Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Before the PBS "bailout," a promise for better coverage...

Posted by Jeffrey Chester at 10:40 AM on February 15, 2007.


Jeff Chester: A step-by-step plan to reform OUR network.
piccommit
How can we commit without a prenup?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Groups such as Moveon.org and others have rightly responded to the proposed Bush Administration budget slash to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (around a 25% reduction to CPB's funding for public television and radio). There is now a campaign to help restore funding and also politically pave the way for some form of permanent support-such as a "Trust Fund."

While reversing the cuts is necessary, it is too early to support any permanent funding plan. More money won't cure PBS's problems. It will just enable the network to display higher-priced collectibles on Antiques Roadshow. The system needs to be restructured so the public interest is better guaranteed via a truly non-commercial approach. We also must think beyond today's PBS and NPR to ensure there will be funding to support a much more expansive and diverse non-commercial digital environment.

But to begin with PBS. Its annual budget should be required to have mandatory requirements for programming. For example, PBS -- and its stations -- should be mandated to reserve around 30% of annual revenues to pay for news and public affairs programming. Investigative news programming produced locally and nationally would be part of this commitment. A significant amount of funding would need to go for cultural programming. All children's programming would need to be fully non-commercial: no underwriters, brand-tie-ins and even toy deals.

Like news, the PBS "kidvid" block would receive a guarantee percentage of the Trust Fund revenues. PBS would be required to underwrite programming which reflects the needs of a diverse and under-served audience. It would have to ensure independent producers, especially women and producers of color, create at least half of all its annual programming. A review process would be created via an independent committee that would report annually to the public how well PBS was fulfilling its Trust Fund obligations. PBS and its stations would also be required to develop governance reforms which would help put the "public" back into public broadcasting. There could be similar approaches to NPR (This blogger has worked on PBS issues for many years, so my expertise is with the TV side versus public radio).

Finally, an independent body would be set up which would provide grants directly to producers and others who produce non-commercial content across various platforms. Such funding would grow in time as the need for stations recedes due to the digital transformation. (A Trust Fund would have to alter its funding strategies to reflect current and impending changes in media use). CPB would be replaced, of course. I don't believe Congress will "free" public broadcasting soon. But as we begin the conversation about its future, much more serious deliberation is needed. We shouldn't help save "Big Bird" if all the public is going to get is more of the same of what we have today. That's why advocates need to clearly offer a serious restructuring that will better guarantee the country has a set of diverse non-commercial digital services it deserves.

Digg!

Tagged as: media coverage, pbs

Jeff Chester blogs at Digital Destiny.


Blago: It Just Keeps Getting Stranger
Have you noticed that Blagojevich appears to be stark raving mad?
Post by Steve Benen. January 9, 2009.
Obama: 'If Paul Krugman Has a Good Idea … Then We're Going to Do It'
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman has been a frequent critic of President-elect Obama.
Post by Amanda Terkel. January 9, 2009.
Kucinich Speaks Out Against Congress' Blind Support of Israel
"We must take a new direction in the Middle East.
Post by Staff. January 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I agree...much more like the BBC
Posted by: asilsfable on Feb 15, 2007 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am very involved with MoveOn and I sometimes believe that they give too much blank license without making any demands of their/our own.

I'm hoping that they'll adopt more suggestions and really put together a strategy and gameplan than will further a more progressive agenda.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Polluted By Underwriting
Posted by: NoPCZone on Feb 15, 2007 11:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The dilution of PBS/NPR has been driven by the need to get ever increasing underwriting from listeners/viewers and corporate underwriters. That's why we get hours of cooking and craft shows despite HGTV/ The Food Channel/etc. The old folks money is chased by showing 30 year old reruns of Lawrence Welk.

A simple plan to fund community broadcasting is a tax on commercial broadcast air time. If WCBS-TV sells an ad for 15K, the CBS Network for 1.5 Million, or WCBS Radio for 1.5K, a tax on that ad sale would be directed to a fund to pay for PBS/NPR operations and production as well as funding grants for independent media production. Local broadcast revenue would stay in the local community and national revenue would be directed nationally.

This would largely eliminate the political and commercial strings being pulled.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A few weeks ago on PBS I watched Juan Williams
Posted by: Ellie1 on Feb 16, 2007 10:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
interviewing George Bush. I had to check to be sure I was not watching Fox (faux) news. I do not watch PBS for be told how wonderful this disgraceful administration is. It was at this point that I E-mailed PBS to tell them I would no longer be contributing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

npr..
Posted by: vand on Feb 16, 2007 1:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NPR is most worrisome. It seems to be the yuppie righteous-left mouthpiece determined to keep imperial business as usual with a multi-counter-cultural smokescreen. Nothing can improve globally/culturally/politically until nations unite for an equitable, sustainable resource-sharing global economy. Commercial profiteering is not only obsolete, it is counter-productive, unethical and unhealthy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tara Downer
Posted by: Tara Downer on Feb 16, 2007 2:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most ideas to fund PBS/NPR are fine with me. I'm extremely fortunate to be served by Austin, Texas' PBS. The programming is amazing and they provide more in-depth reporting than any other station that I have access to on standard cable. We are lucky to have a very dedicated population. In fact, last pledge drive was ended early because they had reached their goal for that quarter. As a result, we see the best of the best. I would rather watch one hour of Nova or any of the other science programs than twenty-four hours of the agenda-filled Discovery Channel.

I have been greatly saddened by the reduction of NOW and the weekly absence of Bill Moyer has been hard on my heart. Our local station filled that empty half-hour with Austin NOW, and I've learned more about Austin from that show than I have living here for the past 21 years.

As far as the negative comments about The Lawrence Welk Show, if you've ever worked in a nursing home, you would know that show brings more joy to those people than almost anything else on t.v. For many of the residents, it is easier to remember those song and dance numbers than it is to remember the names or faces of their children and grandchildren.

To the conservative who doesn't like the facts presented about the current administration, wake up. My biggest complaint about PBS news is that they will present both sides of an issue when the minority view is held by a few (often bought and paid for) "experts". However, without those news shows, I would have little access to something approaching fair and balanced reporting. And, without the nightly news, I wouldn't have the chance to pray for those families whose sons and daughters are dying because we invaded a country. Their pictures, rank, age, and home town are included at the end of each newscast.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'll pony up
Posted by: Mewsician on Feb 16, 2007 3:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for PBS AFTER I see some hard evidence that they've not gone the way of the rest of the mewling mainstream pack. The days when PBS and NPR could take for granted the financial support of people like me, who expect them to do their job no matter WHO is in the White House, are long gone. Both entities have been drinking the Kool-Aid in the past five years, and I WANT IT STOPPED before they'll get another damn dime from me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Want fair and balanced reporting?
Posted by: TruthBeTold on Feb 19, 2007 7:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Try the BBC and the CBC. And read the foreign press. These outlets have better coverage of what is going on in the world and in this country than the "public" broadcasting stations stopped serving the public long ago. NPR and PBS have been carrying water for Bush and the Republicans for so long that I doubt they have a clue as to what fair and balanced reporting is about. It is sickening to hear how they pander to the right-wing. I am at the point where they could go off the air and I would not notice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]