pShould PBS receive government funding?

Next>

Results

57 %

No, it shouldn't

43 %

Yes, it should

@Nov '12 c 374 comments V 1,024 votes

Detailed Results Next Debate Vote Now

Activity Stmts Popular

1024 Votes

3 hr
Toraco voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

4 hr
steve2 voted

v Yes, it should
u

6 hr
jtb1776 voted

v No, it shouldn't
6 hr
Greatkaven voted

v Yes, it should
u

8 hr
kywildflower60 endorsed Mercury34

v No, it shouldn't
10 hr
BudH voted

v No, it shouldn't
12 hr
Amy2723 voted

v Yes, it should
18 hr
sgh7 endorsed MarkJM

v No, it shouldn't
u

u

Mon
robbob280 endorsed beemerphill

v Yes, it should
o

Mon
randy28 voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

Mon
Richard22 voted

v Yes, it should
u

Mon
DesignerLM voted

v No, it shouldn't
Mon
DonMyrick endorsed MarkJM

v No, it shouldn't
Mon
cypun voted

v Yes, it should
Mon
Njorl voted

v Yes, it should
Mon
LHoran voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

Mon
NolanVoyd voted

v Yes, it should
u

Mon

forrest

v No, it shouldn't

Nope. PBS turned a profit last year. It is the Public Broadcasting System, not the Government Broadcasting System.

Post
u

Mon
rctj voted

v Yes, it should
Sun

doodadson

v No, it shouldn't

NO. PUBLIC BROADCAST SYSTEM means public and no big brother taking control just like all the other things they are trying to control.

Post
Sun
Raisinbran96 voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

May 19
tinto voted

v Yes, it should
u

May 19
aledar voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 18
doggie_luv voted

v Yes, it should
May 18
outsidecat endorsed Lpguy

v No, it shouldn't
u

May 18
DonEros voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 18
DamnGunslinger voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 18
PaulJ voted

v Yes, it should
May 18
mikev9359 voted

v Yes, it should
May 18
new_life voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 18
sillybilly1b voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 18
ersiii1958 voted

v Yes, it should
u

May 17
Rpete endorsed Lpguy

v No, it shouldn't
u

May 17
Zennbenn endorsed Nat

v Yes, it should
May 17
solodad voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

May 17
Obsidion voted

v Yes, it should
u

May 17
tam406 voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

u

May 17
Texican endorsed Nat

v Yes, it should
May 17
Jaxson voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 17
Stinger2 voted

v Yes, it should
May 17
Zach endorsed Lpguy

v No, it shouldn't
u

May 16
stevil666 voted

v Yes, it should
u

May 16
Theocrat voted

v No, it shouldn't
u

May 16
okienomore54 endorsed Nat

v Yes, it should
May 16
JWhite voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 16
Knightkore endorsed MarkJM

v No, it shouldn't
May 16
shadowmonkey11 voted

v No, it shouldn't
May 16

mommybt

v Yes, it should

PBS teaches our Children I think it wouldnt kill them to fund the channel and make the future a little brighter educating our children at home. Its a great channel thats loaded with childrens programming. I for 1 taught my kids how to count and say the ABC's while enjoying PBS programming. Do it for the kids and agree that the government should fund this channel. Everythings money money money well how about thinking about the children who actually watch and learn from PBS and not how much its gonna cost out of their millions.

Post
u

u

May 15
Bingo35 endorsed beemerphill

v Yes, it should
u

May 15
hmariewv voted

v Yes, it should

u

Mon

forrest

v No, it shouldn't

Nope. PBS turned a profit last year. It is the Public Broadcasting System, not the Government Broadcasting System.

Post
Sun

doodadson

v No, it shouldn't

NO. PUBLIC BROADCAST SYSTEM means public and no big brother taking control just like all the other things they are trying to control.

Post
May 16

mommybt

v Yes, it should

PBS teaches our Children I think it wouldnt kill them to fund the channel and make the future a little brighter educating our children at home. Its a great channel thats loaded with childrens programming. I for 1 taught my kids how to count and say the ABC's while enjoying PBS programming. Do it for the kids and agree that the government should fund this channel. Everythings money money money well how about thinking about the children who actually watch and learn from PBS and not how much its gonna cost out of their millions.

Post
May 14

griffco

v No, it shouldn't

If the Federal Gov't has money to spend, send it to the Social Security Division and Assist the people who need Assistance. PBS has there own fund raising policy,let them work harder in that endeavor.

