This is beyond making the perfect the enemy of the good. This is making a hypothetical perfect broadcasting network that is Air America on steroids the enemy of the last bastion of nationwide comprehensive news coverage in America.

Query: Why do liberals and Democrats expect an executive with the Corporation for Pubic Broadcasting to have more political muscle than the entire Democratic party?

This is why liberals are losers. They have some pie in the sky ideological hegemony and absolutely no common sense. Abolishing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a Newt Gingrich-Karl Rove-Rupert Murdoch wet dream.

Can anyone say "Mend it, don't end it"? Geesh.

They have a strong attachment to their father figure or anyone in their social order be it within the church or their elected representatives.

They believe that people have selected roles to fulfill and they are not to challenge their leaders, the decisions they make, the ideas they foster, their rules or laws they make.

Liberals on the other hand are very challenging and distrusting of anyone and don't really believe that an elected official is any better than they are and as a result have a natural tendency to challenge authority, ideas, power, rules, laws, etc.

The issue with conservatives/republicans and all of this mythical liberal bias is that they cannot fathom anyone challenging their father figure, its not in their DNA.

However, it should always be in the DNA of the 4th estate to challenge government at every turn on everything, liberals love this, conservatives love it when it challenges someone outside of their hierarchy, but cannot stand it when it challenges someone within it.

Thus they are at a contradiction with the entire purpose of the 4th estate when it comes to those that they elect as their reps.

Its like heresy is to the church.

Hey, lets just turn the thing into a non-profit publicly held corporation, I'd gladly buy up a bunch of shares.

My spouse and I used to contribute to the PBS station in the New York City metro area.  About two years ago I was called by them to renew our support during one of their fund-raising efforts.  I was disturbed by the distinct rightward tilt PBS programming had taken and told them so, that I would not contribute again until they moved back to their previous programming practices.  We have not been contacted by our local PBS station by mail or telephone since. That silence says it all.

They know what they're doing in drifting toward a distinct conservative bias.  Stop subsidizing them and still allow them to complain about PBS liberal bias.  It gives them a foil to fend off attacks about the reactionary, corporate bias which pervades American TV programming.  Why pay for the weapon to be used against ourselves?

We need more liberals producing more programming for PBS.  

Where are the liberal production companies?  What if somebody with connections to some wealthy donors were to convinces some Liberals to set up a big time production company withthe goal of supplying PBS with ten new programs in the next few years?

I think that would have a greater impact than a membership boycott.  

In the words of George Harrison,
"All Things Must Pass"

Republicans started threatening back in the mid 90's when they won the House -- and were very surprised that members who stepped forward on NPR in particular, really got a ton of letters from very mad Moderate and Middle-Upper Middle Classed Republican voters.  They backed off as a result, and many of the stations took this as fair warning, and built up endowments for their systems.  It's not true everywhere -- but it is in many places.  The result is the system can more or less survive without CPB funds for several years or more.  More important, NPR knows their audience well.  Many will fight with them to keep partisian politics out of management, though the initative needs to come from the audience.  

Here in Minnesota we complain all the time about our "Big Corporate MPR" -- so big that it owns stations in Idaho, Michigan, and Southern California -- and seems to always be buying other stations that are not well supported locally.  But MPR is also not vulnerable to CPB.  It has long had a strategy of owning a "for profit" side that produces capital that can and is re-invested in the "non-profit" side of things.  If you like listening to "As it Happens" from Canada -- well your local station is buying it from Minnesota -- as are they doing if your station carries BBC overnight.  MPR produces radio documentaries and sells them to out of area stations -- no CPB money at all.  MPR produces arts programs, Jazz programs, Author's series and of course Garrison Keillor.  It is a big business but it is so far above anything else that is available it's silly.

Because of that show, I would never give anything to PBS.  And I think people should boycott it in any event.  Aside from the fact that they're practically running commercials as it is, they specially in "puff" shows like Antiques Roadshow, self-help and financial gurus.  I remember a time, in the late 60s and 70s, when PBS did socially relevant programming.

This is the reason why it topped all  - thats right
ALL of the other partisan news sources in its
coverage of the debates on network television.

As I recall, it was nearly 21 % of all viewers.
A huge segment. The same was true of coverage
of both conventions.

I believe certain other bitchy news entertainment
companies who fund certain partisan talking
heads to do their thing, love to sell the idea
that they're on top.

Lets define "top". shall we.. if you have
scaggy maggy on top of you, are you having fun?

PBS is a class act.

No changes whatsoever.

Just thought you should know.

To control a country you need to suppress all dissenting voices. Take a look at all the countries which close down newspapers.

Losing the only impartial TV outlet would be playing directly into the right's hands.

I think a continual campaign of letter writing and other public action is the best plan.
I have already written several times about the introduction of WSJ and Tucker Carlson to the PBS lineup. Two talking heads opinion shows are supposed to be a balance to investigative reporting.

If they want balance then let's have some investigative reportng by "conservative" reporters.
Funny how you won't be able to name one in any media. Throughout history it has been the voices of liberalism that have uncovered the defects in society starting with Lincoln Steffans and the other muckrakers in the early 20th Century up through Seymour Hersh today.

By philosophy the conservatives are the upholders of the status quo and have no desire to uncover scandals. That's the true "liberal bias".

Removing another source of independent information is not the way to proceed.

The left attempts to be bottom-up. We attempt to create bottom-up organizations.

The problem is that our basic model for bottom-up organizations is flawed to where the right is able to take-over our flawed bottom-up organizations.

The fatal flaw is winner-take-all, non-proportional elections, whether they be in government or private non-profit organizations.

PBS and CPB and "public" radio stations in general started out "non-public" in the sense that they are often created as self-electing boards or some similar structure.

Even Pacifica Radio suffers the same structural flaws. Simple majority or plurality rules allow dedicated activists (right or left) to drive out less dedicated, potentially more democratic forces until control becomes at least de-facto top-down.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

The medium of electoral government is a left-wing tool. It communicates from the many to the few.

When the right trys to discredit governments (and elected union organizations) they are fighting against democracy and for authoritarianism. Broadcast media works for them.

Now comes the internet as a two-way, many-to-many medium. That is a medium and an organizational tool that favors our goals of democracy.

Just as the right has demonized government so should we demonize broadcast media. PBS has filled a vacuum for us for a while, but now is reverting to its more natural function of propagandizing the views of a few to the many. The internet will need to begin to take up the slack. To do that we must be prepared to sling mud on all forms of broadcast media. Including now PBS et al.

What a bunch of spineless cowards.

The democrats don't deserve to win any more elections as long as they aren't willing to fight for them. No wonder the GOP is so successful in privatizing the media and brainwashing the public.

How about fighting for something for once. Liberal blogs have brought down media figures before, why not wage a campaign against this GOP mole running PBS? Where's ACT and MoveOn?

You know what? You're right. Here's comes the GOP machine! Better just take your ball and go home... And democrats wonder why Americans can't trust them to fight a war.