NPR and the AK47

[MillCreek]

I think people of all creeds can enjoy the Ketchup Advisory Board on PHC: http://prairiehome.publicradio.org/programs/20031227/scripts/ketchup.shtml

Ketchup contains natural mellowing agents, you know.

[Perd Hapley]

True.

From time to time, I do eat Raw Bits for breakfast.

[geronimotwo]

i was looking up the funding for npr and found this:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2008/01/frequently_asked_questions_1.html

about halfway down it states that none of their funding comes directly from the federal gov, and less than 2 percent comes from other federally funded organizations.

?

any countersources available?

[Tallpine]

I suppose I am sort of biased - I take it as self evident that we are endowed by [nature] with certain unalienable rights. 

 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

i was looking up the funding for npr and found this:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2008/01/frequently_asked_questions_1.html

about halfway down it states that none of their funding comes directly from the federal gov, and less than 2 percent comes from other federally funded organizations.

?

any countersources available?

The wiki page on NPR goes into it in some detail.  The short answer is that NPR doesn't get anything directly from the government, but they do get a fair amount of tax money indirectly from more circuitous routes, mainly from local public radio stations who get money from states, universities, and publicly funded charities.

The rest of their money comes from tax deductible donations.  The tax write-offs that encourage these donations might be the biggest form of public funding they get.

[geronimotwo]

yea, i saw the wiki page as well. in one sentence it said they received 10% of their funding from cpb grants, and two sentences later it only received 1.5% from cpb grants.   ??

any other sources

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Local public radio stations ("member stations"), not NPR, receive 10% of their funding from CBP.  These stations then turn around and use some of their funding to purchase content (radio shows) from NPR.

40% of NPR's funding comes from the content purchased by member stations.  Another 1.5% comes straight from CPB.  So NPR is getting CPB money directly from CPB, and indirectly from CPB via the member stations.

As for other sources, you could start with the citations on the wiki page.

[geronimotwo]

i like this version

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/10/how_public_is_nprs_funding.html

[kgbsquirrel]

I did some volunteer work in high school at KRVM 91.9FM in Eugene, Oregon for a time. It's an NPR station that is housed and operated in Henry D. Sheldon public high school and in turn offers classes to students in broadcasting and other things but remains primarily a public radio station. It would follow that being housed in a public institution would be government funding in a way but I'll sling an email to the folks I know back there and see if I can't get a more solid answer.

[Perd Hapley]

During pledge drive week, aren't they always complaining that .gov will be giving them less money next year? Or maybe I'm confusing them with St. Louis's "other" public radio station, KDHX.

[MillCreek]

Here is what our local NPR/BBC/local news and talk station, KUOW has to say:

KUOW serves communities in the Puget Sound region, Western Washington and Southern British Columbia. The station is operated by KUOW Puget Sound Public Radio (PSPR) under an agreement with the University of Washington, KUOW's licensee. PSPR was established in 1999 and is a private, non–profit corporation governed by a community board.

More than 89 percent of KUOW's applied revenue comes from individual and business support, while the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) and the University of Washington provide 9 percent. The station employs 63 full–time employees; plus freelance reporters, part–time staff, interns and work–study students. Donor information, intern opportunities and employment opportunities are available on our Website.

I thought I recalled them saying during pledge drives that about 90% of their funds came from 'listeners like you'. And the pledge drives are always at 0600, when I am in the shower getting ready for the day. 

[Monkeyleg]

point taken.  but even if the average person agreed that a news show was "unbiased", likely it would only mean that it was biased towards their point of view.  so would we remove all tax funding for news shows?  that would leave an advertiser driven bias, do we have such faith in them?

What other news organizations are taxpayer-funded? I don't know of any.

Bias in the news is not new, and in fact was much more prevalent decades ago in the age of William Randolph Hearst and "yellow journalism", or at least that's what were we told in school.

If NPR were defunded and disappeared, its listeners would gravitate toward another news outlet that reaffirms their views. Liberals are as unlikely to listen to Rush Limbaugh as I am to watch "The View".  Advertisers will watch the bottom line, not the political slant. Few advertisers want to be perceived as politically biased.

[MillCreek]

Although it is impossible to quantify, I wonder how much of a news organizations editorial or investigative focus is driven by the bottom line of not ticking off the advertisers.  If, say NBC did an investigative piece on defects in GM cars, and GM pulled their advertising from NBC, how much does this drive the actions of the news organization?  Although I cannot place my hands on them right now, I do recall reading about newspapers and local TV stations suffering large revenue drops when advertisers pulled the ads in response to critical news stories.

I know that many news organizations talk about editorial independence and all, but I suspect that these bottom-line considerations do exist.

[geronimotwo]

What other news organizations are taxpayer-funded? I don't know of any.

Bias in the news is not new, and in fact was much more prevalent decades ago in the age of William Randolph Hearst and "yellow journalism", or at least that's what were we told in school.

If NPR were defunded and disappeared, its listeners would gravitate toward another news outlet that reaffirms their views. Liberals are as unlikely to listen to Rush Limbaugh as I am to watch "The View".  Advertisers will watch the bottom line, not the political slant. Few advertisers want to be perceived as politically biased.

advertisers are frequently using their clout to change programming.  why do you think shows get cancelled?  mostly this is because of consumer ratings.  sometimes it is through a consumer based uproar. but either way it goes back to the "if i like it it is good (or not biased)" argument.  how many times have we talked about "mainstream america's" lack of proper reasoning, and yet it is consumer driven programming that we are arguing for.  i do not like the idea of government owned/censored media either, but to think that consumer driven programming is any less biased is a big mistake.


as i can't seem to find the reply button for this thread (i guess i used up my three reply limit?),  i will respond to the comment below via editing.  i think the correct term would be "viewer ratings", but an advertiser is looking for more than how many people are watching a show, they want to know the demographics that will lead to the viewer becoming a consumer, or more specifically their products consumption.  that is why i mispoke with the term "consumer ratings".

 i heard this week about how direct tv will be using demographics, and how your home's commercials will be tailored to fit your preferences.  ie: if you have dogs but no cats, you will likely never see a cat food commercial, but will be inundated with k9 ads.

[Monkeyleg]

advertisers are frequently using their clout to change programming.  why do you think shows get cancelled?  mostly this is because of consumer ratings.

If by "consumer" you mean "viewer", then this makes perfect sense. If by "consumer" you mean the consumers of a particular advertiser's product, could you give an example?

[geronimotwo]

 i think the correct term would be "viewer ratings", but an advertiser is looking for more than how many people are watching a show, they want to know the demographics that will lead to the viewer becoming a consumer, or more specifically their products consumption.  that is why i mispoke with the term "consumer ratings".

 i heard this week about how direct tv will be using demographics, and how your home's commercials will be tailored to fit your preferences.  ie: if you have dogs but no cats, you will likely never see a cat food commercial, but will be inundated with k9 ads.

[lee n. field]

i heard this week about how direct tv will be using demographics, and how your home's commercials will be tailored to fit your preferences.

"Cookies!  On you TeeVee!", or, why it is I see ads for GFI Mailsecurity everywhere I go.

[Scout26]

What's wrong with having consumer's deteremine the success or failure of the news outlet ??  If they are doing a good job then people will flock to it.  (I watch* Fox News NEWS shows, not because they are 'conservative' but because they present BOTH sides of the discussion).  Fox News according to viewers presents the news in a way viewers prefer.

Yellow Journalism has been around since news began.  Since the news is found, written and presented by humans it always shows the bias inherent in any human activity.  J-school profs like to point at the "Yellow" journalism period as how "bad" it was.  But was it really ??  People bought and presumably read several papers all with their biases.  They always point to the Heasrt Fortune as "bad" and that McKinley allowed himself to be bullied in War with Spain.  (Can anyone say "Bullied Clinton into the former Yugoslavia and Kosovo" ??)

Let the market decide and get the .gov out of the news business.  If NPR is worthwhile, it will have to learn to stand on it's on two feet.

[geronimotwo]

What's wrong with having consumer's deteremine the success or failure of the news outlet ??  If they are doing a good job then people will flock to it.  (I watch* Fox News NEWS shows, not because they are 'conservative' but because they present BOTH sides of the discussion).  Fox News according to viewers presents the news in a way viewers prefer.

Yellow Journalism has been around since news began.  Since the news is found, written and presented by humans it always shows the bias inherent in any human activity.  J-school profs like to point at the "Yellow" journalism period as how "bad" it was.  But was it really ??  People bought and presumably read several papers all with their biases.  They always point to the Heasrt Fortune as "bad" and that McKinley allowed himself to be bullied in War with Spain.  (Can anyone say "Bullied Clinton into the former Yugoslavia and Kosovo" ??)

Let the market decide and get the .gov out of the news business.  If NPR is worthwhile, it will have to learn to stand on it's on two feet.

   

so this would be a consumer driven "election" of a news station? 

[Scout26]

   

so this would be a consumer driven "election" of a news station? 

No not "A" news station, but a variety of news stations.  Seriously, look at magazines.  There is, in essence, no government regulation/support, of magazines, and hence there is a wide variety of all types of magazines.

Same with the internet. 

Why is there a "government" radio and TV network ??

The marketplace of ideas.  Why should ideas be any different then economics ?

[HankB]

. . . NPR doesn't get anything directly from the government, but they do get a fair amount of tax money indirectly from more circuitous routes, mainly from local public radio stations who get money from states, universities, and publicly funded charities . . .

When I read this, I immediately thought "Money Laundering."

[geronimotwo]

No not "A" news station, but a variety of news stations.  Seriously, look at magazines.  There is, in essence, no government regulation/support, of magazines, and hence there is a wide variety of all types of magazines.

Same with the internet. 

Why is there a "government" radio and TV network ??

The marketplace of ideas.  Why should ideas be any different then economics ?

i agree that there should be a variety of news stations.  i am less than thrilled with the pandoring to specific consumer groups by most networks.  i would like to see sensible newscasts reporting complete stories, regardless of the political slant.  but hey, sensationalism sells!