A Day of Debate Over NPR Funding

The House voted 228-192 to defund NPR this afternoon. A few Republicans sided with the Democrats, but they weren’t enough to topple the GOP in the final tally. The Republican triumph is symbolic, given that the Democrat-controlled Senate is highly unlikely to follow suit. But the issue seemed anything but an empty gesture as members debated the measure leading up to the vote.

The Republican argument essentially boiled down to this: NPR funding is an example of unnecessary federal spending, and the organization should stand on its own. The Democratic argument was that it’s not really about money, that the GOP is really just exploiting NPR’s unflattering headlines to attack an organization against which it has an ancient grudge. If there were a playbill, the caricatures, as describe by the opposing party, would read thus:

Democrats: financial nincompoops bent on forcing Americans to consume liberal news and pay tax dollars for the privilege, whether they like it or not

Republicans: culture-hating sneaksters trying to gut NPR with whatever means possible, unable to see what they’re destroying through ideological blinders

Needless to say, these lines of argument — taken up in a much more tempered manner by some — didn’t bring out the best in everyone. Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner gave his two cents in the form of a childish (if entertaining), satirical thank you to the Republican party for fast-tracking this bill to get to the country’s greatest threat, international or domestic: Click and Clack. Rep. Marsha Blackburn, who was leading the GOP side of the debate, meanwhile demonized NPR listeners for being educated and wealthy, saying people like that could fund their radio for themselves.

Presentation aside, the money justification has some weak points. The amount of funding NPR gets is a tiny fraction of a percent of the federal budget — and Democratic members repeatedly referred to the CBO determining that the bill, H.R. 1076, would have zero impact on the deficit. (No publication has been made public by the CBO, but they’ll sometimes communicate figures directly to the budget committee, which is then responsible for making sure members aren’t espousing nonsense on the floor.) But the Republicans treated it as a meaningful, if only representative, bit of belt-tightening all the same.

In terms of direct funding to NPR, the bill doesn’t mean much. NPR only gets about 2% of its revenue from the federal government. But there is another provision in the bill that prevents the hundreds of public stations that purchase NPR programming from doing so with federal dollars. Those member-station fees account for about 40% of NPR’s revenue, and a larger percentage of their funding comes through government channels, like the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (You can see a full breakdown of their finances here.)

Beyond the figures, the real driving forces behind the vote seemed to be the public relations-mishaps NPR has endured in recent months — the firings, the mispeakings and the O’Keefe-ing — that have all made the entity look at worst ungrateful and biased, at best haphazard. The vote, if it comes to mean nothing else, will be proof of how quickly bad publicity can manifest into legislation.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of  a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty number two), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay marriage advocates—as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • artraveler

    Hey, Orange Man, where are those damn job bills you promised as your first priority. You are going on vacation (AGAIN!!!!!) and you still haven’t shown any compasion for the out-of-work American people but the fact that your are a semi-Tea Party camp follower.

    And now, with almost no news on most radio stations country-wide because they have all been bought by large chains, it is your plan to shutter the few local stations around the country that still provide local news. I guess, when you are so intent on destroying the American economy as you have shown, you probably wouldn’t want anyone to know.

  • http://tisias.wordpress.com tisias

    to finish off with your last statement-
    .
    or political revenge

  • gysgt213

    “The vote, if it comes to mean nothing else, will be proof of how quickly bad publicity can manifest into legislation.”
    .
    I think it proves if you don’t fight back and stand up for yourself you will lose everytime.

  • charlieromeobravo

    “Rep. Marsha Blackburn meanwhile demonized NPR listeners for being educated and wealthy, saying people like that could fund their radio for themselves.”
    .
    Sure, they could use that money they got in that unfunded GOP tax cut.
    .
    /me rolls eyes

  • nflfoghorn

    Nasty people like Keefe (given today’s date I won’t give him the pleasure to have the O’) and Breitboy baited NPR officials thru false pretenses. House Republicans, who’ve always hated NPR, see the opening and, although they know it won’t go anywhere, claim Phyrric victory.
    .
    And this is news how, exactly?

  • nflfoghorn

    Rich???
    [Me laughs awkwardly]

  • gysgt213

    Mean while:
    .
    The House has overwhelmingly rejected a resolution calling for President Barack Obama to withdraw American forces from Afghanistan by year’s end.
    .
    The vote was 321-93 with one member voting present on Thursday.
    .
    In a show of bipartisanship on national security, Republicans and Democrats had warned that passage of the measure would have dire consequences in the fight against terrorism and put the U.S. at risk of another 9/11 strike.
    .
    “Withdrawing before completing our mission would reinforce extremist propaganda that Americans are weak and unreliable allies and facilitate extremist recruiting and future attacks,” said Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., the chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
    .
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42127319/ns/politics-more_politics/

  • nflfoghorn

    I’d be the first one to let NPR & PBS run ads, but then what would happen? We’d get versions of TLC and Clear Channel stations.
    “The Real Housewives of NOVA.” “Masterpiece Cake Boss, Plus 8.” “Wait, Wait, Don’t TMZ!”
    Ugh.

  • rdw56

    It’s perfect timing. We have deficits as far as the eye can see and all of these highbrow liberals arguing for corporate welfare to go to NPR.

    This is win/win for conservatives. I almost want them to lose the vein is so rich as a example of liberals pissing away public cash.

  • rdw56

    Right, so we should pay them hundreds of millions to spare your sensitivities.

  • shepherdwong

    Beyond the figures, the real driving forces behind the vote seemed to be the public relations-mishaps NPR has endured in recent months –
    .
    Really? I thought that the Democrats explained it pretty well:

    …the GOP is really just exploiting NPR’s unflattering headlines to attack an organization against which it has an ancient grudge.

    But hey, it was terrific he-said-she-said “reporting”. Who gives a sh!t about the truth of it?

  • jsfox

    rdw56

    And yet will the Republican defund billions in corporate welfare to the oil companies who certainly don’t need it? Nope

    Will they defund billions in corporate welfare to agribusiness who certainly don’t need it? Nope

    You want to talk deficits do try and get serious. And getting serious means not only cutting off corporate welfare but tax increases. You can balance the budget without them. It is impossible.

  • filmnoia

    “childish (if entertaining), satirical thank you…”

    Hardly “childish”. I watched Weiner. Instead of “childish” how about “withering comtempt and sarcasm.”

    Just another GOP exercise in self gratification. These clowns are being laughed at by anyone who has half a brain.

  • fhmadvocat

    Of course, the Republicans have not really thought about what it means to defund NPR. Us “rich” snobs will stil continue to get our fill of “liberal” biased news. However, it is rural stations which will not have any local radio news programing.

    Well, it is not like the Democrats in the Senate are going to defund NPR, so the whole exercise was a complete waste of time and a waste of taxpayers money.

  • shepherdwong

    These clowns are being laughed at by anyone who has half a brain.
    .
    Not our hosts or pretty much anyone else in the legacy media. At least not publicly. Brain dead or just patently dishonest, you be the judge.

  • freeinpa

    IN the end what it shows that Democrats give nothing but lip service to cutting defects. The argument shifts from no local news in rural areas (the 1960s argument) to pushing Big Bird out into the cold, both ridiculous arguments.
    .
    “unfunded GOP tax cut.”
    This goes a long way to explaining that the left does not have any clue about the budget. You see taxes fund spending – spending does not fund tax cuts. And BTW it was extended by a Dumo House, Senate and President.

    Spend On!

  • logicloop

    According to this NPR revenue was 164 million last year, of which 2% was funded indirectly through grants from federal institutions. Your shouting about hundreds of millions of dollars that wont be saved because they dont exist. Its not hard to do the math and realize that this reaks of a political grandstand because it plays well to Freep and others.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR#Grants

    Also ill take a small amount of money to help put Big Bird on as many stations and televisions as possible over the drivel that Fox shows. I grew up watching Mr. Rodgers, Reading Rainbow, and Big Bird, and im a better person for it. I also gre up listening to “All things considered” “Morning Edition” and “Car talk”. All of which helped me be better informed, and smarter in school. Sometimes these “librual” programs have a good purpose of promoting a better prepared, more informed and kinder people.

