Dubya’s Final “FU” To The CPB

Eric Boehlert of Media Matters for America tells us a few things in this post; one is that President George W. Milhous Bush just presented, in his last budget, the largest cut ever proposed to public broadcasting (timed, coincidentally, before the presentation of “Bush’s War” on “Frontline” to coincide with today’s fifth anniversary), and Boehlert also tells us that Dubya received a little help in the anti-PBS propaganda department recently from Charles McGrath of the New York Times here (the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is in charge of PBS, by the way).

I thought that Boehlert might have been a little harsh, so I went back and read McGrath’s original Times commentary called “Is PBS Still Necessary.” And after doing so, I still think Boehlert erred slightly, but only because he may have been too kind.

As Boehlert states, McGrath argues that public television may be obsolete (an opinion I contest greatly), though McGrath curiously defends public radio. And in attacking public TV, McGrath argues that cable provides comparable or better programming alternatives.

However, my old standby argument still holds up, and it is that public TV provides better programming for kids, for example, over cable satellite and premium channels by leaps and bounds (something McGrath doesn’t bother to mention). Also in his critique, McGrath laments that public TV has “settled into an all-Jane Austen format” regarding its dramas (and even if that were true, and it isn’t, how exactly is that bad?). McGrath also snidely states that the main character in the “Brit-com” called “Keeping Up Appearances,” Hyacinth (a middle-aged lady who pretends to be more affluent than she is) “is practically a parody of a certain strain in public broadcasting: the one that puts on airs and wants to pretend to singularity.”

And on top of that, we have McGrath’s snarky remark that Jim Lehrer, the host of the “News Hour” formerly with co-host Robert MacNeil, has been with the show “so long that some of his early viewers are now in assisted living” (would that all TV journalists possessed Lehrer’s diligence, talent and integrity), and McGrath calls public TV pledge drives, “the fundraising equivalent of water-boarding” (I don’t like them either to say the least, but I think that comparison is in bad taste).

And contrary to any typically delusional right-wing propaganda, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has been run by various individuals across the ideological spectrum, including Richard Carlson (Tucker’s father) and Sonia Landau under The Sainted Ronnie R, former head of “Women For Reagan-Bush” (noted here). And as noted here (correcting “Falafel Boy” yet again)…

In addition, the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 formally ensures that no one political party dominates. The law requires that "[n]o more than 5 members of the [nine-member] Board appointed by the President may be members of the same political party." The board elects its own chairperson. The law has recently ensured the appointment of Republicans by President Clinton, including (Kenneth) Tomlinson, whom Clinton appointed in 2000; and Katherine Milner Anderson, whom Clinton appointed in 1997. She had previously served as the associate director of the White House's Office of the Cabinet in 1983 and 1984 under Reagan.

I would argue instead that, aside from the almost continual effort to put public TV out of business by the Repugs, the biggest problems faced by PBS are ideological (such as here, where Pittsburgh’s public station was forced to return a $5,000 underwriting donation from Planned Parenthood because the station’s license holder, Duquesne University – a Catholic college – objected), and managerial (here, where the infamous Bill Marrazzo of WHYY in Philadelphia pulls down the highest salary of anyone in public broadcasting – a related post is here).