Post
May 13

thechairman

v No, it shouldn't

PBS receives contributions from its partners and engage in other fundraising activities. If its programming is good, it will stay on the air. They can always sell commercials. I have seen enough telethons on that station that last all weekend that a good old soap commercial would be a welcome break.

Post
u

May 11

reaux

v No, it shouldn't

did you see how much they bring in? did you see what big bird alone takes home? they have income from many sources, they do not need the govt's. OUr military could use that, and their families.

Post
May 11

Xavier_Onassis

v Yes, it should

The commercial news networks are overly commercialized, repetitive and simplistic. Most commercial TV only seeks to sell crap, not to inform or induce people to think. PBS and NPR cost very, very little when you take into account all that they give us. We should TAX advertising on the commercial networks to support NPR and PBS.

Post
May 11
Post Removed by Moderators
u

May 11

metre

v Yes, it should

It is "Public" and should be funded by the "Public".

Post
u

May 10

oldsolder

v Yes, it should

Sure It's the only TV that my entire family can sit down together and watch without some kind of obscenity being blurted out or violent scene. What ever happened to family television? TV shows today are just complete garbage.

Post
May 10

marysrus13

v Yes, it should

Only if there was stipulation that they provide only the facts - like during the Boston Bombing when one of their voices continually said, "We're here to collect the dots, not connect the dots". If Jounalism would go back to the standard of providing Information without the "expert analysis and commentary" , I'd be forever grateful and the GOVERNMENT would then positively show it wants to be fully ACCOUNTABLE and TRANSPARENT for what it's generating as information and policy. Wouldn't it be wonderful if the GOVERNMENT were run by facts and not "expert analysis, opinion and commentary"?

Post
May 9

RedSonja2000

v Yes, it should

It's the only place for truly unbiased news.

Post
May 9

TerryConklin

v No, it shouldn't

Sadly, PBS has a "Progressive" slant and therefore it should stand on its own. I would feel the same of a conservative enterprise.

r1 reply

Post
May 13

Polito-Facts

Facts are facts even if you don't like it and want to label said facts as "Progressive". One can easily label all of national media back in the 70s as "Progressive" because they were all about presenting the facts. A time when their were consequences in lying on tv. With Regan abolishing such a law permitting lying in the news it permits embarrassing outlets like Fox News to thrive and manipulate their uneducated followers to do their bidding. Sad, but true.

Post @Polito-Facts
May 7

Airtime

v Yes, it should

Yes why not we fund every other thing that comes down the pipe line. PBS station do alot of good for non profits and other charties that can't afford to have main stream media station do it for them.But should state that they show more educational programs during the day for schools to show during class times to educate the students on current events on social studies or history of the world and united states.

Post
u

May 7

tressa4

v No, it shouldn't

Have your cable supplier charge an additional buck or 2 for these channels. No opting out; low charge <$5. The kids that are home all day (and the moms) count on these shows for a well deserved break from diapers, dirty little hands and noses. The kids relate to the show, they normally loved to curl up with you - which allows you to sneak out and get a few things done. Or, if it's been a rough night or morning, give you some rest as well.

Post
u

May 7

Greenjeans

v Yes, it should

When we stop subsidizing the fossil fuel industry and companies that pay no taxes or fines (Exxon Valdez) because of their lawyers' and accountant's clever tricks. then maybe we'll think about stopping funding for PBS.

Post
u

May 6

Pms888

v Yes, it should

Intellectual people need somewhere to turn... And the pop culture cannot deliver... Our society needs intellectuals to excel and those relative few need their sustenance.

Post
May 6

AlexNWA

v Yes, it should

ROI. The real reason the Republicans are against PBS are because they can't control its content. FRONTLINE exposes the dirty secrets of government; POV shows us what is happening in the real world; PBSNewshour gives actual news instead of propaganda; Sesame Street, Nova, Nature, educate us and an educated public is dangerous to demagogues.

Post
u

May 5

maddie56

v Yes, it should

I have enjoyed more PBS broadcasts than any main stream channel has provided. Entertaining and educational also. Kudos PBS!

Post
u

May 4

Eagle1

v Yes, it should

Our legislatures use earmarks to spend my money. I want the same right to direct one dollar from my tax return to programs of my choice. It would be nice if I could select ten things (not from their list) to earmark one dollar to each of my pets.

