Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

They in all likelihood would never have existed without a) funding from CPB and PBS and b) airing by PBS stations.  Private funding would have been obsessed with whether they could sell enough ads for Count Chocula in their time slot.

Private funding is always obsessed with growth above all else, even business model sustainability.

When your only goal is growth, and you don't give a shit about outcomes for the people consuming your product/service, you're gonna run that enterprise into ground and ruin everything that made it successful in the first place. It's half the reason I have a career - cleaning up that mess of bad foresight is a very very reliable means for finding work and engagements

Posted
16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Private funding is always obsessed with growth above all else, even business model sustainability.

When your only goal is growth, and you don't give a shit about outcomes for the people consuming your product/service, you're gonna run that enterprise into ground and ruin everything that made it successful in the first place. It's half the reason I have a career - cleaning up that mess of bad foresight is a very very reliable means for finding work and engagements

To be fair, Sesame Street was created in the pre-Friedman capitalist era, when business was a bit less psychotic about growth and quarterly reports and share price.

But, profit motive, in whatever form it took in 1968 and prior still was not up to producing educational TV for kids.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Private funding is always obsessed with growth above all else, even business model sustainability.

Someone needs to read more Tuttle Twins to understand the wonders of the invisible hand.

Posted
19 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Haha jkates negged this post.  I won't neg back, but I'll call him a fascist cunt.  Cunt. 

He’s established a creepy pattern of defending people who prey on children’s minds and bodies. I really hope he's not involved in any youth activities, like the Boy Scouts or Little League Baseball.

Posted
30 minutes ago, bolverk said:

He’s established a creepy pattern of defending people who prey on children’s minds and bodies. I really hope he's not involved in any youth activities, like the Boy Scouts or Little League Baseball.

Or any position of authority in the Catholic Church. Or the Republican Party 

Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Haha jkates negged this post.  I won't neg back, but I'll call him a fascist cunt.  Cunt. 

Haha, I've noticed him doing that quite a bit in DT threads.  Not sure if I've ever actually seen him post.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, MissingInAction said:

I worked in IT at a hospital for four years, and can confirm this fact. 

I have worked in a place that employs a number of PhD’s.  In the beginning of my time there, I was always impressed when someone had that level of education. 
 

The shine is off.  
 

The human brain is only used by us to what, 20% of its capacity?  Whatever the low number is that gets thrown around?

My theory is that PhD’s have crammed so much knowledge into that 20% of the brain we use in order to excel in their field of choice, that something else was forced out. 
 

Common sense.  The ability to perform basic maintenance checks on a vehicle. Simple bodily hygiene.  How to make a sandwich.  Not putting Dawn liquid into the dishwasher when you run out of Cascade so you don’t turn your kitchen into a scene from Mr. Mom. 
 

That sort of thing. 
 

Anymore, when I meet a PhD, I judge them in a way that asks the question “what has your brain given up to reach this level?”

M.D.’s are susceptible to this.  For God’s sake, there have been instances where someone went into the hospital to have a leg amputated, and they took the wrong leg.  You can make it a lot more easily with one leg than with none.  But no, they still had to go back in and take the other one. 
 

The absolute worst are the rare M.D./PhD.  My daughter works for UT Health in the TMC.  Her former boss was an M.D./PhD.  His family had to have paid someone to give him those degrees.  He’s an idiot. The staff had to babysit him to make sure he doesn’t try to use research grant funds on $2500 bottles of wine or $15k Christmas parties for the staff. 
 

Rant over. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Vanilla Strange Gato said:

I have worked in a place that employs a number of PhD’s.  In the beginning of my time there, I was always impressed when someone had that level of education. 
 

The shine is off.  
 

The human brain is only used by us to what, 20% of its capacity?  Whatever the low number is that gets thrown around?

My theory is that PhD’s have crammed so much knowledge into that 20% of the brain we use in order to excel in their field of choice, that something else was forced out. 
 

Common sense.  The ability to perform basic maintenance checks on a vehicle. Simple bodily hygiene.  How to make a sandwich.  Not putting Dawn liquid into the dishwasher when you run out of Cascade so you don’t turn your kitchen into a scene from Mr. Mom. 
 

That sort of thing. 
 

Anymore, when I meet a PhD, I judge them in a way that asks the question “what has your brain given up to reach this level?”

M.D.’s are susceptible to this.  For God’s sake, there have been instances where someone went into the hospital to have a leg amputated, and they took the wrong leg.  You can make it a lot more easily with one leg than with none.  But no, they still had to go back in and take the other one. 
 

The absolute worst are the rare M.D./PhD.  My daughter works for UT Health in the TMC.  Her former boss was an M.D./PhD.  His family had to have paid someone to give him those degrees.  He’s an idiot. The staff had to babysit him to make sure he doesn’t try to use research grant funds on $2500 bottles of wine or $15k Christmas parties for the staff. 
 

Rant over. 

Yep.  And I think both types of doctor suffer from "overspecialization."  Not only are they cramming in a shit ton of knowledge, it becomes increasingly narrow and specialized academically and professionally so that they can no longer see any type of forest for the trees.

Probably all of us suffer from this to one degree or another.  That's one thing I love about this forum: I increase my exposure to different subject matter constantly, from expert types in their respective fields.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

I agree. I liaise with a lot of PhDs and it’s amazing how they cannot follow simple directions for simple tasks, research anything outside of their area of expertise and just believe anything they read on the internet outside of their field 

Edited by Js1
Posted

Something else occurs.

Since "we" don't like "subsidizing" frivolities like PBS, why are "we" considering renaming the Kennedy Center the Trump Center?

New Republicolibertarian thinking seems to say we should knock the fucker down and let UFC build an Octagon in its place.

And what about those fucking libraries?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

Haha, I've noticed him doing that quite a bit in DT threads.  Not sure if I've ever actually seen him post.

He's popped into the Youth Minister's (and other pervs) Thread of Shame a couple of times to defend some prominent pedophile or their enablers, who he claims are "good people." And, of course, we can all guess with 99.999% certainty that he fully supports the one who's currently defiling the White House with cheap and tacky gilding and a paved-over Rose "Garden," while planning a major $200 million construction project ($2,222/sf) there that will fundamentally alter its character, and acting as if he never plans to leave.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Rage+1 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Js1 said:

I agree. I liaise with a lot of PhDs and it’s amazing how they cannot follow simple directions for simple tasks, research anything outside of their area of expertise and just believe anything they read on the internet outside of their field 

Can we add colonels to this mix? I work with a few and damn they just don't know basic shit and are used to having a staff. Welcome to the real world sir, now go get your own damn coffee. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
14 hours ago, elfenix said:

yeah i wasn't talking about toys, doc. congrats on uncritically posting API screed as a defense to the subsidies of oil companies. i'm sure the fact that the oil companies are paying royalties more than makes up for the subsidies and isn't itself a disguised subsidy at all. 

 

I was just having fun talking about toys. Gasoline is a more serious topic. It bugs me that the local, state, and federal governments make $0.90 cents per gallon and tax the shit out of oil companies only to hear people complain about big oil. It makes no sense. 

Posted
On 8/2/2025 at 10:07 AM, TwiceHorn said:

Why didn't the private sector generate Mr. Rogers, Sesame Street, etc?

And now we're concerned about private media having to compete with PBS?  Fucking hell.

I think the cutting of funding for public broadcasting is short sighted and wrong.  I think some changes needed to be made but cutting funding is just silly and non productive and political theater.

To the above, when shows like Mr Rogers and Sesame street were created (late 1960s) there were only 3 real channels for television.  Marketing for the fledgling tv industry had to focus on shows that adults watched because that is what advertisers would pay for.  The networks did not have the financial ability to generate exclusively kids shows because there were no advertisers for those shows.  There were cartoons that offered mindless entertainment for kids but not educational.    So getting PBS to do shows like Sesame was great.  A really good use of public funding.

What some are suggesting is that times are different now.  There are literally thousands of shows on network, cable, streaming services etc that are considered educational children's programming.  So it is a fair question whether the public funding is still necessary.  I personally think it is but I can see the argument.

There is also a pretty big distinction, in my mind, from PBS and NPR.  For anyone to suggest that NPR does not have a political lean to liberals/democrats is just foolish.  When Berliner resigned he uncovered a lot of what people certainly suspected.  Berliner was as "inside" as you can get and worked there for 20 years and was a strong liberal.  The staff at NPR, especially the editors, are overwhelmingly registered democrats.  Berliner suggested that there were zero registered republican editors at the headquarters.  May or may not be true but the democrat numbers there are overwhelming.   That is an astonishing fact for an institution that receives federal funding.  It will never be 50/50 but to not even have a few token republicans on the editorial staff just opens NPR up to legitimate criticism by hard core conservatives.  NPR did it to themselves.  Even if in their hearts the editors wanted to be balanced and thought they were being balanced, they just couldn't.  Every human has personal biases.  It is part of our DNA and unavoidable at a subconscious level.  When the numbers of people editing stories is 95% left leaning, then it is absolutely inevitable that that bias is going to creep into their thought making.  Inevitable.  Not every single time.  But over a period of time it is simply inevitable. 

And for certain NPR is not over the top bias like OAN or MSNBC, but it is there.  And there is plenty of programming on NPR that is not political at all.  But they opened themselves up for this by their own actions and hiring practices.  And I have zero objection to any private outfit aligning their staff to a certain ideological similarity, but it just can't exist when receiving public funds. 

As an analogy, if there was a publication of some sort in Texas that prided itself on diversity of opinions and the entire editorial staff of the publication were TAMU graduates, no one here, including myself, would believe the publication was not biased.  We all know aggies that are hard core, moderate and a small group that are actually liberal.  But putting them all together will guarantee a right leaning bent to their reporting.  It is just human nature.  

If NPR announced back in 2024 when Berliner resigned that it was going to look inward at their editorial staff and make some changes and really try to add a percentage of diversity of opinion to their staff then they would have a good argument against the far right wanting to defund them.  Maybe add 20% of conservative leaning editors.  But they didn't.  They dug in and kept the status quo and are now suffering for it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Js1 said:

I agree. I liaise with a lot of PhDs and it’s amazing how they cannot follow simple directions for simple tasks, research anything outside of their area of expertise and just believe anything they read on the internet outside of their field 

I'm hurt!

  • Haha 2
Posted

Speaking of the revenge tour, Blondi filed a judicial conduct complaint against DC Chief Judge James Boasberg, who has been a thorn in Trump's side.

The gravamen of the complaint:  allegedly public comments about the Trump administration disobeying court orders.

The forum for the comments:  a breakfast with John Roberts during the Judicial Conference of The United States, where Chief Judges of district courts all across the nation raise issues current in their courts.  An entirely private affair at which such issues are supposed to be raised and Boasberg raised them on behalf of the entire DC District Court.

Unsurprisingly, a complete load of shit that Blondi didn't even have the guts to sign herself.  And clearly designed to intimidate judges into capitulation.

Didn't see this reported or discussed anywhere.  https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/170-dojs-ridiculous-misconduct-complaint

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 5
Posted

The uri reference may have been too obscure earlier. 

https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-npr-lost-americas-trust

I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust.

Uri Berliner, a veteran at the public radio institution, says the network lost its way when it started telling listeners how to think

You know the stereotype of the NPR listener: an EV-driving, Wordle-playing, tote bag–carrying coastal elite. It doesn’t precisely describe me, but it’s not far off. I’m Sarah Lawrence–educated, was raised by a lesbian peace activist mother, I drive a Subaru, and Spotify says my listening habits are most similar to people in Berkeley. 

I fit the NPR mold. I’ll cop to that.

So when I got a job here 25 years ago, I never looked back. As a senior editor on the business desk where news is always breaking, we’ve covered upheavals in the workplace, supermarket prices, social media, and AI. 

It’s true NPR has always had a liberal bent, but during most of my tenure here, an open-minded, curious culture prevailed. We were nerdy, but not knee-jerk, activist, or scolding. 

In recent years, however, that has changed. Today, those who listen to NPR or read its coverage online find something different: the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population. 

If you are conservative, you will read this and say, duh, it’s always been this way.

But it hasn’t.

 

 

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The uri reference may have been too obscure earlier. 

https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-npr-lost-americas-trust

I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust.

Uri Berliner, a veteran at the public radio institution, says the network lost its way when it started telling listeners how to think

You know the stereotype of the NPR listener: an EV-driving, Wordle-playing, tote bag–carrying coastal elite. It doesn’t precisely describe me, but it’s not far off. I’m Sarah Lawrence–educated, was raised by a lesbian peace activist mother, I drive a Subaru, and Spotify says my listening habits are most similar to people in Berkeley. 

I fit the NPR mold. I’ll cop to that.

So when I got a job here 25 years ago, I never looked back. As a senior editor on the business desk where news is always breaking, we’ve covered upheavals in the workplace, supermarket prices, social media, and AI. 

It’s true NPR has always had a liberal bent, but during most of my tenure here, an open-minded, curious culture prevailed. We were nerdy, but not knee-jerk, activist, or scolding. 

In recent years, however, that has changed. Today, those who listen to NPR or read its coverage online find something different: the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population. 

If you are conservative, you will read this and say, duh, it’s always been this way.

But it hasn’t.

 

 

I was aware of it and disagree with the premise of telling listeners how to think.

For example, here's a piece that is ripe for editorializing.  https://www.npr.org/2025/08/03/nx-s1-5491473/senate-confirms-ex-fox-news-host-pirro-as-top-federal-prosecutor-for-nations-capital

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Ghost of NMAS said:

Percentage depletion has no relation to operating costs.  It is a perk granted by the Federal government to allow non integrated oil and gas companies (E&P and Royalty holders) to completely shelter 100% of their taxable income related to oil and gas activities.  I have been associated with a number of E&P companies, and none of them ever paid a penny in Federal Income tax (no matter what oil prices were). The only income based taxes they ever paid were a small amount of certain state Franchise taxes and Oklahoma State income tax (yay Oklahoma).  Please name one other industry that has been granted this level of subsidy by the Federal government.

besides religion of course, and please don’t tell me that religion isn’t a for profit industry

I agree that percentage depletion has little economic basis than encouraging investments in energy.  My personal experience has been with respect to individual royalty and WI holders who gladly take that perk.   Much like those that take the EV credit.  Congress does what congress does. 

I have a big hunch that there is a huge net positive economic impact to the federal budget and our overall economy from the energy industry.

Posted
11 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Yes thread got sidetracked by a troll. So much amazing content that never would have happened without CPB


NPR:

Car Talk

This American Life

I Built This

All Things Considered

Fresh Air

Marketplace

The Moth Radio Hour 

Wait Wait… Don’t Tell Me!

 

PBS:

Frontline

Nova

American Experience 

Washington Week 

Antiques Roadshow 

 

And of course without CPB the Ken Burns documentaries never get made; for all his flaws and the valid criticisms of his films, they are the richest, most in depth portraits of our country and its people that have ever been put in such an accessible format  

nothing like this going forward will be created and that is a shameful stain on our government and us for voting them in

 

 

The American Experience episode on the near disaster in Arkansas nuke missile site was something else.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Yes thread got sidetracked by a troll. So much amazing content that never would have happened without CPB


NPR:

Car Talk

This American Life

I Built This

All Things Considered

Fresh Air

Marketplace

The Moth Radio Hour 

Wait Wait… Don’t Tell Me!

