Do you think the government should defund NPR and all public broadcasting agenci

1. 67

   Flightkeeperposted 13 years ago

   Do you think the government should defund NPR and all public broadcasting agencies?

   replyreport
2. 61

   nicompposted 13 years ago

   Withdrawing federal funding from NPR won't hurt them financially because it's only 2% of their budget. They'll probably drift further toward the left if they aren't answerable at all to Congress, but they will continue to receive donations from George Soros: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10 … eporters/.

   replyreport
3. 61

   drbillfanninposted 13 years ago

   Yes. The government should get out of broadcasting completely, even PBS. If they can't make it on donations, get off the airwaves. NPR has plenty of money. That is one way to reduce taxes and spending.

   replyreport
4. 60

   weholdthesetruthsposted 13 years ago

   There is no reason on earth to be spending taxpayer dollars on tv or radio.    There never has been.

   replyreport
5. 88

   Bibowenposted 13 years ago

   Absolutely. I like NPR, but they’re not objective and taxpayer money should not go to promote liberal elite opinion. They should have to work to earn a listenership, just like every other radio program.

   replyreport
6. 82

   Jason R. Manningposted 13 years ago

   I take an opposite approach to everything said here thus far.  I say the government and NPR should put their money where their mouth is.  Instead of enacting (or trying to) the Fairness Doctrine…show us by example that NPR can equally take a non partisan view and objectively report news and programming.  Or, give equal time to both sides, again, showing us through this program just how well a 50/50 roster is supposed to work.  Is this not the least combative, and most “fair” way of handling the latest debacle?

   replyreport
7. 59

   colonial82posted 13 years ago

   No, I think anyone thinking that after the Juan Williams thing is letting partisanship get the best of them.  Juan Williams broke his contract with NPR and under an at-will contract, they can fire him whenever they want to fire him.  They do a great job of talking about the news and only the news.  I want my news to be the news and the opinions of the newscaster to stay with themselves.  This whole incident is blown out of proportion.
   
   Anyone who wants to call NPR liberal must be listening to a different station because I believe they are the most balanced and fair news organization we have in this country (but not saying much with state of our media).  I want news and only news, which is what they give me.  And I am a moderate independent and that is my opinion.
   
   Jason, you are missing the point about the news.  There shouldn't be equal time for each side, there shouldn't be a side with the news.  It should be just the news and no sides. 
   
   P.S. NPR only gets 2% of their funding from the federal government.

   replyreport
8. 60

   BillyDRitchieposted 13 years ago

   Um, yes, not only NPR but other wastes of time like the National Endowment For The Arts.
   
   How do you locate a government building?  Look for a really hideous piece of subsidized "art" on the front lawn.

   replyreport
9. 73

   someonewhoknowsposted 13 years ago

   no,however the public airwaves have been sold to private interests and N.P.R. is one of the few well known publically at least overtly ,though covertly private interests use it to promote their own agenda,it's more obvious that it is in the private side of television.

   replyreport