The politics behind PBS

[Chuckup]

So, is PBS a left or right leaning entity?

I look at is as a left leaning entity. It depends on donations from viewers to survive, which in my opinion is based on the left wing philosophy.

[deadparrot]

1. ties to bbc

PBS also has close ties with the BBC, seeing as their evening news are broadcasted on PBS, as well as several other British shows.

So, yeah, my opinion is that they are more left-leaning.

[newyawker99]

14. Hi deadparrot!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Brucey]

2. Conservatives view PBS as leftist,

but they see anything rational as leftist. Hell, they even think CNN is a liberal network. PBS does a relatively good job of presenting information, on such programs as Nova and Frontline, and this can be viewed as liberal since it's factual. The news program is viewed as liberal, but in fact they rarely have anyone who could be considered far out. Everyone in suits. So, it is conservative by European standards, but liberal in the US or Saudi Arabia.

[leftyandproud]

4. I'm a leftist, and we must admit, PBS is VERY favorable to us

the only left wing channel on broadcast (or otherwise) tv in America

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

3. Depends on whose grants are funding the program

PBS relies on grants for much of it's programming so the program's content largely reflects the money behind it.

Here is a very good article about it:

http://www.mediatransparency.org/stories/bos.htm

[gottaB]

5. Tolerance levels

pbs tolerates liberals, but doesn't tolerate hate speech. The liberal programming is rather obviously liberal. The conservative programming may not register with your run-of-the-mill dittohead, as they have been condition to regard vitriol and denigration as the sin qua non of conservative political ideas. To me though, the biases are apparent.

Some examples. Ever see To the Contrary? It deals with women's issues, but in a panel format with typically one liberal, one neoliberal, one conservative, and one neoconservative--I mean old school neoconservative, not like PNAC. Well, we could talk about varieties of feminism and third wave politics and how that plays into it too, but the one constant I believe is that radical feminists are not usually represented. Still, to the dittohead, any discussion of women's issues appears to be liberal.

Tony Brown's Journal. Relatively moderate Black political commentary. It is not an onair version of Final Call. Still, to the dittohead, any levelheaded discussion of African American issues must be liberal.

Religion and Ethics Newsweekly. Rather conservative and sedate in tone, but they actually treat Muslims and Jews with respect. The rightwing cultural warrior just sees it as giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

Nightly Business Report. The topic itself lends a conservative bias, but the cohost Suzy Gareb is smart and assertive--two qualities the dittohead can't tolerate in a woman.

Now with Bill Moyers. Definitely liberal. Must drive the wingnuts crazy.

Nova. I believe it's tilted rather heavily to the right, which is evident in the choice of topics. But it's typically objective in tone. The dittoheads can't recognize it as their own.

News Hour. Especially since MacNiel left, they lean right. They privilege government spokespeople, and are generally respectful of government, which represents an kind of oldschool conservative bias. They attempt to be somewhat rational and are not rancorous enough to register in the wingnut psyche.

And on and on. Actually, I kind of miss the days of intelligent conservative politics like you got with William F. Buckley. I mean, he could really get my dander up at times, but it was a real joy to see thoughtful debates with worthy opponents.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

15. Nova DOES have a rightward slant

not in its straight science programs, but in its depressingly frequent programs about the development of various weapons systems.

[HEyHEY]

6. I agree 100 per cent

It was put in to play to educate people...rightys hate that

[Chuckup]

7. PBS offers local programming

that varies from state to state. I've seen Detroit PBS, Maine PBS and Boston PBS.

All thier local News issue programming seems to lean to the left.

To be honest, I really can't stand in your face right wing wankers on TV, in the form of news programming or entertainment.

When I watch PBS, I feel like they are presenting a view that most people from the left can relate to.

What the heck do right wingers watch, besides themselves?

[smallprint]

8. PBS is heavily censored by corporate interests

here is an excerpt of an article about how PBS refuses to run certain left-wing documentaries:

snip

In 1997, PBS was scheduled to air "Out at Work," an award-winning documentary about three lesbian and gay workers' struggles for justice and dignity in the workplace. PBS suddenly cancelled, claiming it discovered that 23 percent of the film's modest $65,000 budget came from such "problematical" sources as a lesbian action foundation and some labor unions. One of the film's directors, Kelly Anderson, said: "None of the funders in question gave more than $5,000 to the project, and most gave $1,000 or less."

PBS official Sandy Heberer insisted: "PBS guidelines prohibit funding that might lead to an assumption that individual underwriters might have exercised editorial control over program content even if, as is clear in this case, those underwriters did not." Journalist James Ledbetter asked PBS official Barry Chase if this decision meant that a labor union could never fund any program on public television that had to do with issues of the workplace. Chase replied: "Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying." However, corporations have been allowed to sponsor programs that featured their products. Financial institutions sponsor business news; in fact, "Wall Street Week" host Louis Rukeyser even has interviewed analysts touting certain companies with which they had an undisclosed financial relationship.

In 1994, PBS refused to air "Defending Our Lives," winner of the Academy Award for "Best Documentary Short." The film critically examines the problem of battered women. PBS turned it down on the grounds that one of the producers was a member of a nine-member prison support group concerned with the issue. The producers said the woman neither funded, profited from nor controlled the film, but PBS said the "perception" that shows are being "created to advance the aims of group" is "as important as the fact."

In contrast, earlier this year former CBS and ABC news correspondent Jerry Landay revealed that three conservative foundations -- Bradley, Olin and Scaife -- subsidized at least 17 single programs or series on PBS from 1992 through 2000. All the programs served as "a platform for the views" of the foundations' grantees and their organizations. These included a program on "scientific creationism," another that blamed lack of self-reliance for problems in the ghetto, an attack on "political correctness" based on alleged "reenactments," a three-part series on the "gender wars," dominated by anti-feminist voices and a debate on "school choice" with 38 of 42 guests supporting public funding of private schools. Not only did these shows air, but there was no public acknowledgement of PBS violation of the "perception" guideline.

more: http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/4631

emphasis in bold is mine, not in original

my comment: there is a lot more where this came from. and since Bushco took over, it's gotten even worse. PBS is not left wing-- they are a mainstream, corporate centrist group that throws out a liberal bone every now and then.

[Metatron]

9. Very true

As a former employee of a PBS/NPR organization, I agree completely. I recommend the book "Air Wars: The Fight to Reclaim Public Broadcasting" by Jerold M. Starr for an inside look at the network.

[smallprint]

10. thanks for the book info

I'll definitely check it out.

:hi:

[smallprint]

11. Actually, I just checked the author of the article

I just cited, and it IS Jerold Starr. I guess I shoulda looked before I posted it!

[Metatron]

12. Be warned

I found the book quite depressing!

[smallprint]

13. That's OK

I was "broken in" by reading Noam Chomsky a long time ago...

:evilgrin:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

16. A hearty endorsement here for Wide Angle

Its second season just finished, and I hope that there are more to come, but this is a series of fascinating independent documentaries on international topics.

In the past two years, I've seen many fine programs, including some on economic inequality in China, the Chechen conflect as portrayed by three film crews, each traveling with a different party in the conflict; school experiences of children in the Third World, illegal immigration to the U.S. and other industrialized countries, and a Pakistani musician who is waging a cultural battle against Islamic fundamentalists.

I hope that it comes back next year and that all of you will watch it.