NPR NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO- FUNDING CUTTS!

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by acidrock, May 2, 2004.

  1. acidrock macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    The Evergreen State College
    #1
    NPR may loose funding, there is an email circulating trying to save NPR. Did anyone hear this?

    On NPR's Morning Edition last week, Nina Tottenberg said that if the
    Supreme Court supports Congress, it is in effect the end of the National
    Public Radio (NPR), National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) & the Public
    Broadcasting System (PBS). PBS, NPR and the arts are facing major
    cutbacks in funding. In spite of the efforts of each station to reduce
    spending costs and streamline their services, some government officials
    believe that the funding currently going to these programs is too large
    a portion of funding for something which is seen as not worthwhile.

    The only way that our representatives can be aware of the base of
    support for PBS and funding for these types of programs is by making our
    voices heard.
     
  2. Datazoid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2002
    #2
    Hoax...
     
  3. acidrock thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    The Evergreen State College
    #3
    thanks thought it was but wasn't sure -n
     
  4. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #4
    I rarely listen to NPR. We should not be forced to contribute though. If it produces such great stories it should be commercially viable. I do contribute to our local PBS of my own free will, they have great programs of interest.
     
  5. MacRumorSkeptic macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Location:
    Southern California
    #5
    Too bad its not true. Not that anyone cares these days, but can anyone site for me the constitutional mandate that allows the federal government to fund the arts.
     
  6. MongoTheGeek macrumors 68040

    MongoTheGeek

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    Its not so much where you are as when you are.
    #6
    Let me dig it up...

    Hmm... I couldn't find it. I think its done under the auspices of the #&*#% elastic clause.

    Honestly though I was listening to NPR over the weekend and changed it to mainstream radio because I was tired of all the ads. :(
     
  7. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #7
    Where's the mandate for the Air Force?
     
  8. pinto32 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    PA
    #8
    How could you say that NPR is irrelevant/not have any good shows? Have you never listened to "Fresh Air"??
     
  9. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #9
    It's the internet, so I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. ;)

    None of the previous posters said that NPR is "irrelevant" or that it "[doesn't] have any good shows". Personally, I like several of the shows on public radio, such as "Car Talk", "Wait, wait..." and "Prairie Home Companion". The question was whether it's the government's role to fund the arts (including public television and radio). If my local public radio station were "commercial", if it did rely solely on advertising dollars from sponsors, then I would do my best to let those sponsors know that I appreciated them and that I wanted them to continue to sponsor that station.
     
  10. G4scott macrumors 68020

    G4scott

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #10
    Well, I believe it's mentioned in the preamble...

    And Congress has the power to declare war, and allocate funds for defense, which basically means, if Congress says there should be an air force for national defense, then there will be one.

    The "promote the general welfare" part has to deal with the government's ability and responsible to keep the economy strong.

    Defense is a part of our constitution. NPR is not. There's a big difference between the military that protects us, and public radio...
     
  11. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #11
    Sez who? The general welfare clause is so broad that there is no way to define it. The founding fathers left it that way because they knew that there was no way they could enumerate all the possible aspects of future governments that should be supported by government. The most obvious of these is education. 200 years ago our economy was largely agrarian and beyond basic instruction in the 3 Rs there was little need for widespread publicly funded instruction.

    General welfare could be and has been construed to mean support for education, the arts and a myriad other government funded programs. It's a little late to start crying foul now after a couple hundred years of funding such programs.
     
  12. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #12
    I've never heard of "Wait, wait" but FWIW the other two shows you mention, though they may run on some of the NPR affiliate stations, are not produced by NPR. Also, FWIW, the vast majority of the funding for NPR comes from private sources, not taxes. Joan Kroc left a $100 million endowment to NPR last year, so thankfully, their future is secure.
     
