What You May Have Missed
Most Popular
Across Site
In Opinion
- Dan Liljenquist: Chaffetz's search for truth...
- Matthew Sanders: Imploding trust in America's...
- In our opinion: Frances B. Monson's...
- Michael Gerson: As government's ambitions...
- What others say: Assault on core values
- Letters: Deception and government
- Letters: Paycheck Fairness Act
- My view: Climate argument is shortsighted
Most Commented
Across Site
In Opinion



Political campaign ads are the antithesis of what public broadcasting is all about. The 1967 Public Broadcasting act uses the word “noncommercial” over a dozen times to describe what public television and radio should be, and specifically states, “No noncommercial educational broadcasting station may support or oppose any candidate for political office.” That common sense stance has worked for over forty years, and most people still think public broadcasting should provide sanctuary from the outright lies that characterize politics today.
But it was just a matter of time--already as corporations cover the cost of public programming, the lines that differentiate public TV from commercial broadcasting are blurring. When the Supreme Court issued its notorious Citizens United decision that opened wide the taps for corporate funding of politicians, it spoke the message loud and clear: The corporations will have free, clear, and legal access to whatever it takes for them to select the politicians of their choice.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments