The arts on PBS is essential viewing, essential funding, with 'front-row seating'

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • michaelm Louisville, KY
    June 10, 2012 6:47 p.m.

    Too much of the programming is politically motivated and very one sided on both NPR ad PBS. Most Americans are not going to get behind funding until both become neutral. PBS is only slightly better but much of what passes for art just requires an accent. Benny Hill for example runs on some PBS stations as well as upstairs downstairs both of which are just trash tv with a Brittish accent. NPR consistently trashes conservative ideas even when reporting news it writes any story that favors conservative values with a negative slant and all liberal news with a positive bias. Where I live NPR does 2 hours every day of pro LBGT content twice each day. Never any programming that is pro conservative positions or pro family. I'm not anti LBGT in any way just against the constant left wing propaganda sold as fair news paid for with everyone's taxes regardless of the fact that it preaches an endless ideology more than half the country disagrees with.

  • True Blue SEoul Orem, UT
    June 10, 2012 9:20 a.m.

    Tami Said: "That means funding only that which we absolutely need for our survival"

    Um, I guess you support getting ready of NASA, mass transit, CIA, FBI, huge chucnks of the military, EPA, FDA, State Department, School Funding (heck, all of the Department of Education), highway and road funding (dirt roads are fine if you are just talking survival), etc. Well, you get the point. Wrong standard for what the federal government should fund.

  • Florien Wineriter Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 10, 2012 7:30 a.m.

    Sporting events and their participants will always attract bigger crowds and millions of dollars but they only satisfy base physical satisfactions.They are the fats and sugars of our emotions. Opera, classic music, history, and the fine arts are the nutrients that nourish our minds but thinking is not deemed as important as physical mayhem.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2012 7:40 p.m.

    I ALREADY "donate" under coercion via my tax bill. When I listen to NPR they sound particularly left-leaning.

    I guess I'll wait to donate when/if my "contribution" is no longer mandatory.

  • Owl Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2012 7:28 p.m.

    If public stations were less political they would garner broader public support. Some of NPRs programing is partisan or terminally insipid which lessens my annual contribution. A governing board that is more centerist and artistic directors that plan presentations with less emphasis on the avant garde or experimental would also help. As Oscar Wilde noted, nobody loves bad art as much as bad artists. The BBC has done a more credible job than US public broadcasting.

  • Dave D Pocatello, ID
    June 9, 2012 6:07 p.m.

    Tami, I disagree. If PUBLIC TV is tossed to entirely to private companies we end up with The Jersey Shore, America's Next Top Model, and other mindless drivel which has low production costs, low entertainment and educational value, and zero cultural value. There are some great programs on various for-profit TV networks, but these serve a different purpose than public television programming.

  • Tami Herriman, UT
    June 9, 2012 4:22 p.m.

    Despite the fact that I do support the arts and I definitely support Public TV, I have to say it has no place in the federal budget. We have to get our budget under control. That means funding only that which we absolutely need for our survival. While I think the arts are important for civilization, they can be funded privately and should be.