  13. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #13
    NPR is an amazing news outlet. unlike most other outlets, they do in-depth analysis. i can go anywhere for headlines, but there are few choices for in-depth (non-print) coverage.

    regard commercial viability, you've got the horse/cart thing going on. NPR is a not-for-profit designed to be free of pressure from advertisers. this was a conscious decision made to provide a fair analysis.

    and EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW: NPR RECEIVES NO DIRECT FEDERAL FUNDING!!!

    http://www.npr.org/about/privatesupport.html

    disclosure: i've done contract work for NPR and produced a piece for WBEZ, my local NPR affiliate
     
  14. G4scott macrumors 68020

    G4scott

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #14
    I do occasionally enjoy NPR, because some of their programs are funny, or worth listening to. I don't like it as a news source, though. I do like listening to some of the music they play.
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    survey any of the nightly newscasts by CBS, NBC, ABC, or Fox and compare them to the Jim Lehrer News Hour. (have you watched it?) without rendering a judgement on the quality, would you say that News Hour is the most different?

    take any of the network's "in-depth" news magazines. compare their quality (starting w/ choice of story) to Front Line or Bill Moyers' NOW.

    if you get hooked on this stuff, you'll realize
    1) what crap network tv "news" is
    2) how bloody important these publically-funded news outlets are
     
  16. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #16
    My bad (about PHC and Car Talk). Also, FYI, "Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!" is a co-production of NPR and WBEZ (Chicago), according to their home page. It's sort of a quiz show on the week's events, stuff like that. I like it. ;)

    Thanks for the corrections
     
  17. acidrock thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    The Evergreen State College
    #17
    lol it' s "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me"!
    edit: saw the correction by lyle two min ago! ha

    Well surprisingly not a lot of big NPR fans here, what do you think of what just happened with Bob Edwards?
     
  18. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #18
    Air Force grew out of the Army. It used to be called the Army Air Force.

    Art1 Sect 8 Clause 12:
    To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
     
  19. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #19
    "With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." - James Madison, principal author of the US Constitution
     
  20. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #20
    You are missing the point. If NPR, or the various federal boondoggles are appealing to people, then it would find a way to fund itself and make a healthy profit for its investors.
     
  21. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #21
    what happened to Mr Edwards is a symptom of something going wrong w/ NPR, starting at least 5 years ago.

    there is a high-level movement at NPR (resisted by many, if not all, of the correspondents) to make NPR more like the mainstream media. i.e. more headline oriented.

    there's a joke at NPR that they can't compete at that level, so the saying goes, "we run it a day late and call it analysis". the thing is -- it's really good analysis.

    anyway, this movement is driven by the perceived need for a greater listening base. NPR's base is growing older and they want to attract a younger generation. i agree w/ that, but i don't think it should be done at the expense of quality.

    bob edwards doesn't want to leave morning edition, but it wasn't his decision. management decided that, in order to attract younger listeners, they needed a younger (or younger sounding?) person. not only will i miss bob, but i fear the ultimate replacement (the temporary stand-in, renee montaine (sp?), is someone i like) will come part and parcel with an "updated", read as "inferior", news product.

    so while NPR's funding is as secure as it gets, the real destruction of NPR is happening from within.
     
  22. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #22
    no, i think i've got the point exactly

    this profit will come from either advertiser revenue (which i've discussed above) or subscription. and guess what -- NPR is already run on a subscription basis, but there's no profit 'cuz they're a not-for-profit.

    what does that status gain them? first, it's tax-preferable for people and institutions making donations. second, it allows them to get all sorts of things and favors. one example is: NPR has an agreement w/ BMI/ASCAP which allows NPR to use all music royalty-free. this includes music leading in to pieces, underscore, dead roll, in-piece examples, etc.

    any profit a for-profit NPR would make would quickly be sunk into royalties. or they'd have to stop using music, which would, imo, degrade the product.
     
  23. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #23
    Maybe BMI/ASCAP would like to get in on the ground floor of a for-profit NPR. That ought to give them an incentive to continue with allowing the use of music royalty-free, for a piece of the action.
     
  24. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #24
    well, that's one of many benefits of them operating as they do. the structure they have basically works, why make such a radical change? they'd lose most of their correspondents, in my estimation.

    but this isn't even my main point. here it is:

    1. public news is higher-quality (more in-depth and informative) than for-profit news
    2. i maintain that changing PBS/NPR to for-profit will lower the quality
     
  25. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #25
    If they got a "piece of the action," they'd be getting royalties.
     

Share This Page