Listen to the listeners - Fort Morgan Times
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Fort Morgan Times.
#1 Mar 21, 2011
The value of NPR's reporting is debatable, but its relative worth is not what's at question here. The question is not whether it is good or bad, biased or unbiased, but whether it should be subsidized by taxpayers. High quality bias is still bias. In my opinion, it should not be subsidized.
When the Roberts argue that public broadcasting is so indispensible that it must be subsidized, they are in effect saying that the service has a high value, but not enough people want that service to make it viable without taxpayer money. In the same breath, they say that 34,000,000 people value it enough to tune in every week. So which is it?
That's a pretty big bunch of people, and NPR's demographics show that they are a fairly affluent bunch, too. One might wonder why they can't pay for it themselves if they value it so highly, especially when the public broadcasting business model is heavily dependent on member support already.
The only dependable way to know whether a good or service is valued in our economy is to let it succeed or fail in a true market. Get rid of the subsidy. If NPR has no value, people will not pay for it and it will go away. If it has value, it will thrive and the Roberts can quit putting quote marks around the phrase "liberal media."
As an aside ... if you only scanned this article, please re-read and pay particular attention to the third paragraph. It perfectly illustrates the kind of reporting NPR does. When the other side does it, it's an "ambush video." When they do it, it's "undercover reporting." James O'Keefe is a "conservative activist." But the lefty who scammed Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker a few weeks ago was just an "impersonating blogger" pulling a "prank." (See http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/... for a lesson in NPR hypocrisy.) O'Keefe's report was taken out of context and "heavily edited." This from NPR, who on four separate occasions has been caught deliberately changing (heavily editing) direct quotes from Israeli leaders in favor of the Palestinians. They "heavily edit" everything they report, and usually with a liberal spin.
NPR must seem like high-quality reporting to the uninformed. For the truly informed, listening to NPR is an unbearable exercise in frustration. Nails on a chalkboard.
Add your comments below
|Perdue the better choice for Georgia in Washington (Oct '14)||Jan '18||Taxpayer||2|
|White House first discussed Bergdahl prisoner e... (Jun '14)||May '17||Lottery Traitors ...||95|
|Georgia Special Election Likely Advances to Jun... (Apr '17)||Apr '17||He Named Me Black...||2|
|Tea Party Whisperer Pleads Guilty to Making Fal... (Sep '15)||Oct '15||LeDuped||14|
|Threat To Bergdahl Led To US Action, Officials Say (Jun '14)||Mar '15||Dubya Tee Eff||33|
|What qualifies Michelle Nunn to be Georgia's US... (Oct '14)||Oct '14||Sam in Ellijay||1|
|The 2014 election might stretch into 2015, than... (Oct '14)||Oct '14||Marine Corp Pat||6|
Find what you want!
Search Saxby Chambliss Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC