President Trump Signs Executive Order to Defund NPR and PBS

[wing2000]

For 2025, Congress appropriated $535 million to CPB. That's less than 1/100th of a percent out of the total federal budget. It costs, on average, per American, a little over $1.50 a year. Most of those funds are distributed to some 1,500 local stations nationwide, which produce shows themselves and pay NPR and PBS for the rights to Air National shows.


$1.50 a year....

 

[BCP1928]

For 2025, Congress appropriated $535 million to CPB. That's less than 1/100th of a percent out of the total federal budget. It costs, on average, per American, a little over $1.50 a year. Most of those funds are distributed to some 1,500 local stations nationwide, which produce shows themselves and pay NPR and PBS for the rights to Air National shows.


$1.50 a year....

If the cuts go through maybe it would be a good idea to rescue CPB by making it subscription as well, along with the local broadcasters. Trump can stop funding CPB but he can't legally disband it. Hey, rjs! At $1.50 per year, we'll be glad to pony up your share.

 

[rjs330]

For 2025, Congress appropriated $535 million to CPB. That's less than 1/100th of a percent out of the total federal budget. It costs, on average, per American, a little over $1.50 a year. Most of those funds are distributed to some 1,500 local stations nationwide, which produce shows themselves and pay NPR and PBS for the rights to Air National shows.


$1.50 a year....

535 million thats not necessary.

535 million here, 535 million there eventually adds up to Billions being spent on various unnecessary programs.

I could look at my home budget and say well $20 for Netflix a month isn't bad. But as part of a budget which includes enough non-necessary spending suddenly I can be under water.

So, I don't care what it is per person. Its the total cost that matters and the necessity of it. I bet I could find better, more necessary ways to spend that money.

 

[wing2000]

So, I don't care what it is per person. Its the total cost that matters and the necessity of it. I bet I could find better, more necessary ways to spend that money.

...and I disagree. I think $1.50 investment is a sound investment.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Depends on the state. Often its those with educator experience and educators are typically liberals who have been educated in liberal Universities. Its a cycle. Even in conservative states.

Who appoints the reagents? Does that authority come from the people?

What are they still operating with antennas on their roofs getting just a couple of channels?

There is no cable in the country.

 

[SimplyMe]

You mean promoting and exposing minor children To woke drag queen story time on my tax paying dollars, the very reason why President Trump is moving to defund PBS

View attachment 364903

PBS
Drag Queen Story Hour offers a different kind of page-turner
Jul 2, 2019

Children’s story hours are intended to instill a love of reading in young kids. But one reading program also seeks to spread messages about self-love, acceptance of others and appreciation of diversity: Drag Queen Story Hour, a national organization that runs programs in Washington, D.C.’s Adams Morgan and cities across the country. Julia Griffin reports.

This seems like a weird, even dishonest, claim, since one of these is a children's show and the other is a one-time segment from a news program. It seems about like not letting your children watch your local TV channel when they are showing children's programming because of what they might hear on the news.

 

[rjs330]

Hey, rjs! At $1.50 per year, we'll be glad to pony up your share.

Nice! How much would it cost you to cover rhe other 70 million who don't want to pay for it either?

The military costs us 200 month to keep us safe and secure and helps other nations be safer as well, which the left supports. I guess that's one thing we can agree on.

Or is it? Would it be a bargain at half rhe cost?

 

[rjs330]

I used to live in the country. I had an antenna on my roof that I had to climb up on and fiddle with all the time to get television. It was a pain. I couldn't get cable either.

The we got satellite! Sweet! Eventually cable made it out. Now we have wifi. You can get stuff like that through your phone provider. Lots of options now. Heck you can watch anything on your phone anymore.

But you didn't really answer my question. Cable isn't the only option and I wondered if they only used an antenna and no other options.

 

[BCP1928]

I used to live in the country. I had an antenna on my roof that I had to climb up on and fiddle with all the time to get television. It was a pain. I couldn't get cable either.

The we got satellite! Sweet! Eventually cable made it out. Now we have wifi. You can get stuff like that through your phone provider. Lots of options now. Heck you can watch anything on your phone anymore.

But you didn't really answer my question. Cable isn't the only option and I wondered if they only used an antenna and no other options.

If you're in the country and poor, antenna TV is the only way. I live close to a major city so I can get PBS on antenna or cable.

 

[rjs330]

If you're in the country and poor, antenna TV is the only way. I live close to a major city so I can get PBS on antenna or cable.

PBS doesn't need taxpayer dollars. They can exist without it. Its NOT needed.

If I remember correctly the majority of antenna users live in or near cities.

The VAST majority of people who want to have PBS type programming can get it without PBS. You still have not provided a need for it.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The VAST majority of people who want to have PBS type programming can get it without PBS. You still have not provided a need for it.

I'd like to address this claim. Once upon a time, cable TV claimed it would provide alternatives to the kind of programing PBS provided in primetime. Science and Nature. Cultural shows. Historical documentaries, etc. So what is the status of those channels:

Bravo: (Movies and culture) The occasional movie and lots and lots of "reality shows". Some originals, some reruns of network or their own. (Their "flagship" show is the "Real Housewives of somewhere" franchise.

Discovery: (Science, nature, and learning) Cheap "reality" shows.

Smithsonian: Low budget series of "documentaries"on themes ("Mighty Planes/Trains/Cruise Ships"), Air Disasters

A&E (named for "Arts & Entertainment): Whatever resemblance it had to "arts" name was gone by the mid 90s when it was the "L&O" channel.

History: While it still did a lot historical content it became known as the "Hitler Channel" for endless WW2 documentaries plus ancient aliens. Hitler has apparently been defeated (or the WW2 watchers have all died off) replaced by paranormal content.

Science: probably fallen less than some of the others. Some of the content seems a bit sensationalist. I don't know the quality. (Several years ago I was eating in the bar area of a local restaurant and they had a big TV that sometimes showed sports, but that night they had it on the Science channel and I knew about half of the people in that particular doco.)

"Nat Geo": a cross between today's Discovery ad Smithsonian channels.

Another feature of PBS has been to show British programming. So, what about BBC America? The next 48 hours alternate between a "Bones" marathon and a "Law&Order" marathon. Most of the programming is American TV and movies these days.

The commercial channels that at least tried to focus on parts of the PBS portfolio have all failed to continue to due so, some have failed completely. (Discovery, History, Bravo, Smithsonian, I'm looking at you.) The notion that they are a good substitute for PBS might have been plausible 25-30 years ago, but not for some time.

I don't watch a lot of PBS these days (a few hours a month), but it is more than the rest of those cable channels combined (unless I spot a good movie on BBCA).

 

[Truth7t7]

For 2025, Congress appropriated $535 million to CPB. That's less than 1/100th of a percent out of the total federal budget. It costs, on average, per American, a little over $1.50 a year. Most of those funds are distributed to some 1,500 local stations nationwide, which produce shows themselves and pay NPR and PBS for the rights to Air National shows.


$1.50 a year....

Stop liberal PBS/NPR, remove taxpayer funding

 

[Truth7t7]

This seems like a weird, even dishonest, claim, since one of these is a children's show and the other is a one-time segment from a news program. It seems about like not letting your children watch your local TV channel when they are showing children's programming because of what they might hear on the news.

Stop taxpayer funding to liberal PBS/NPR

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

I wasnt aware that we had any control over the leaders in NPR and PBS.

Ok, may be what I have suggested is not possible. We need to find common ground and make concessions, rather than swinging from one extreme to another every 4 years.

 

[BCP1928]

I wasnt aware that we had any control over the leaders in NPR and PBS.

Congress granted CPB's corporate charter and presumably can withdraw or modify it whenever they want. But the President has no authority over it because it is not part of the Executive Branch.

 

[Laodicean60]

Ok, may be what I have suggested is not possible. We need to find common ground and make concessions, rather than swinging from one extreme to another every 4 years.

These are the times we live in that'll lead to our destruction.

 

[mark46]

My advice to the Democrats is to continue moving to the left - it will ensure many more years of Conservative leadership.

.

Surely, you don't think that Trump is a conservative.

 

[mark46]

The big "if"

Trump will tell everyone that they are paying less for groceries, rent, insurance and their purchases at Walmart. He will tell them that Social Security, Medicaid and other social services are better.

People will either believe him or not.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Surely, you don't think that Trump is a conservative.

Surely you don't think the Democratic Party is Centrist.

 

[mark46]

Communist China and those exploiting their slave labor work force for personal gain

I expect that you are now anti-Trump since he has reduced tariffs on China to the 20% "fentanyl" tariff and the 10% that is on every country. There is no action on all the rest of China's many abuses.