Annenberg Classroom - Speak Outs - Defunding Public Media: Should taxpayer money support PBS?

Home • Speak Outs • Defunding Public Media: Should taxpayer money support PBS?

Speak Outs

Speak Out

Defunding Public Media: Should taxpayer money support PBS?

Maybe you grew up watching Elmo on Sesame Street or Arthur the Aardvark. Maybe you caught science programs like NOVA in middle school. You might recall hearing that those shows “were brought to you by a grant from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and viewers like you.”

Did you ever wonder what that means?

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting was created by Congress in 1967 to distribute funding to public media outlets and groups that create programs for them. CPB receives most of its funding from Congress but is not a government agency. Public stations on radio and television do not rely on commercial advertising, which allows them to present a broader range of offerings than major networks. They usually gravitate toward educational, cultural and locally focused programs.

Public television stations that produce and present shows like Sesame Street are funded through a few different means – individual memberships (remember waiting out those insufferably long pledge drives as a kid?), business sponsorship and government funding. The latter is where the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) comes in, but its role may be dwindling.

Members of Congress want to end federal funding for public media as a means to reduce the deficit. In times when the nation is strapped for cash, they feel supporting broadcasters is not a high priority.

“We’ve got to figure out how to do more with less,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said in a Boston Globe interview. “It’s unsustainable.”

The House of Representatives voted to defund the CPB in a 235-189 vote on Feb. 19. However, the issue may face a tougher battle in the Senate, as well as with President Obama – an outspoken supporter of public media.

But if the bill does go through, different stations would be affected at different levels.

WGBH TV in Boston is a heavy hitter in the public media world. One of the oldest stations, it produces a number of nationally syndicated programs – like Frontline, Antiques RoadshowCurious George. Of its $156 million budget , about 8 percent comes from the CPB, the rest from its strong base of membership and business support. Without that money, not as many new programs would be produced – but the station would survive.

This is not the case at WFWA, a PBS station in Fort Wayne, Ind.

“That federal funding is one-third of our budget,” General Manager Bruce Haines told the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette. “So, you can take it from there. It would be devastating. I don’t want to go total doomsday here, but passing this bill, unfortunately, makes losing Sesame Street a possibility.”

Even smaller stations than WFWA, particularly in rural states, might “go dark,” Haines said.

Supporters of defunding think this is not likely. Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona thinks the importance of CPB money is overstated.

“I listen to a lot of NPR; I’m a closet NPR listener,’’ Flake told the Globe. “I think a lot of these programs could survive the market test and do fine on their own. I’ve long felt that we could cut funding and be fine.’

Others feel that priorities need to be made before spending government money – and media are not one of them. In a blog post, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina said, “It’s time to draw a clear distinction between the government and entertainment.”

What do you think?

Should taxpayer money support the Corporation for Public Broadcasting? Is public media a priority for the government? Or should it be defunded to help close the deficit? What are the public television and radio stations in your area like? Join the discussion!

Join the Discussion

Your First Name:
Your Teacher/School:
Your City/State:
Your Comment: limited to 2000 characters including spaces

Thank you for commenting.
Your comment is awaiting approval.
Click here to view all Speak Outs

Comments

4/18/2011
Irving/ Texas

Kenneth
Helen Bradley
I think taxpayer money should go to the Cooperation of Public Broadcasting. It may not be a necessity that these programs are on air; but from personal experience they helped me when I was younger and I would not want younger generations to miss out on those little things those shows provide like math help, life lessons, and just clean cartoons that our parents did not have to worry about us picking up any bad lessons from. Public Media is a priority in today's government. It is the way the word gets out to the people.

3/31/2011
Irving/TX

Hector
Bradley/Nimitz
At a time like this, where every cent seems to matter in our econoy public television shows should not recieve as much funding. Our taxpayer money should have more important things they could be funding instead of public television. These CPB programs should take a not from other television channels and make funds by other means than that of government based sponsorships and funds. Public media isn't a priority, and definetly shouldn't be aq priority in government spending, any margin that can be cut to lower the deficit would be a victory to the economy and cutting programs like sesame street seems like a small sacrifice to make to help repair this economic downturn.

3/31/2011
Irving, Tx

Katy P.
Bradley/ Nimitz High School
I believe that cutting government spending on public broadcasting would be a tricky task. Although we do need to spend money on higher priorities, I also believe that for our youth, we should continue to fund public broadcasting. I do not think it would hurt the government to spend a little bit of it's money to support stations that provide educational shows. If children do not have option to turn on the television and watch Sesame Street, what channel will they turn it to? With all of the channels we are able to access today, children might be learning stuff they do not need to know! I'm not saying they should continue to fully support the station, but still providing some money would help. I do believe that some stations could survive on their own from their businesses, and public support. So are we willing to take the chance that our children will be watching something we forgot to put a parental lock on?

3/25/2011
Indianapolis,IN

Nicole
Singleton?Ben Davis
I dont think it should be the government's priority, because then they will have the right to censor things that they think is innapropriate and on the radio stations in my area, the more urban stations talk about the government all the time and ask for other people's opinions. If the government doesnt like whats being said, they can shut the radio station down.

3/25/2011
Indianapolis, Indiana

Akaash A
Mrs. SIngelton, Ben Davis High School
Yes, And yes it should be a priority. T.V. ownership is already limited as it is lets not make it even worse.

3/25/2011
Indianapolis/IN

James
Singleton/Ben Davis HS
The federal funding for the CPB should remain in place. Regardless of how you feel about public media, it's a major educational opportunity, for kids and adults. I remember growing up watching Sesame Street and Arthur, and my mom always watching the news shows on Sunday mornings. Besides, the amount of money it takes to fund the CPB is a drop in the bucket, compared to things like defense, or infrastructure, and the wars we're involved in.

3/25/2011
Rudyard, MT

Brian
Mrs. Campbell/ North Star High School
Coorporations like PBS should definately be supported because they are the only system that reports actual news. News networks like CNN and Fox News rely on advertisements to stay in business, and with that, it is in their best interest to maximize their viewers so they can have a greater profit. In order to do that, they resort to "entertainment" instead of boring, actual news so that more people would watch their station. PBS has no such incentives to report entertainment so they report actual news.

3/3/2011

Demi S
Bradley/ Nimitz High School, Irving/ Tx
I think that tax payer money should not support the Corporation for Public Broadcasting because there are more important issues that the money should go towards. Sure the PBS shows are legend, but I don't think its right for the government to put money into them with the deficit continuing to be a big concern. It is also highly likely that the stations will be able to stay open without the money and can do a lot more fundraisers to help fund the programs. If all else fails, with the internet becoming more popular they could even move their shows over to the internet so the public may still view them.

3/2/2011

Dennis N.
Bradley/Nimitz, Irving/TX
I believe that funding for PBS is not highly needed and the passing of the bill would also help cut the budget deficit. If the bill passes, PBS programs such as KERA would most likely still exist. The programs or shows that are presented do educate the people that are viewing it but not as seriously as it seems. Public broadcasting is important in today's society but, the money could and should be used for other important needs.

2/28/2011

Josh A.
Bradley/ Nimitz, Irving/ Texas
I think that funding for PBS is not really a high priority. I believe that if the bill passes through, it will help cut the budget deficit. Many of the PBS programs I see on KERA are plainly entertainment. The government should realize the difference between entertainment and government. Though some programs on KERA help educate the public, it's not a high enough percentage of the total volume of programs. The government should divert the funds given to PBS and use it in higher priority areas like roads and other infrastructure.