Should the federal government cut funding for PBS?

  • PBS is a waste of 500 million dollars.

    PBS was originally founded to produce programming that could not be found on other channels . That is no longer the case . Every night all night its the same drama after drama . NOVA is now a joke were lucky if we get 12 new episodes a year. Its time to reign them in . The government doesn't need to spend 500 million a year to fund yet another worthless drama, thats what abc nbc cbs a+e...... .

  • It is Time for Sesame Street to Retire

    The show Sesame Street and others need to retire or be moved to other networks. I am sure that their are plenty of networks that would pick up such programs. Sesame Street is so well known it would have no trouble at all being switched over. Other programs could be played on the History Channel, Cooking Channel or whatever is suitable.

  • PSB's are IMPERATIVE to a successful democracy

    You fundamentally do not understand the role public broadcasting plays in a democracy. With only 6 companies oligopolizing the media market, owning 90% of it, funding for public service broadcasting (PSB) is more important than ever. Unlike the BBC in Europe, which receives tax payer money every year, PBS doesn't, and a tax wouldn't fly in the U.S. That is why it is essential that the federal government not defund the one service that provides educational content in the country. PSB's are imperative to a democracy and an informed public.

    It is very difficult to find funding or donations for a service provider that is not then obligated to show content that the donors prefer. If you can find a means of funding PBS, where their content isn't determined by the donors, then funding from the government is surely needed.

  • NO, Not at all.

    The federal government should NOT cut PBS, everyone has the right to watch high quality entertainment. If they cut PBS funding, it wouldn't be public television anymore and that's how PBS is special, because, it's public television which has the highest quality programming without commercials/advertising. No, they shouldn't cut PBS funding. The federal government can afford PBS funding.

  • PBS needs to stay

    PBS doesn't even get very much money from the federal government we need to keep the high quality programming that they provide on the air.

    PBS helps many young minds learn and grow for many parents not able to teach their kids PBS has lots of great shows that without pushing an agenda help children learn reading, spelling and math skills.

    It's a great help to many and not at a high cost to tax payers.

  • PBS doesn't cost that much.

    Compared to the benefit that it provides-- cultural and educational programming for millions of people-- PBS is quite cheap. Most successful PBS stations raise the majority of their operation budget through donations, anyway. The amount of money that would actually be saved by cutting PBS would be miniscule, and the cultural impact would be far worse.

  • PBS funding should NOT be cut off

    These types of shows which are government funded are the best chance in which children that live in poverty can get a decent education that atleast puts them at an average level for a kindergartner to be at. Without shows like Sesame Street, the children whose parents are too busy doing drugs or drinking to afford cable or interact with their children expect those children to sit in front of the tv watching free programs that they will hopefully learn from and further their education once in school so to not become some hoodlum and commit crime. Education is correlated with wealth. Who cares if we have to maybe borrow from another county to provide this program? It provides the youth of our country who were born with less opportunity than others a fighting chance at getting out of the same hamster wheel they've been in.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.