    But what i say doesnt help as much as what this man said when he had to defend why these things should exist.

  • troubador222

    $1.35 per tax payer per year is the cost broken down.

  • troubador222

    Thats not just NPR but all of Public Broadcasting.

  • Ivy_B

    As fhmadvocat said above, if the defunding goes through it will be the smaller and rural stations that will be hurt. This is part of a comment from someone at a central PA station describing their audience and the problems they will have with funding gone. The comment was made on Jay Rosen’s blog in a post he wrote titled The Brought a Tote Bag to a Knife Fight. It is worth reading the whole comment and scrolling up to read his post.

    WITF, a joint (TV and radio) public licensee serving the capital region of Pennsylvania, recently conducted a regional survey (4% plus or minus accuracy) which yielded this important data point: 56% of WITF users are self-described Republicans; 30% are self-described Democrats; 13% are Independents and 1% “don’t know.” This mirrors the region’s political makeup and demonstrates to me that public TV and radio as consumed in central PA isn’t perceived as biased because persons of all political views consume it regularly.

    As Prof. Rosen points out, public media’s opponents are primarily DC-based politicians and those in the political chattering classes online and on-air—not local officials or citizens who depend on the programs and aren’t swayed by the constant haranguing of “liberal”, “liberal.”

    But here’s the reality: public television and radio were designed based on a social and financial compact with states and the federal government. Public stations would provide commercial-free, high quality programs that respect the intelligence of adults and nurture the curiosity of children, and in return, the federal government would provide a modest level of support (about $1.35 per citizen) to make up for the commercial revenue that stations forgo. That compact appears to be breaking down, without adequate warning or business model alternatives.

    http://pressthink.org/2011/03/they-brought-a-tote-bag-to-a-knife-fight-the-resignation-of-nprs-ceo-vivian-schiller/#comment-4586

    It has irritated me no end that NPR didn’t defend itself at all. After the other experiences, they should have known that the tape was heavily edited. Even the whole two hour version that Breitbart posted has missing frames. They played the development guy making a bad comment about Republicans. They cut out the part when he said good things about Republicans and that his family were Republican. (Gee wonder why that was cut?)

    As Peter Sagal said on Wait, Wait – they are acting as though they are an island tribe believing if they just throw another virgin into the volcano, everything will be all right.

  • troubador222

    Broken down more, its .0004 cents a day per taxpayer. Yeah cutting this will create jobs. (Insert eyeroll emoticon here)

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Not for nothing, but Mr. Rogers traumatized me as a child. I’m sorry, but he really was a bit creepy. With that said, I’m all for federal and state funding of NPR and PBS and the likes. Not only are they both committed to quality of content and education over ratings, but they have also been responsible for some of the 20th century’s most honest and intellectual journalism. Frontline anyone?

  • freeinpa

    Funding was set up on conditions that no longer exist- Period Their is nothing as permanent as a temporary spending program form out government.
    .

    If public radio and TV are as good and well-watched as everyone claims it is, there will be no problem finding that tiny amount of funding.

  • freeinpa

    I am sure the left which still can’t seem to find any program to cut other than defense and cuts to NPR would be draconian. Maybe the next time terrorist try to bomb the US the Left can call up Big Bird and Oscar to defend them.

  • diecash1

    that tiny amount of funding

    Why don’t you try being honest for once? Cutting this “tiny amount of funding” isn’t about deficit reduction at all. It’s simply an exercise in ideology, nothing more.

  • freeinpa

    “You want to talk deficits do try and get serious.”
    .
    What a specious argument that is typical of the phony left. You can’t cut small thing as small and truly inconsequential to the needs of this country as NPR and then you expect the right to think you have any principle or backbone to tackle the changes and cuts to entitlements.
    .
    You are either completely full of crap or just an out and ouit liar!

