The other payola – revisited
PBS is irate at newly sworn in Education Secretary Spellings’ views on funding programming that is questionable, particularly children’s programming. At issue is an episode wherein a character is introduced to a lesbian couple:
As Education Secretary Margaret Spellings is sworn in today in Washington, children’s TV programmers and public television advocates wonder whether her protests last week signal a tough new attitude on values in children’s programming.
“She may make it very difficult for programs to get funded,” says Peggy Charren, a pioneer in children’s TV and board member at WGBH. The Boston station produced Postcards From Buster, the show in the center of the firestorm. “You could be put out of business.”
The financial impact could be significant:
According to its Web site, PBS receives 16.4% of its funding from the federal government through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, grants and contracts, and 18.3% from state governments. (Members contribute 23.5%; businesses, 16.1%; state colleges and universities, 6.5%; foundations, 5.5%.)
I don’t think the government should be in the media business in general, other than to regulate false claims. That includes paying pundits to plug a program, paying for propaganda, and funding other media outlets, like PBS and NPR. I like knowing that my media is where it belongs, in the hands of large corporations.
February 2nd, 2005 at 2:41 pm
I think including PBS/NPR in the comparison is apples/oranges. Set aside for a moment whatever objections you may have to the content on PBS or NPR (or even on their funding schemes). The key difference is that in the pundit/propaganda case, the government is paying for a specific message to be presented in a specific way. The funding for NPR and PBS comes with no such strings attached, so on that basis I don’t think the comparison is even close to valid.