Read Eric Rhoads' Blog
User Feedback
Should We Take The Money Away From CPB and NPR?
Add a Comment
(2/22/2011 2:06:29 PM) Flag as inappropriate content
NPR should stand on its own two feet (or however many they claim to have evolved) just like any OTHER religious broadcaster. For the separation of Church and State to have ANY meaning whatsoever they need to be disconnected from taxpayer monies if they insist upon preaching their religious dogma masquerading as science. As a Christian broadcaster I am at least HONEST about my faith-based content.
NPR supplies a level of background information on current events that is not economically feasible for commercial radio broadcasters to supply (remember radio newsrooms?-precious few survive). It provides a valuable service; a better-informed electorate makes for a better-run, more competitive country. Further, NPR's large audience says a lot about the continued importance of radio in general.
No government... federal, state or local should ever provide funds to any business (non-profit or otherwise) that has free market private competitors. Why should my tax dollars subsidize my competition?
Public broadcasting has its place, but it should not receive direct financial support from the Federal Government. Just like with any Federal program, when the government gets involved, the waste begins with bureaucracy and less $$ to the PBS stations. If the listening public wants it, they will support it. For years the purchase of broadcast equipment by PBS station groups has been without limit as to what they can or will spend for production, RF equipment and towers. Let the market prevail, not the U. S. Government.
Add a Comment
Add a Comment
(2/22/2011 2:06:29 PM) Flag as inappropriate content
NPR should stand on its own two feet (or however many they claim to have evolved) just like any OTHER religious broadcaster. For the separation of Church and State to have ANY meaning whatsoever they need to be disconnected from taxpayer monies if they insist upon preaching their religious dogma masquerading as science. As a Christian broadcaster I am at least HONEST about my faith-based content.
- Joe Mann
(2/22/2011 11:56:40 AM) Flag as inappropriate contentNPR supplies a level of background information on current events that is not economically feasible for commercial radio broadcasters to supply (remember radio newsrooms?-precious few survive). It provides a valuable service; a better-informed electorate makes for a better-run, more competitive country. Further, NPR's large audience says a lot about the continued importance of radio in general.
- Jaime Arbona
(2/22/2011 11:16:08 AM) Flag as inappropriate contentNo government... federal, state or local should ever provide funds to any business (non-profit or otherwise) that has free market private competitors. Why should my tax dollars subsidize my competition?
- Chuck
(2/22/2011 10:54:23 AM) Flag as inappropriate contentPublic broadcasting has its place, but it should not receive direct financial support from the Federal Government. Just like with any Federal program, when the government gets involved, the waste begins with bureaucracy and less $$ to the PBS stations. If the listening public wants it, they will support it. For years the purchase of broadcast equipment by PBS station groups has been without limit as to what they can or will spend for production, RF equipment and towers. Let the market prevail, not the U. S. Government.
- Monte Miller
Add a Comment