  • freeinpa

    Why doesn’t the left admit they just want to spend spend spend. Deficit reduction is a punch line like patriotism, freedoms and law and order. They talk a lot about them while they trash them

  • rdw56

    Actually they just might because funding NPR / PBS in an age of unlimited stations and programming is unnecessary and unwarranted. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and a handful of others can’t afford to alienate voters for supporting waste.

  • rdw56

    Your shouting about hundreds of millions of dollars that wont be saved because they dont exist.

    *************************************************

    Then the few dollars the taxpayer provides should be easily replaced by fans like you.

  • rdw56

    I won’t create jobs just save taxpayers money. It’s also a lesson to publicly funded institutions that if you pick sides there might be a price.

  • diecash1

    That’s what I thought. More dishonesty and bile with every breath. At least you’re a consistent hater.

  • deconstructiva

    Agreed. Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs? Figures the R’s would waste time on this instead of creating programs to actually create jobs. This “bill” sure as hell ain’t to create new jobs in the media biz.
    .
    Katy, thanks for the NPR update, however depressing that topic is. Well, if Congress won’t do a damn thing to discuss job creation, maybe you and swamp colleagues can ponder ideas / interview real experts here instead (NOT tax-cut-driven R’s reading off talking point memos). If your bosses need prodding, have ‘em read our whiny comments. But creating jobs should be job #1 for Congress, not defunding programs like this.

  • sacredh

    “Not for nothing, but Mr. Rogers traumatized me as a child”
    .
    The bastard touched me.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Rich?? Rich!!! Blackburn’s statement means nothing except that she is a snob.

  • johnobx

    What foolishness. The Republicans aren’t the only party that has introduced go-nowhere legislation, but to do so so close on the heels of promising to change the way business is conducted in Washington…tsk tsk. I can hardly believe it.

    Now let me go cash this check I just got in the mail from some Nigerian prince I seem to be related to.

  • freeinpa

    “, where are the jobs? Figures the R’s would waste time on this instead of creating programs to actually create jobs.”
    .
    First you need to be relieved of that delusional mind set that the government can create programs to create jobs. They can’t other than government jobs which creates nothing. Secondly, check out he unemployment rate since December. It has gone down. Not quite to the 8% level the Dems told us we would never see by “creating programs” which is French for stimulus spending bu ton its way back down to it.

  • freeinpa

    “More dishonesty”
    .
    Please cry me a river. Every time there is a suggestion to cut one of these programs that government has np place being involved its “your a hater” GROW UP
    .
    And please tell me where the dishonesty is? Besides the continuing lies for the left that they give 2 hoots about the deficit. It’s spend spend spend and any cut is draconian and will starve children and throw grandma into the street. That’s the lie and dishonesty.

  • sacredh

    “Now let me go cash this check I just got in the mail from some Nigerian prince I seem to be related to.”
    .
    What a relief! I thought I was the only one he was related to. I had my doubts at first because if I got any whiter, I’d be a snowflake.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Sacred, he told me I was unique and he liked me just the way I am, right before he proceeded to ‘erect’ a change in my stature. I guess that ‘you’re perfect just the way you are’ only goes so far. D*mn you, Mr. Rogers!

  • theotherjimmyolson

    I’m rich. Whocoodanode. I’ll have to inform my wife.

  • Matt

    Here we are, supposedly in the worst fiscal crisis in our history — as the Tea Party screams at us daily — and the wonderful leadership of the Republicans in Congress is giving us utterly worthless legislation to cut meaningless amounts of money from the budget for public radio that tens of millions of Americans use and appreciate every day. Well done, GOP!
    http://www.sunstateactivist.org

  • sacredh

    Mr. Rogers was a little after my time but we liked to catch a buzz and watch his show. We only got a few channels and he was the best we could do. The pre-vcr world was a cruel one.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Seriously, in me he instilled a deep-seeded mistrust of nice people.

  • theotherjimmyolson

    !70,000,000 Americans tune into public broadcasting each month. Sounds like a lot.

  • theotherjimmyolson

    The real difficulty for conservatives is that the truth has a liberal bias, and conservative don’t like it. It has nothing to do with bias on public broadcasting. Conservatives would rather listen to Reagan tell them it’s morning in America, than hear the truth and act on it. To difficult doncha know.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Because apparently my postal carrier is a figment of my imagination……..

