I say Disney would never do it. Disney will not buy out Sesame Street outright, they will by the right to air its program.

The Marvel deal is different. Disney didn't buy the license, that was a flat out merger. Disney will reap profits from every aspect of Marvel, and puts them in bed with Universal. It's a great deal for Disney since they get to reap the profits from the movies, but avoid being criticized for making violent movies since they are under the Universal name.

They get to move into the teen/young adult market without having to create their own.

 

[run_silent]

Yes, I do know how much Sesame Street depends on merchandise, and that is why I say Disney would never do it. Disney will not buy out Sesame Street outright, they will by the right to air its program.

The Marvel deal is different. Disney didn't buy the license, that was a flat out merger. Disney will reap profits from every aspect of Marvel, and puts them in bed with Universal. It's a great deal for Disney since they get to reap the profits from the movies, but avoid being criticized for making violent movies since they are under the Universal name.

They get to move into the teen/young adult market without having to create their own.

True.

 

[CHNOPS]

It is quasi-government because it gets part of its funding from Congress. True, it is a small amount, but tied to that small amount are huge amounts of restrictions that for profit stations are not tied to.

And as far as the statute concerning PBS, yes it is true that the FCC requires communities to carry PBS stations. This was actually a bone of contention during the last round of budget talks. The CPB was worried that if the funding was cut, then they would have to change FCC regulations that require them to serve smaller markets that can not find private funding to make up the difference.

In the end, this is all tied together.

Please list the "restrictions" tied to the tiny proportion of NPR's funding that comes from grants partially backed by the CPB. You seem to misunderstand the function of grants, and of this one in particular. However, if you can show that the grants are tied to restrictive conditions that somehow hurt the station, I'll give you a pass on that one.

The next one is going to be tougher for you. Please back up your assertion that the FCC requires "communities" to carry PBS. While you're at it, please back up the underlying assertion that the FCC has any authority at all over what any 'community' does, anywhere. What is the penalty for non-compliance? Do they close the local park?

I've provided a link to the FCC's website to help with that second one. I will not need providing any passes on that one. http://www.fcc.gov/guides/public-and-broadcasting-july-2008

 

[LongPenStroke]

Please list the "restrictions" tied to the tiny proportion of NPR's funding that comes from grants partially backed by the CPB. You seem to misunderstand the function of grants, and of this one in particular. However, if you can show that the grants are tied to restrictive conditions that somehow hurt the station, I'll give you a pass on that one.

The next one is going to be tougher for you. Please back up your assertion that the FCC requires "communities" to carry PBS. While you're at it, please back up the underlying assertion that the FCC has any authority at all over what any 'community' does, anywhere. What is the penalty for non-compliance? Do they close the local park?

I've provided a link to the FCC's website to help with that second one. I will not need providing any passes on that one. http://www.fcc.gov/guides/public-and-broadcasting-july-2008

Here's the first part - The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 requires the CPB to operate with a "strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature".[12] It also requires it to regularly review national programming for objectivity and balance, and to report on "its efforts to address concerns about objectivity and balance.

Here is a link to the terms and conditions for CPB grant.

As far as must carry laws, go to Wiki and search it. There's a nice part in there that if an area carries two or more national stations, they are required to carry PBS, but only if PBS requests it. It has become even more convoluted with addition of cable and satellite services.

 

[CHNOPS]

Here's the first part - The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 requires the CPB to operate with a "strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature".[12] It also requires it to regularly review national programming for objectivity and balance, and to report on "its efforts to address concerns about objectivity and balance.

Here is a link to the terms and conditions for CPB grant.

As far as must carry laws, go to Wiki and search it. There's a nice part in there that if an area carries two or more national stations, they are required to carry PBS, but only if PBS requests it. It has become even more convoluted with addition of cable and satellite services.

Thanks for those terms and conditions. First I'll link you to something there, and then you'll link me to something.

I'll link you to the following language:

CPB Role and Cooperation with Government Agencies

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private, nonprofit corporation. Because CPB is
neither a government agency nor a law enforcement body, it does not have the legal authority to
investigate and adjudicate complaints based upon allegedly discriminatory practices by recipients
of its assistance that such agencies and bodies do. CPB will, however, promptly refer all such
complaints received by it to a government agency with jurisdiction for any proceedings that my
be appropriate. Further, CPB will cooperate fully with every agency with jurisdiction to inquire
into allegedly discriminatory practices of recipients of CPB assistance.

Now you link me to the part where it determines programming.

As for the must-carry section on Wiki, I'm afraid I'll need more than your word, which has so far been, shall we say, questionable. Quote the "nice little section" for me. My Wikipedia doesn't seem to have it.

I note you ducked the "community" part. Are you talking about cable providers? If so, just say it. If not, please provide the support I asked for showing that the FCC has any authority over any community, anywhere.

 

[LongPenStroke]

Thanks for those terms and conditions. First I'll link you to something there, and then you'll link me to something.

I'll link you to the following language:

CPB Role and Cooperation with Government Agencies

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private, nonprofit corporation. Because CPB is
neither a government agency nor a law enforcement body, it does not have the legal authority to
investigate and adjudicate complaints based upon allegedly discriminatory practices by recipients
of its assistance that such agencies and bodies do. CPB will, however, promptly refer all such
complaints received by it to a government agency with jurisdiction for any proceedings that my
be appropriate. Further, CPB will cooperate fully with every agency with jurisdiction to inquire
into allegedly discriminatory practices of recipients of CPB assistance.

Now you link me to the part where it determines programming.

As for the must-carry section on Wiki, I'm afraid I'll need more than your word, which has so far been, shall we say, questionable. Quote the "nice little section" for me. My Wikipedia doesn't seem to have it.

I note you ducked the "community" part. Are you talking about cable providers? If so, just say it. If not, please provide the support I asked for showing that the FCC has any authority over any community, anywhere.

First, the CPB is not going to grant a grant to anyone who is not within their terms and conditions, and those terms and conditions are much harsher than any license requirement for a for profit broadcaster. And true that the CPB does not have the authority to induce penalties, but the FCC does, including penalties that are specific to the CPB.

The Must Carry section is pretty easy to find. Just search MUST CARRY. It's right there. The FCC does not have direct account of the community, but they do control the airwaves that serve the communities.

 

[CHNOPS]

Just as I thought.

 

[run_silent]

A. Production Standards. Every Grant Project must conform to the highest standards
in the public broadcasting industry; that is, each must reflect the editorial balance, innovation,
accuracy, and technical quality reflected in public broadcasting projects of similar nature and
budget.

Anyone seen Bill Moyers lately? Editorial Balance?

 

[LongPenStroke]

Just as I thought.

Are you one of those people that have to have a road map drawn for you. Are you incapable of critical thought or inferring an outcome based on the known factors?

I mean seriously, you can put together some decent thoughts, but you fail to follow through to the logical conclusions.

If NPR is beholden to CPB grant provisions and the CPB is beholden to FCC and Federal Law, then the logical conclusion is that it is a quasi government entity.

The same can be said about Haliburton, RAND Corp and almost any other defense contractor.

Sure, it's not a direct relation, but it's a relation none the less.

 

[CHNOPS]

If NPR is beholden to CPB grant provisions and the CPB is beholden to FCC and Federal Law, then the logical conclusion is that it is a quasi government entity.

This big, messy bowl of word soup was one "duh"-at-the-end away from perfection.