 

PBS:

Frontline

Nova

American Experience 

Washington Week 

Antiques Roadshow 

 

And of course without CPB the Ken Burns documentaries never get made; for all his flaws and the valid criticisms of his films, they are the richest, most in depth portraits of our country and its people that have ever been put in such an accessible format  

nothing like this going forward will be created and that is a shameful stain on our government and us for voting them in

 

 

My comments haven't been remotely trollish. I want to know why your entertainment requires other people's money. You offer no rebuttal. I feel like you should have some shame at your basic lack of any sense of responsibility. Why are you more special than everyone else? Why doesn't my entertainment get subsidized too? And yes, I believe your sense of entitlement is a stain on society. Countries succeed when old men plant trees under whose shade they will never rest, not when old people suck every last drop of life for their short term benefit.

I will await your measured and well thought out response. 

Edited by Thetexashammer
  • Fuck You 3
Posted
3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

It’s hilarious that this thread turned to criticism of academic accomplishment. 

My experience in higher ed tells me that the ratio of crazy or clueless to reasonable and grounded pretty much mirrors the general population. It seems more acute because 1.) we foolishly think education inoculates against crazy; 2.) people with more education are given many more chances to demonstrate their tenuous grip on reality; 3.) smart people can reason themselves into really crazy things at a very high level.

That’s not to say that their aren’t a ton of nutcases in higher ed, just that most here are underestimating just how many nutcases are prowling around them while they wander around the Piggly-Wiggly.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

My comments haven't been remotely trollish. I want to know why your entertainment requires other people's money. You offer no rebuttal. I feel like you should have some shame at your basic lack of any sense of responsibility. Why are you more special than everyone else? Why doesn't my entertainment get subsidized too? And yes, I believe your sense of entitlement is a stain on society. Countries succeed when old men plant trees under whose shade they will never rest, not when old people suck every last drop of life for their short term benefit.

I will await your measured and well thought out response. 

CPB required taxpayer money because Congress voted to appropriate money for that purpose. This Congressional majority ran on reducing the budget, and, instead, bloated the budget. Arguing CPB is a reason for the cost overrun is trolling, because the cost of CPB is minuscule. Ignoring the reasons why the budget shot skywards is disingenuous, and that, too, is the behavior of a troll.

Edited by Willfully Horn
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Thetexashammer said:

You offer no rebuttal.

Plenty of rebuttal has been offered in this thread, it's not his fault you can't fucking read you fucking dingus.

Dude gets windmill dunked on in every thread he posts in and never gets the picture, it's remarkable.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
On 8/1/2025 at 10:08 PM, DalTxHornFan said:

I do miss Firing Line with William F. Buckley. 

Conservative media today would be nowhere as even-handed as Buckley, who actually believed in the exchange of ideas.

Incidentally, Firing Line was restarted in 2009 with Herbert Hoover's granddaughter as host.  She is conservative, and former Fox commentator, but anti Trump, as I suspect Buckley would have been.

If there's any liberal slant in PBS/NPR, I suspect it's really in PBS News' various shows.  But, the presence of Firing Line in the lineup indicates more of an effort at even-handedness than most.

I suspect that those of you claiming its liberal captured don't listen to NPR or watch PBS.  Like most things, you've been suckered by propaganda.

Also, caught up on some American Experience and Frontline.  The AE on German American Bund was excellent.  Almost completely factual, but it has darky and Jew commentators (woke!).  It's timing is felicitous, as is the one on the Gilded Age.  THAT is the very subtle liberal slant of PBS.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
Posted

It’s also an issue that “facts have a liberal bias” has gone from some smug asshole thing to say to a real problem where you can’t present both “viewpoints” while adhering to any of the core principles of journalism.

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
10 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

It’s also an issue that “facts have a liberal bias” has gone from some smug asshole thing to say to a real problem where you can’t present both “viewpoints” while adhering to any of the core principles of journalism.

That’s why they invented alternative facts 9 years ago 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)

There is a spectrum of selfishness and lack of caring that is bordering pathological for a lot of our citizens these days. And no… the ability to cut a 25k check to his local charity is not the only way to show you care about your community either. Which is the excuse a Trumpy-adjacent friend gives me. 

Edited by YChang
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Celery Man said:

It’s also an issue that “facts have a liberal bias” has gone from some smug asshole thing to say to a real problem where you can’t present both “viewpoints” while adhering to any of the core principles of journalism.

This is the foundational problem.

Reporting on simple facts, like "the temperature data gathered in the Gulf of Maine over the past 50 years shows that the body has reached a temp 4 degrees warmer than its long-term average" is liberal slant/bias.  You have a POTUS firing the head of the BLS because....it reported and adjusted job numbers using the EXACT same methodology it has used forever, including during his first term, Obama's term, Biden's term, etc.  Reporting of ACTUAL FACTS is...to use the exact word from the leader of "conservatives" is "rigged."  

A society never gets over that.  We are going to gut every single entity that gathers or reports on objective data and facts.  Because....objective data and facts are enemy #1 of an authoritarian government.  It's not any more complicated than that.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

Look, jackass, a prominent and successful billionaire taught us this and used an example that is just basic science. 
 

 

IMG_0699.jpeg

Edited by Vanilla Strange Gato
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

A society never gets over that.  We are going to gut every single entity that gathers or reports on objective data and facts.  Because....objective data and facts are enemy #1 of an authoritarian government.  It's not any more complicated than that.

It was SO GOOD back when COVID was hitting in Feb 2020 and President Trump fought against nation-wide testing because if we had no positive tests then we had no pandemic!

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Would that conservative "news" outlets were merely biased.

As an NPR listener and former conservative one thing notable about it is there's very little "analysis," or "editorializing."

Yes, you can often tell that the reporters and personalities are revolted and shocked by what they're reporting, but they rarely come out and say it, or even really imply it.

And don't pretend this is some measured conservative policy.  They've been bitching about it since Nixon but haven't done anything about it.

This is 100% Donald Trump's revenge tour.

Also, yes it is different times.  But you really never know when the next Sesame Street is coming down the pike and I think there is value to having a non-profit, publicly oriented media outlet.

Don't we have a few hundred page topic on the bias of some conservative leaning news sites?  I agree there are biases in almost all news organizations.  As far as I know, none of them are a topic of what I am posting about and none of them receive federal funding.  Surely you are not suggesting that having NPR is necessary to offset conservative leaning news sites?  

It is not always about simply editorializing or analyzing.  You have to look at the guest list for interviews and the topics discussed.  Plus, as all humans do, we often fail to see a bias if the coverage supports our own worldview.

Quick example, I queried Immigration and NPR.  There is actually a link on NPR's website that collates NPR's coverage of immigration.  Of the first 15-20 links, all of them were negative towards the current policy and its actions.  Fine.  Its newsworthy discussion and the negative impacts need to be made public.  But not one single article about the positives.  Not one.  Just throw in one article out of 20 that details the deportation of hardened criminals, rapists, human smugglers etc.  When ICE raids a plant and say ten people are rounded up, there likely will be 1 us citizen wrongly swept up, there likely will be 2 cases of immigrants that really should be here that are law abiding and productive and the rest will likely be really horrible people that never should have been here and need to be deported post haste.  We absolutely need reporting and transparency on the first two groups.  But we equally need transparency and reporting on the bad guys.  How were they able to get here?  How have they not already been deported or arrested?  When you are publicly funded, you need to try to be even handed.

Sure they have been bitching since Nixon.  You are unwittingly making my argument.  The reason nothing could be done previously is that in Nixon's day there were about as many conservative hosts/panels as there were liberal.  There was actual political diversity in the editorial positions at NPR.  The right could bitch but there were legitimate facts the left could argue.  I think it is a bit telling that you ignored the fact that there seem to be almost zero republican editors currently at NPR.  That is a staggering fact.  It is almost impossible to explain away.  

On your last point we agree mostly.  I completely favor continued funding.  I do think there should be some changes but it is foolish to just abolish.  I will also argue that it is unlikely the next great breakthrough in children's educational programming will come from a source like PBS.  Today, PBS just doesn't have the reach or funding of other sources and the competition is brutal versus the 1960's when there wasn't any competition.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...