Not content with suppressing the implications of
science when they contradict neo-con policy, our current adminstration now seems bent on undermining the financial of support of the only non-commercial educational programming available to the American public. The Bushy Republican stooge in this case is Kenneth Tomlinson who has repeated accused PBS and NPR of blatant left wing bias. He has proposed (and may achieve) major funding curs for these organizations on the basis of this allegation.
Here is an article on the story.
Steep Cut Proposed for Public Broadcasting
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: June 17, 2005
WASHINGTON, June 16 - The House Appropriations Committee approved a spending bill on Thursday that would slash spending for public television and radio nearly in half.
Broadcasting executives say the action reflects the political bind in which public broadcasting now finds itself. Some traditional supporters are turning lukewarm in the growing belief that conservative Republicans are taking over the system, while traditional critics are mounting another campaign to reduce taxpayer support for the programs.
By voice vote, the committee approved a measure, approved by a subcommittee last week, that would reduce the financing of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the organization that directs taxpayer dollars to public television and radio, by 25 percent, to $300 million from $400 million.
The measure would also eliminate $39 million that stations say they need to convert to digital programming, $50 million for upgrading the aging satellite technology that is the backbone of the PBS network and the $23 million "Ready to Learn" program supervised by the Education Department. That program provides some money for producing children's shows, including "Sesame Street," "Clifford the Big Red Dog," "Between the Lions" and "Dragon Tales."
All told, the cuts in the budget of the corporation and other programs for public television and radio amounted to a reduction of nearly 50 percent.
"What has happened under the committee proposal will be disastrous for public broadcasting as we know it," Representative David R. Obey of Wisconsin, the senior Democrat on the committee, said.
This article appeared the day before:
BUSINESS/FINANCIAL DESK | May 16, 2005, Monday
NPR Conflict With Overseer Is Growing
By STEPHEN LABATON (NYT) 1478 words
Late Edition - Final , Section C , Page 1 , Column 6
ABSTRACT - Executives at National Public Radio are increasingly at odds with Bush appointees who lead Corporation for Public Broadcasting; corporation is considering plan to monitor Middle East coverage on NPR news programs for evidence of bias, has told its staff to consider redirecting money away from national newscasts and toward music programs, has named two ombudsmen to judge content of programs for balance and blocked NPR from broadcasting its programs on station in Berlin owned by US government produced by NPR stations; Kenneth Y Tomlinson, corporation's chairman, repeats his belief that public broadcasting's reputation for being left-leaning is (the) problem
So here is my question. Forget for a moment whether you sympathize right or left.
Is it not valid and justified for the press to take adversarial positions against the policies of elected government without having to fear financial retribution from the party in power?
Isn’t that part and parcel of their job - to take the opposing position and challenge the dogma of the times?
Aren’t journalists the only independent representatives of the public in a position to effectively criticize the status quo ?
Isn’t this a good thing that keeps our leaders honest ?
Otherwise, doesn’t the party in power hold all the cards for propagandizing the nation ?
Isn’t a political withdrawal of public funding for public broadcasting an insidious and malicious attack on public representation in the press ?
How is this any different in principle from any other form of censorship imposed for opposing the policies of a ruling party?
Is it not indirectly designed to accomplishing the same objectives of Stalin or any other dictator, silencing of criticism ?
I strongly urge everyone to sign the petition
here opposing this legislation.
™ Version 4.2