Save NPR and PBS

[Anonymous]

Evil now lives in the White House and evil doesn’t care one bit about people and even less about poor rural people.

even though I’ll never understand it, we have to be happy for those communities that got exactly what they wanted- to be relieved of the burden of news, healthcare, doctors, disease prevention, jobs, education, healthy food, and even money. Without those distractions getting in the way, they can now live their dream lives focusing on God and austerity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Evil now lives in the White House and evil doesn’t care one bit about people and even less about poor rural people.

even though I’ll never understand it, we have to be happy for those communities that got exactly what they wanted- to be relieved of the burden of news, healthcare, doctors, disease prevention, jobs, education, healthy food, and even money. Without those distractions getting in the way, they can now live their dream lives focusing on God and austerity.

You'll never understand it because you cling to ideas that reinforce your worldview rather than actually listening to anyone and learning something new about the world.

Rural people are not sitting around listening to NPR or PBS to begin with, nor are they upset about its intrusion in their lives.

Also, the apocalyptic scene you've laid out about life in the country- not food, no money, no schools- is pure fantasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Evil now lives in the White House and evil doesn’t care one bit about people and even less about poor rural people.

even though I’ll never understand it, we have to be happy for those communities that got exactly what they wanted- to be relieved of the burden of news, healthcare, doctors, disease prevention, jobs, education, healthy food, and even money. Without those distractions getting in the way, they can now live their dream lives focusing on God and austerity.

You'll never understand it because you cling to ideas that reinforce your worldview rather than actually listening to anyone and learning something new about the world.

Rural people are not sitting around listening to NPR or PBS to begin with, nor are they upset about its intrusion in their lives.

Also, the apocalyptic scene you've laid out about life in the country- not food, no money, no schools- is pure fantasy.

Wait and see

I can understand that rural wants to be a cuck for Trump. And he pays them back with NOTHING. And they love it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Evil now lives in the White House and evil doesn’t care one bit about people and even less about poor rural people.

even though I’ll never understand it, we have to be happy for those communities that got exactly what they wanted- to be relieved of the burden of news, healthcare, doctors, disease prevention, jobs, education, healthy food, and even money. Without those distractions getting in the way, they can now live their dream lives focusing on God and austerity.

You'll never understand it because you cling to ideas that reinforce your worldview rather than actually listening to anyone and learning something new about the world.

Rural people are not sitting around listening to NPR or PBS to begin with, nor are they upset about its intrusion in their lives.

Also, the apocalyptic scene you've laid out about life in the country- not food, no money, no schools- is pure fantasy.

Wait and see

I can understand that rural wants to be a cuck for Trump. And he pays them back with NOTHING. And they love it.

Rurals are the original welfare queens

[Anonymous]

This is simple economics. PBS and NPR bring zero value added to its listenership. The only real constituency for these outlets are people directly connected with and benefitting from their continued existence, and members of the white urban Northeast liberal elite. That's a tiny number of people.

Anyone who wants to hear their message can get it online through numerous now available speakers that simply didn't exist 10 15 20 years ago. Besides they just parrot much of the same content as is readily available online from the WaPo, NYTimes, Mother Jones, etc.


Like Colbert, NPR and PBS have outlived their economic liability.

[Anonymous]

This is simple economics. PBS and NPR bring zero value added to its listenership. The only real constituency for these outlets are people directly connected with and benefitting from their continued existence, and members of the white urban Northeast liberal elite. That's a tiny number of people.

Anyone who wants to hear their message can get it online through numerous now available speakers that simply didn't exist 10 15 20 years ago. Besides they just parrot much of the same content as is readily available online from the WaPo, NYTimes, Mother Jones, etc.


Like Colbert, NPR and PBS have outlived their economic utility.

Colbert is free to start a podcast just like Don Lemon, Joe Rogan and many many others. If his audience is willing to pay him he may end up making a lot more money that way. NPR and PBS can be continued by onine entrepreneurs in a similar manner if there is a sufficient market for their services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

NP, no it can’t. PBS stations don’t run advertising and what they air has education value and not commercial value. Many stations can survive via fund raising but in remote areas the money isn’t there.

The CEO of pbs lives in a mansion outside Roundhill.

Long overdue to let them stand on their own

There are a lot of rural communities like rural Kansas where public broadcasting is the only way they have to get local news, weather, high school sports, agricultural updates and so on. Smoky Hills PBS serves 1.2 Kansans over 71 counties. They are going to be gutted, losing half of their budget.

Seems Trump gives even less of a shit about rural "flyover country" than the democrats do.

Well then they should have been more responsible and reported the news such as high school sports and weather and ag reports; and avoided progressive nonsense.

I’m a former NPR listener who was shocked by how biased it had become in recent years. Can you imagine if a public radio had dared report with a conservative lens?

They 100% deserve this.

I love how conservatives are so f-d up, that you think reporting the facts is skewed and biased.

If the truth makes you think it's biased to the left, you really need to get your head out of your RWNJ ass.

Get over your self-righteous virtue signaling. You know that “truth” is not exclusive to progressive propaganda right? WSJ, financial times, the Economist are factual media publications that do a much better job reporting “news” than NPRs so called reporting on progressive and biased human interest stories.

You’re just as brainwashed as the RWNJs that you lambast, just in the other direction. You lost critical thinking ability ; it’s easier to ad hominem attack people with a different position as RWNJ than consider that your team has misstepped. Sad.

Wow. You are out of touch.

We would just LOVE it if MAGAs were actually influenced by WSJ, Financial Times, the Economist and so on, and guess what - we read those too. But unfortunately 99% of what comes from the right wing these days completely ignores WSJ, Economist and so on and in fact the MAGA movement is even calling WSJ "leftist propaganda" these days. Instead, they get their "news" from Newsmax, Gateway Pundit and other trash outlets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

NP, no it can’t. PBS stations don’t run advertising and what they air has education value and not commercial value. Many stations can survive via fund raising but in remote areas the money isn’t there.

The CEO of pbs lives in a mansion outside Roundhill.

Long overdue to let them stand on their own

There are a lot of rural communities like rural Kansas where public broadcasting is the only way they have to get local news, weather, high school sports, agricultural updates and so on. Smoky Hills PBS serves 1.2 Kansans over 71 counties. They are going to be gutted, losing half of their budget.

Seems Trump gives even less of a shit about rural "flyover country" than the democrats do.

Except the inconvenient truth is that all these rural NPR stations are just rebroadcasting programming feeds from NPR production hubs in Boston, DC, LA, Chicago or NYC. There’s almost NO truly “local” news content on these stations each day. They’re just re-broadcasting All Things Considered, Morning Edition, Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me, RadioLab, etc. They might do a few minutes each week of actual, locally created content. Other than that, it’s all NPR syndicated programming.

During the flooding events in Texas in early July, the local NPR station wasn’t even staffed when the flood warnings went out. They made no mention of it all because they were in automated overnight programming.

That’s how NPR is “serving” rural communities. By being a re-broadcast conduit for urban programming from big cities. A total failure of their duty to inform local communities.

Local reporting costs money. This is what happens when you defund everything. You DO know that thousands of calls for help to FEMA went unanswered too, right? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/thousands-of-calls-to-fema-went-unanswered-following-texas-floods-after-contracts-weren-t-renewed/ar-AA1Iugnc

And, it's clear that most of you who carry on and on and on about how horrible NPR is don't actually ever listen to it but are just here to echo propaganda and cynical right wing narratives and rationalizations.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely untrue

We love PBS at our house and we aren’t that much of an outlier.

GOP is too scared to take an actual vote and see how much of America wants to support the CPB.

Just like abortion, it's rule of the minority for them.

[Anonymous]

It's not PBS and NPR that's the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is simple economics. PBS and NPR bring zero value added to its listenership. The only real constituency for these outlets are people directly connected with and benefitting from their continued existence, and members of the white urban Northeast liberal elite. That's a tiny number of people.

Anyone who wants to hear their message can get it online through numerous now available speakers that simply didn't exist 10 15 20 years ago. Besides they just parrot much of the same content as is readily available online from the WaPo, NYTimes, Mother Jones, etc.


Like Colbert, NPR and PBS have outlived their economic liability.

Is everything in your life about economics? Sad.

[Anonymous]

Apparently Prager U is now filling the gap, rife with political and historical propaganda.

“For the White House exhibit, PragerU created AI-generated videos of the Founding Fathers delivering patriotic accounts of the Revolution. In one, an AI-generated John Adams borrows a catchphrase from conservative pundit Ben Shapiro and tells the viewer, “Facts do not care about our feelings.”

AND

“There’s a video with Christopher Columbus, who is talking to some modern-day kids who are saying, basically, “I heard bad things about you.” And he says, “You have to judge me by the standards that were true at the time.”

This is where our tax dollars are going. Not to mention the AI, which will kill the planet faster under this admin.

There’s much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained…

https://apple.news/A92nZlWdBT1CpdL5XVqx08g

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I forbade my children to watch PBS for its pro-LGBTQ stance, such as an episode of Arthur featuring a same-sex wedding.

That is unacceptable and contradicts what I have taught my children from the Bible: LGBTQ = sin; they will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven but will be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Have absolutely nothing to do with such people other than to rebuke and reprove them.

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. (Ephesians 5:11)

I also refused to let them watch Sesame Street because I did not want my children emulating ignorant inner-city degenerate culture.

Do we need to get CPS involved? You sound like one of those people that ends up hurting their kids because they are possessed or something.

Or you are a troll.

As a parent, it is my responsibility to teach my children properly. PBS is unsuitable to be teaching children; therefore, it was expunged from my household.

I have found that people call troll those whose beliefs they disagree with.

Trump is a blessing. It is like he drove up in a huge garbage truck tossing PBS and USAID into the compacter. Next stop: taking it all to the dump where it belongs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

NP, no it can’t. PBS stations don’t run advertising and what they air has education value and not commercial value. Many stations can survive via fund raising but in remote areas the money isn’t there.

The CEO of pbs lives in a mansion outside Roundhill.

Long overdue to let them stand on their own

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it's that good, it can stand on its own, right?

How about Palantir and Tesla stand on their own instead of making record profits off of taxpayer funded, government contracts?