• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

De-fund NPR and PBS

Defund NPR and PBS!

  • I agree!

    Votes: 41 47.7%

  • I disagree.

    Votes: 45 52.3%
  • Total voters
    86
NPR/PBS is not funded by the government they get some of their funding from the government. There is a huge difference. Part of the greatness of NPR comes from the fact that it is not biased by a corporate owner. Both are the best source of in depth, unbiased news. PBS provides so much educational programing for families and for schools. They both deserve all the support they can get.
 
samsmart said:
I agree that those shows shouldn't get taxpayer funding.

However, PBS also provides/provided funding for Sesame Street, Mr. Roger's Neighborhood, Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Wishbone.

Sesame Street and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood provides basic educational television for children. Bill Nye's show was entertainment about science for tweens. Wishbone exposed tweens to literature.

Now I don't like all of PBS' content. However, I think that taxpayer funding should focus on educational content like the kind I mentioned because, well, it's educational. I mean the educational system gets blasted for being so low, but we also have to remember that school isn't the only way people can be exposed to learning.

So here's my question to you, and to others who are willing to answer it: would you agree to NPR and PBS if they content they produced focused more on educational shows?
Click to expand...

Even those shows should not be funded buy the government. Let Nickelodeon, ABC,CBS, Disney or who ever have those shows. Its content should not matter. TV and radio stations should not get any funding from tax payers.
 
Last edited:
jamesrage said:
Even those shows should not be funded buy the government. Let Nickelodeon, ABC,CBS, Disney or who ever have those shows. Its content should not matter. TV and radio stations should not get any funding from tax payers.
Click to expand...

The problem is, then it would turn into something like Fox or MSNBC, useless partisan bulls**t. Right now, it maintains a decent amount of objectivity, a load more than the other big "news" agencies put together.
 
jamesrage said:
Even those shows should not be funded buy the government. Let Nickelodeon, ABC,CBS, Disney or who ever have those shows. Its content should not matter.
Click to expand...

But the focus of those networks aren't to provide educational shows. Rather, it's to provide entertainment.

But don't you think our society would be better off if educational content was available to everyone via the television and radio?
 
repeter said:
The problem is, then it would turn into something like Fox or MSNBC, useless partisan bulls**t.
Click to expand...

What educational shows on non-tax payer funded tv do that?


Right now, it maintains a decent amount of objectivity, a load more than the other big "news" agencies put together.
Click to expand...

If it gets enough viewership then it should survive on regular tv. It should not get tax payer dollars just for a handful of viewers.
 
samsmart said:
But the focus of those networks aren't to provide educational shows. Rather, it's to provide entertainment.

But don't you think our society would be better off if educational content was available to everyone via the television and radio?
Click to expand...

Disney, Nickelodeon and other tv stations can fill those roles.
 
Your Star said:
NPR and PBS provides some of the best news, and educational programing in the country, and it would hurt the nation to defund them. The fact is that, even if you defund everything besides the military, social security, and medicare, we will still have a deficit. We need to cut those programs, this is just politicians pretending to do something about the deficit, nothing more.
Click to expand...

It's not in the Constitution, defund the bastards.
 
repeter said:
I love that you don't even dispute that you believe NPR and PBS brainwash people :lol:
Click to expand...

Where did I say DNC GOVERNMENT RADIO/TV INC. brainwashed people?
.
.
.
.
 
Layla_Z said:
NPR/PBS is not funded by the government they get some of their funding from the government. There is a huge difference. Part of the greatness of NPR comes from the fact that it is not biased by a corporate owner. Both are the best source of in depth, unbiased news. PBS provides so much educational programing for families and for schools. They both deserve all the support they can get.
Click to expand...

Yeah you can tell its Unbiased by all the Bipartisan support going around.......
.
.
.
.
 
Your Star said:
Alexander Hamilton would disagree.
Click to expand...

Alexander Hamilton supported tax payer newspapers(they didn't have radio or tv back then so this would be the equivalent) and wrote in the constitution?
 