B1

Post
R Load more comments...

Oct '12

Lpguy

v No, it shouldn't

The government has no business spending our tax money on these unconstitutional endeavors. I'm pretty sure there is no bigbird clause in the enumerated powers of congress. PBS will exist fine on its own if people like it, otherwise it will fail and something better and take its place. that's how the market works, and that is a good thing - being competitive keeps the market running as efficiently as possible

B4

r6 replies

e102 endorsed

Post
u

Oct '12

Nat

v Yes, it should

PBS is 1/100th of 1% of the Federal Budget spending. If this is what Mitt Romney thinks will save the country, he's blowing in the wind. Stop Congressmen from adding Riders to important bills in order to get pork projects passed for their state and you'll save more with the erasure of one of those than you will with cutting funding to PBS. I think our Government leaders have lost the ability to think critically and are too selfish and detached from American citizens to even be in office.

r1 reply

e86 endorsed

Post
Oct '12

MarkJM

v No, it shouldn't

They hold telethons for private donations. Many of their shows now go into market, especially the kid shows (Sesame Street, Calliou, The Cat in the Hat, Ghostwriter, etc. are all on Netflix and some even on Hulu). Sesame Street (i.e. Big Bird) has merchandise, DVDs, movies, etc. all out on the private market. Clearly PBS can do without taxpayer dollars. Have the stations add in commercials from both local and big businesses. Have the stations encourage more in private donations. Sorry, but we shouldn't keep borrowing money from China to fund Big Bird (Especially when Big Bird and the rest of the Sesame Street gang can afford to do the show themselves).

B1

e39 endorsed

Post
u

Oct '12

beemerphill

v Yes, it should

There are too many other places to cut the budget. PBS is giving us our moneys worth(and a little bit more).

e22 endorsed

Post
Oct '12

Thunderchicken

v No, it shouldn't

When you can't pay the mortgage, do you still continue the cable TV?

B3

r1 reply

e14 endorsed

Post
Oct '12

methinks

v No, it shouldn't

When PBS was the only name in town for science and educational television, that was fine, but the far superior Discovery Networks, and Nat Geo do a far better job. PBS is a dinosaur that should be privately funded. NPR is just a tool for the left anyway.

B2

e13 endorsed

Post
u

Oct '12

Bearwillie

v Yes, it should

Those against PBS funding claim it is controlled by leftists and some say it is run by socialists / communists. You only have to listen to the output and realise this is nonsense. This medium gives a platform for programming that commercial media just does not do. The cultural output is excellent. Listening to a Chopin piano concerto is not my idea of a socialist conspiracy! Frankly I found it of sublime beauty! If what some on the right say is true of the PBS, then I still prefer it to a media dominated by billionaire oligarchs and big multinational companies through their advertising dollars! If anything does not finally put out a death note of the independence and b...

r11 replies

e14 endorsed

Post
u

Oct '12

ithink2

v No, it shouldn't

No, every dollar we send to PBS is another dollar we add to the $16 trillion dollar debt. We need to cut this type of program. When America is working again and the US is collecting revenues above our needs, then we can look at funding the fun things. Right now we need to pay for what we need and pay down our massive debt. No dollar that is not 'needed' should be spent. How do you dig your way out of a mess at your house? The government is your 'house', treat it the same way.

B3

r2 replies

e8 endorsed

Post
Oct '12

Len_in_NY2

v Yes, it should

Quite frankly, if this is a budget issue, I can think of a lot of other things that can be done that would make more sense than cutting PBS funding. This is just another distraction issue. I'm sure the money the gov't spends on the war machine, a failed drug war, and who knows how much "pork" is a hell of a lot more than PBS. As far as PBS getting political, if y'all aren't clamoring for houses of worship to lose their tax-free status when they preach politics, then it's hypocritical.

r4 replies

e4 endorsed

Post
Oct '12

rextrek

v Yes, it should

Of course the GOP would Love to defund ANYthing and Everything that Makes people THINK, they want Lemmings, and LOW INformation voters.....Interesting the NO people on here, where is all thier Outrage for 2+ Billion a week for war and the military Industrial complex? ..I say, its come down to slpit America into 2 parts...the GOP retard side and the Critical thinking Reality side......and no doubt, within 2yrs - on the GOP side, they'd have Witch Burnings, Slavery, indentured servatude....public stonings etc etc.....

e3 endorsed

Post

Politix

pShould PBS receive government funding?

Results