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Actually they just might because funding NPR / PBS in an age of unlimited stations and programming is unnecessary and unwarranted

    Yes, here in the Virgin islands, the possibilties in radio programm are just endless

  • hippooath

    “What a specious argument that is typical of the phony left. You can’t cut small thing as small and truly inconsequential to the needs of this country as NPR and then you expect the right to think you have any principle or backbone to tackle the changes and cuts to entitlements.
    .
    You are either completely full of crap or just an out and ouit liar!”
    .
    We’re liars but you and your fellow ideologues cant find a real cut, nor increase revenue with taxes. NPR or cutting WIC won’t put a dent at anything, but we’re liars for pointing out the obvious.
    .
    It must be nice to go through life as either clueless and ignorant or a complete tool.

  • paulejb

    jimmyolsen@18,
    .
    Fine! So let them kick in a couple of bucks apieceand leave the rest of us alone.

  • hippooath

    “will starve children”
    .
    Interesting sentiment – from someone who support cutting WIC. Just be honest; NPR won’t really put a single dent in the deficit and you’re not interested in cutting stuff that does. Nor do you want to balance with increased taxes.
    .
    You regurgitate the same tired phrases…we just want to tax you to death. Poor you, wouldn’t want to chisel your marble.

  • shepherdwong

    Yep. In my rural home right here in the contiguous 48, I have exactly one choice in radio: AM talk; Limbaugh, Hannity and a whole string of right-wing liars, lunatics and traitors, all day and night. That’s what this is all about, what it’s always about: taking away choices until we’re left with exactly what the oligarchs choose for us.

  • newfreedomblog

    That is still $1.25 too much

  • newfreedomblog

    Any links for that claim?

  • liberalmeltdown

    Goodbye to the State media.

  • diecash1
  • diecash1

    Going somewhere meltdown? NPR isn’t going anywhere so you must be leaving that “liberal paradise” of CA for foreign climes, yes?

  • freeinpa

    “NPR won’t really put a single dent in the deficit”
    .
    Speaking of tired phrases. With the left it usually won’t cut the deficit or it is draconian. If we can only find the “goldilocks liberal.
    .
    But let’s leave aside your math ignorance ( a million here and a million there soon its real money), tell me how we solve the deficit and to avoid the so-called tired phrases you claim I use besides gutting defense and raising taxes, please impart your brilliance

  • freeinpa

    “the Republicans in Congress is giving us utterly worthless legislation to cut meaningless amounts of money from the budget for public radio that tens of millions of Americans use and appreciate every day. Well done, GOP!”
    .
    The left here keeps alternating between not meaningful cuts to draconian cuts — for the same amount of money. So which is it? My guess its neither since the left has no intention of cutting any spending unless its to gut defense and then raise taxes. You can tax 100% of the so-called wealthy’s income and you still will not zero out the deficit and reduce the debt.
    .
    ANd why exactly are the Republicans now stuck trying to do this? Because the Democrats who controlled both Houses of Congress and the White House, for the first time in memory could not pass a budget. They should all be fired for malpractice and sued to reclaim any money paid to them.

  • http://chesneysbakery.wordpress.com sergeant2

    The writer of this article (Katy Steinmetz) seemed to go out of her way to try and paint the Republicans in the best light possible despite the fact they had no legitimate reason for wanting to De-fund NPR besides the fact they just don’t like it. IMHO

  • hankvreeland

    Since they only get 2% federal funding what is the big deal in cutting them off?

  • Art Pepper

    So that really created a lot of jobs, I’m sure.

  • hippooath

    “But let’s leave aside your math ignorance ( a million here and a million there soon its real money), tell me how we solve the deficit and to avoid the so-called tired phrases you claim I use besides gutting defense and raising taxes, please impart your brilliance”
    .
    How do you balance the budget if you don’t want to balance it? You can’t lower the deficite if you suggest 10 dollars in spending cuts but you spend 100 dollars. That just means that you’re 90 bucks in the hole next year with another 100 bucks about to be spent.
    .
    It’s ignorant to claim that you’re saving anything by cutting a tiny amount if it’s overshadowed by the larger problem.
    .
    This is not about lowering spending; it’s about cutting programs that GOP think are liberal.
    .
    They’re not touching Medicare because the old people – the tea party – will go bonkers. They’re not cutting defense because they have defense contractors in their back yards and it’s a very powerful lobby. They’re not cutting tax breaks for oil companies because it’s a major contributor to their campaigns and they’re not touching agro for the same reason.
    ,
    In other words – anything that contribute to their bottom line or can hurt the voters are off the table.
    .
    Symbolic spending cuts are meaningless unless they actually fix the problem. Put like this – you can cut tiny little things in real money for 10 years – but if they only amount to a shadow of the overall burn rate you’ll still dig yourself deeper into the hole. That’s like BASIC math. Now explain how that’s wrong.

  • http://tghimmelreich.wordpress.com tertius g. himmelreich

    as I see it, it’s still a market that the Government has not reason to be involved in monetarily. They’d be fine, if not better off, without government funding any way. Would the funding put a dent in our debt? No. But does the government need reach in to that market in the day of information? I don’t think so.
    |
    http://tghimmelreich.wordpress.com/

  • ricardo4max

    You knuckle draggers are pathetic. what is this…. March? Who still controls 2/3 of the federal govt? Who created the housing bubble and burst by bullying lenders into making bad loans to the Democrat voter base, those that could not and would not repay them? Who controlled Congress for the last 4 years and made a bad situation far far worse? And what President’s regime has been attacking capitalism and free enterprise viciously for the last 2 plus years? The Marxist Black liberation theologist and friend of far left radicals has systematically lied and destroyed this country and is STILL doing it today. How can you all support this unless you are hard core commies and just plain stupid?

  • ricardo4max

    Kudos to Mr. O’Keefe! Keep up the good work. We got ‘em on the run.

  • ricardo4max

    time to get the govt out of the entertainment and propaganda business! I guess this means defunding ABC NBC CBS CNN MSNBC etc…

  • newfreedomblog

    OMG, I didn’t realize Click and Clack where part of NPR.
    .
    Oh this is sad and dire news. What are these Republicans thinking these days?
    .
    (Now THAT is satire).

  • http://tisias.wordpress.com tisias

    so what? My dad despises Obama and has voted Republican for God knows how many years straight. I’ve never found NPR to have an overt liberal bias compared to places like MSNBC.

  • freeinpa

    “In other words – anything that contribute to their bottom line or can hurt the voters are off the table”
    .
    Once again you speak with ignorant knowledge. But then you have to bash Republicans because gutting defense and raising taxes won’t get anywhere since Obama keeps committing more dollars to defense (he is in over his head) and the bill to extend the Bush tax rates and reduce the payroll taxes was passed by a Democratic Congress, House and President. So the only principle left (chuckle chuckle) is spend full speed ahead!

  • libssd

    The comments on this story are predictably swampish, with few surprises.
    .
    Public broadcasting (NPR and PBS) are the crown jewels of broadcast journalism in this country, truly fair and balanced, and devoid of the flashy graphics, over-amplified sound effects, and screaming heads that pass for news on commercial broadcast and cable news stations. When I listen to Morning Edition or All Things Considered, I get several hours of thought-provoking news and analysis, as opposed to about 15 minutes of headlines and screaming heads in a typical 30-minute commercial network broadcast, or the same drivel broadcast over and over and over again 24×7 on cable news.
    .
    There are times when I feel it’s just not worth the hassle to put up with the crap from the wingnuts about NPR, and that the whole enterprise would be better off as an organization independent of government funding — which it mostly is already.

    I hate pledge drives, but I look forwarding to putting my money where my mouth is when the spring NPR pledge drive begins next week. Newton Minnow had it right in 1961, when he referred to television as a “vast wasteland,” and in the intervening 50 years, it’s become an even vaster wasteland. So let’s go ahead and de-fund the one decent source of serious content that is available in this country, and continue on our merry way to idiocracy.

blog comments powered by Disqus