Your Star said:
NPR and PBS provides some of the best news, and educational programing in the country, and it would hurt the nation to defund them.
Click to expand...

LOL! What? How?
 
jamesrage said:
What educational shows on non-tax payer funded tv do that?
Click to expand...

What educational non-taxpayer funded television shows do not just show partisan crap? BBC, CNN (to a certain extent), Bloomberg is pretty good, but thats about it.

jamesrage said:
If it gets enough viewership then it should survive on regular tv. It should not get tax payer dollars just for a handful of viewers.
Click to expand...

If NPR/PBS were entertainment shows, where there is a clear bias and presentation of opinion rather than fact, then I would agree. However, NPR/PBS are educational and informative. Therefore, the same concepts do not apply because they are a different entity from regular television altogether.
 
jamesrage said:
Disney, Nickelodeon and other tv stations can fill those roles.
Click to expand...

Again, they can't because those private networks rely on advertising revenue in order to profit. Which means they'll put in whatever content is the most profitable. Which means they will likely put more entertaining content than educational content.

So, again, because private networks put out entertainment content in order to have high profit margins because that's the point of a business which a private network is, don't you think that a public network focused on educational content would be better for our society?
 
jamesrage said:
So you got nothing and your answer is no its not constitutional since its nothing in the constitution for tax payer funded tv and radio stations.
Click to expand...

Promote the general welfare. That's without even really thinking about it, and going through the Constitution.
 
jamesrage said:
So you got nothing and your answer is no its not constitutional since its nothing in the constitution for tax payer funded tv and radio stations.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't understand the concept of implied powers, or you didn't click the link, or you just stuck your fingers in your ears, and went nah, nah, nah.
 
Your Star said:
Yes, they are news channels, not entertainment channels like Fox News, and MSNBC.
Click to expand...

So what? What business does the government have in news channels?
 
samsmart said:
Again, they can't because those private networks rely on advertising revenue in order to profit. Which means they'll put in whatever content is the most profitable. Which means they will likely put more entertaining content than educational content.

So, again, because private networks put out entertainment content in order to have high profit margins because that's the point of a business which a private network is, don't you think that a public network focused on educational content would be better for our society?
Click to expand...

The TELEVISION is not your teacher........it is not your child's teacher......neither is the toaster......or the radio.....or any other appliance in your home.

If DNC GOVERNMENT TV was actually educating "the children".....our public schools wouldnt be turning out the abundace on functioning illiterates that it is. But thats DNC GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS.......and a Failure for another time.
.
.
.
 
repeter said:
Promote the general welfare. That's without even really thinking about it, and going through the Constitution.
Click to expand...

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,
and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature
of the limited Government established by the people of America."

-------James Madison--Father of the Constitution--Hater of Liberals

With but one paragraph, Jim destroys the entire Democrat Party and everything they stand for.....gotta give him props. So much for your fantasy land interpretation of "Promote The General Welfare".
.
.
.
.
 
I am actually a pretty big fan of NPR. I do not always agree with their analysis, but they do very good job of going in depth, and providing a well-balanced report. That is why I support defunding it and PBS. It may seem like the station only caters to a select audience, but I believe that the station only received about 8% of its income from the government last year. Enough donors support the program for Big Bird to live if congress pulls the plug.

Another issue is bias. Yes, public media funding makes up a tiny portion of the budget, and getting rid of it would not seriously affect the deficit. However, many people take issue with giving any of their money to a media organization that they do not want to support. Many people here have remarked on NPR and PBS's impartiality. While I agree that these outlets do an excellent job of showing both sides, saying that the stations are impartial sounds like the hard right-wingers insisting until their faces turn blue that Fox News is the most unbiased source. I know that each one of you, would not want to give your tax dollars to Fox News, even if it had a small impact on your wallet. Yes, I know you'll say that Fox News is way more biased. I won't disagree, but both have their biases. No matter how little that bias shows itself, it will create opponents who are ideologically opposed to the reporter's analyses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom