PBS have a liberal agenda?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Aaron62

Contributor
Staff member
#1
Whatever came of this 2005 story?

The man alleging the bias is Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican who heads the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. CPB provides federal funding to public broadcasters including the Public Broadcasting Service, which receives about 15 percent of its operating budget, or $48.5 million, from the corporation.

PBS has denied the charges of a liberal slant. But following the criticism, it moved this month to hire an ombudsman to review its programs and announced a revision of its editorial practices. Among them: a requirement that commentary and opinion be labeled as such.
"What Mr. Tomlinson has been doing is very destructive to the interests of public broadcasting," Dorgan said. "The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be better off with a fresh start with somebody who is not spending their time claiming that the public broadcasting system is unfair."
FOXNews.com - PBS Targeted for Perceived Political Agenda - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum
 

TVLee

DTVUSA Jr. Member
#2
I'm a registered independent so I can make fun of both sides :) PBS is as left leaning as FoxNews is right leaning. Not just because of politics, but in this day of age with so much media available, I'm not exactly sure why we should use federal tax dollars to help support PBS or NPR.

But to answer your original question, I don't know. I'd be curious as well.
 

TonyT

DTVUSA Member
#3
I'm a registered independent so I can make fun of both sides :)
That's what all independents say. ;)

I've always thought that PBS offered programming and news in a much different way than cnn, fox, or any other network. Some of their focus has been more on what's wrong with America over the past few years. One has to remember that most of the PBS channels are owned operated from the engineering department's of universities across the country. I'm not saying that universitys are liberal, you can draw your own conclusion with that, but I would however expect to see rosey stories about Al Gore, President Obama, and maybe even Michael Moore, before, say, how great Rush Limbaugh and red meat is. :)
 

Piggie

Super Moderator
#4
PBS does their news and commentary shows in a much different way. I believe if they were censored into doing shows a certain way they may as well go off the air.

The person and persons making the allegations are far right individuals that find even a centrist or moderate Republican a liberal. I know because I have friends, relatives, associates that are very far right. They consider me a liberal since I resigned from the Republican party and became independent. Yet I am very physically conservative but have always been socially liberal. The party became too liberal in spending while becoming more conservative in social issues, hence I no longer fit in their agenda nor did they serve me.

But I wonder in specific examples how is PBS liberal? I find their shows do in depth investigative reporting revealing faults from both sides of the isle.
 

Aries

DTVUSA Member
#5
A better question would be: "Does the common man even care?", if I don't like what I see on TV, I either change the channel, or switch it off. I don't scream and moan about a slant towards whatever wing.
 

Piggie

Super Moderator
#6
A better question would be: "Does the common man even care?", if I don't like what I see on TV, I either change the channel, or switch it off. I don't scream and moan about a slant towards whatever wing.
To me this begs the question worth considering of which I will ask not judging what is right or wrong, but keep the conversation exploring.

1) I think most people I know don't watch PBS not to much because it's above their understanding, but they would rather not learn watching TV to relax.

a) But a corollary to that is how often I point out to different people that PBS has shows that are solely entertainment, and even have them ask me to remind them when they are on. One the most common shows of this type are the music shows. But a lot of people get hooked on Nature. Not so much anymore but a decade or two ago, it was the best place to find British comedy.

b) The Create Channel now has my son watching (a chief) watching PBS that was solely was a Food Network fan finding Create fills a lot of gaps in cooking that shown on Food Network that is often more entertainment than content on how to cook.
 

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#7
I think a lot of the criticism three and four years ago was due to the fact that the people doing the most "wrong" happened to have been Republicans at the time. I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal (so basically I'm both a Republican and a Democrat, or neither), and from my perspective PBS is pretty even-handed, typically. They do tend to highlight injustice and inequity, which seems to make them anti-Republican, because Republican perspectives often lead to situations that foster sensationalistic accusations of lack of compassion; PBS is not immune from covering that which will attract viewers more. Is this bias? Well there are some members of this forum who have chosen to label standard, respectable Republican (typically, fiscal) perspectives as categorically incompassionate, but I bet those posters would vociferously deny a political bias to their comments in that regard. So a lot of this depends on where you stand.
 

1inxs

DTVUSA Member
#8
Journalist all get their liberal leaning attitudes from their educations. I don't believe a neutral professor remains any where in the Country. All news casts with the exception of Fox have a liberal leaning bias. Fox makes a good effort at getting both sides opinions out during their various programs, but still lean one way or the other. Personally, I would start watching network news again if the anchors would keep their political tendencies to them selfs and report the news. They aren't supposed to be the news, they are supposed to report the news.

As for you that have gone Independent (Liberal), you cannot be a Conservative and be socially Liberal. The whole purpose of conservatism is to help others, help themselves, not give them what they want or think they need. As Conservatives we help each other. We don't rely on the Government to take our money and help others. You call yourselves Independent and vote Liberal. At your core you are Liberal:usa2: That's my opinion, and the opinion of much of the US population.

The fact that Republicans were doing the most wrong? Back up your statement with facts, Bicker. Or did you mean to say, the perception was Republicans were doing the wrong?
Utah is the most conservative State in the USA and probably the most compassionate.
 
Last edited:

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#9
Journalist all get their liberal leaning attitudes from their educations. I don't believe a neutral professor remains any where in the Country.
However, I think the implication the correlation between being educated being liberal in perspective does a disservice to conservatives. It still might be true that education leads people to more liberal (more "compassionate") perspectives, but I think that's a might big leap.

All news casts with the exception of Fox have a liberal leaning bias. Fox makes a good effort at getting both sides opinions out during their various programs, but still lean one way or the other.
I find that Fox generally leans right, and MSNBC generally leans left; while CNN is fair and balanced. However, increasingly, I've found CNN leaning towards "little guy bias" -- they tend, now, to take whatever side resonates most with their viewers' often-paranoid suspicion of large institutions, as long as it doesn't patently represent a lean to the left.

Personally, I would start watching network news again if the anchors would keep their political tendencies to them selfs and report the news.
That never was the case, and never could be the case. The only way to have news unaffected by the bias of those reporting it is to have no reporter, with cameras simply recording events wherever important events may or may not be happening -- no editor to decide which camera footage to show (so the viewer would have to choose, without any indications of what may or may not be important, because that injects the bias of the person making that determination) -- and no camera operator, since even where the camera is pointed could inject bias.

As for you that have gone Independent (Liberal), you cannot be a Conservative and be socially Liberal.
Of course you can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.

The whole purpose of conservatism is to help others, help themselves, not give them what they want or think they need.
That is not accurate.

The purpose of conservatism is to preserve. Fiscal conservatism, therefore, aims to preserve the current financial constructs. Social conservatism, therefore, aims to preserve the current social constructs.

The linkage of fiscal conservatism and social conservatism is a product of the Republican Party, not any necessary linkage between the two.

You call yourselves Independent and vote Liberal.
I vote for whichever candidate best supports my fiscally conservative and socially liberal perspective. I've voted Republicans into office in the past, and happily, most recently Paul Cellucci. I've also voted for Republicans for some local offices (though none of them won).

At your core you are Liberal:usa2:
How would you feel if someone told you that "at your core you are" selfish or bigoted because of your political perspectives? I think it is best if you refrain from statements like, "At your core you are ..." Doing so is inconsiderate -- dare I say incompassionate -- and it isn't your place to pronounce such things with regard to others. Take such stands with regard to yourself, for sure, but those other folks get to declare what they "are" or "are not" -- not you.

That's my opinion, and the opinion of much of the US population.
I assume you're talking about the 21% of the population that is now willing to identify themselves as Republicans. 79% versus 21%.... which to worry ourselves about. :)

The fact that Republicans were doing the most wrong? Back up your statement with facts, Bicker.
It is my opinion, and clearly not one you are in a position to refute with facts. (Besides, you left out the quotation marks about "wrong", so I wonder if you even understood the sentence that you made your reply to.) The reality is that the Republicans were in the White House and whoever is in the White House will always be the ones who are doing the most "wrong", because the others aren't in a position to do anything.

Utah is the most conservative State in the USA and probably the most compassionate.
Most considerate, I'll gladly agree with. Some very nice people in Utah. The Unitarian Universalist Association of America just had its annual convention in Salt Lake City, and our delegates commented just how nice and polite everyone way, and how hospitable they were. That doesn't have much to do with what we're discussing though.
 
Last edited:

1inxs

DTVUSA Member
#10
In my attempt to keep the post on message. :eyes: I don't think Government should be in the NEWS business. It seems like there is too much chance of a conflict of interest.
It still might be true that education leads people to more liberal (more "compassionate") perspectives, but I think that's a might big leap.
liberal does not equal compassionate

Of course you can be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.
Throughout history the Government has shown their lack of self control. You can't have it both ways. Conservatives believe in taking care of their own, not the Government.
Fiscal conservatism
In other words, a government does not have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer; the taxpayers' right not to be taxed oppressively takes precedence even over paying back debts a government may have imprudently undertaken.
Conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Social conservatism
A second meaning of the term social conservativism developed in the Nordic countries and continental Europe. There it refers to liberal conservatives supporting modern European welfare states.
Social conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welfare state
A model in which the state assumes primary responsibility for the welfare of its citizens. This responsibility in theory ought to be comprehensive, because all aspects of welfare are considered and universally applied to citizens as a "right".
Welfare state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The linkage of fiscal conservatism and social conservatism is a product of the Republican Party, not any necessary linkage between the two.
Your words taken from here Social conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia show us there are certain points within social conservatism not linked to fiscal, but overall it leads a Country down the same path. Though I don't know how you attribute this to Republicans?

How would you feel if someone told you that "at your core you are" selfish or bigoted because of your political perspectives? I think it is best if you refrain from statements like, "At your core you are ..." Doing so is inconsiderate -- dare I say incompassionate -- and it isn't your place to pronounce such things with regard to others. Take such stands with regard to yourself, for sure, but those other folks get to declare what they "are" or "are not" -- not you.
This sounds like the many of your other posts on the internet. When you feel uncomfortable with another's opinion you politely ask them to refrain from giving one. You ask how I would feel. I wouldn't feel, I would realize you didn't know me;)

I assume you're talking about the 21% of the population that is now willing to identify themselves as Republicans. 79% versus 21%.... which to worry ourselves about. :)
I think you have mistaken. I never mentioned Republicans. I was speaking of Conservatives. What did you pull these numbers out of? Here are the real facts. I would say you're a little out of phase on your facts.
PRINCETON, NJ -- Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004. The 21% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade, but is up from the 1990s.
?Conservatives? Are Single-Largest Ideological Group



It is my opinion, and clearly not one you are in a position to refute with facts. (Besides, you left out the quotation marks about "wrong", so I wonder if you even understood the sentence that you made your reply to.) The reality is that the Republicans were in the White House and whoever is in the White House will always be the ones who are doing the most "wrong", because the others aren't in a position to do anything.
And now you resort to correcting my grammar. Very mature:bowdown:

Most considerate, I'll gladly agree with. Some very nice people in Utah. The Unitarian Universalist Association of America just had its annual convention in Salt Lake City, and our delegates commented just how nice and polite everyone way, and how hospitable they were. That doesn't have much to do with what we're discussing though.
Utah ranks #2 in the USA for it's conservative values. It's relevance is in response to "They do tend to highlight injustice and inequity, which seems to make them anti-Republican, because Republican perspectives often lead to situations that foster sensationalistic accusations of lack of compassion; PBS is not immune from covering that which will attract viewers more."

What is the most conservative state in the USA? -- A Grupthink Topic
 

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#11
liberal does not equal compassionate
Nor does Utah. Even the links you posted talked this in qualified terms ("most") rather than absolute terms ("equals"). In reality, generalizations are generally general.

Throughout history the Government has shown their lack of self control.
Which has nothing to do with what you were replying to. :confused:

You can't have it both ways.
It isn't a matter of having anything "both ways". Rather it is a matter of being fiscally conservative while being socially liberal. You can have that; I know because I do.

Conservatives believe in taking care of their own, not the Government.
Fiscal conservatives believe that, while fiscal liberals perhaps don't, but "taking care of their own" is not specific to either conservatives or liberals with regard to social issues. Perhaps the biggest transgression that the Republican Party commits in regard to the "taking care of their own" is their attempts to change the laws putting government in the position of imposing its view on the personal concerns of everyone, such as with regard to who you can marry, when life begins, etc. In essence, you can say that the Republican Party is fiscally conservative but not socially conservative -- instead, in many ways, the Republican Party is socially reactionary, bordering on repressive, and/or intolerant.

This sounds like the many of your other posts on the internet. When you feel uncomfortable with another's opinion you politely ask them to refrain from giving one.
When someone posts something showing how little they know me, yes, I do correct them and advise them that they're better off not making such ridiculous pronouncements.

You ask how I would feel. I wouldn't feel, I would realize you didn't know me;)
Me too. I'm glad we are able to agree on something.

I think you have mistaken. I never mentioned Republicans. I was speaking of Conservatives.
"Conservatives" does not represent any identifiable group of people. As we've seen, we both are conservatives, even though we disagree with each other. I think you're wrong, and you think I'm wrong. You can choose to interpret the words in the links you provided in the manner that supports your perspective, while I can choose to interpret them in the manner that supports my perspective. (I'm still right, and you're still wrong, but that doesn't matter.)

So hiding behind a denial that you were talking about the Republicans only serves to obfuscate the situation. You're essentially saying nothing about anything, as a result.

What did you pull these numbers out of?
RHouseParty - View Single Post - Internal GOP Memo Attacks Bush Handling of Economy

You're welcome to present data that supports your contention. I'll think you're wrong, and you'll think I'm wrong. (I'm still right, and you're still wrong, but that doesn't matter.)

And now you resort to correcting my grammar. Very mature:bowdown:
Calm down. I didn't correct your grammar. I pointed out that I put the word "wrong" in quotes, indicating something other than what you chose to interpret my words as meaning. Again, you can always choose to interpret anything, even that which someone else posts, any way you want -- but that doesn't make doing so any less wrong.

Utah ranks #2 in the USA for it's conservative values.
As you choose to define "conservative".
 

1inxs

DTVUSA Member
#12
You're welcome to present data that supports your contention. I'll think you're wrong, and you'll think I'm wrong. (I'm still right, and you're still wrong, but that doesn't matter.)
hehehe! Maybe you forgot to click on the link? I included the Gallup poll results, not my post from another forum:boink: (you got to love these smilies)
?Conservatives? Are Single-Largest Ideological Group

I don't think you're wrong, I know. Some will find a way to spin facts to accommodate their point of view. But in reality there are no hanging chads in facts. Just like the good old USA, we are on opposite sides of the thought process.

It is my opinion, and clearly not one you are in a position to refute with facts.
Republican VS Democrat scandals
I did a Google of political scandals for the year 2004. Google displays 716,000 search options for Republican scandals in 2004.
republican scandals 2004 - Google Search

It shows 4,940,000 search options for the Democrat scandals of 2004.
democrat scandals 2004 - Google Search

I did the search for Republican scandals for year 2006 and Google displays 1,460,000 search options
democrat scandals 2004 - Google Search

It displays 12,800,000 search options for the Democrats
democrat scandals 2006 - Google Search
Spin away:cheers:

What can happen when someone watches too much network news or Government supported PBS news?
 

1inxs

DTVUSA Member
#13
Whatever came of this 2005
The man alleging the bias is Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, a Republican who heads the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. CPB provides federal funding to public broadcasters including the Public Broadcasting Service, which receives about 15 percent of its operating budget, or $48.5 million, from the corporation.
PBS has denied the charges of a liberal slant. But following the criticism, it moved this month to hire an ombudsman to review its programs and announced a revision of its editorial practices. Among them: a requirement that commentary and opinion be labeled as such.
story?





FOXNews.com - PBS Targeted for Perceived Political Agenda - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum
I don't believe you will see anything become of this. Since 2005, reports of the Fairness Doctrine have been on an increase. With the current political landscape it is unlikely liberal bias is going to be dealt any kind of blow. The current political view is there aren't enough liberal stations broadcasting their opinions.
Some Democratic legislators have expressed interest in reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine, although no one has introduced legislation to do so since 2005.
On October 22, 2008, Senator Jeff Bingaman (Democrat of New Mexico) told a conservative talk radio host in Albuquerque, New Mexico:
I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view. All I’m saying is that for many, many years we operated under a Fairness Doctrine in this country, and I think the country was well-served. I think the public discussion was at a higher level and more intelligent in those days than it has become since.
The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented.
Fairness Doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Aaron62

Contributor
Staff member
#14
Boy did I miss out on the conversation! I think you're right 1inxs, haven't found anything about Congress looking into further matters of "liberal slant" with PBS.
 

EscapeVelocity

Moderator, , Webmaster of EV's Antenna Blog
#15
Bill Moyers has a liberal agenda.

PBS programming skews Left, especially with its kids programming.

Its science also skews Left, because of its promoting Global Fearmongering and Darwinism especially.

Its political shows are pretty balanced when taken all together.
 

1inxs

DTVUSA Member
#16
Bill Moyers has a liberal agenda.

PBS programming skews Left, especially with its kids programming.

Its science also skews Left, because of its promoting Global Fearmongering and Darwinism especially.

Its political shows are pretty balanced when taken all together.
I'm with you 75%, maybe 80%. We pretty much have to take the news with a grain of salt to get the whole picture. Then like you say, it will balance out.
 

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#18
Perhaps this is really just a bias on the part of right-wingers against scientific knowledge:
An overwhelming majority of scientists say they have heard a lot (55%) or a little (30%) about claims that the Bush administration did not allow government scientists to report findings that contradicted administration policy. By contrast, just 10% of the public heard a lot about the claims and 34% heard a little; most say they have heard nothing at all about it.

About three-quarters of scientists (77%) believe the claims about the Bush administration are true, while just 6% say they are false. And virtually all of the scientists who say these claims are true – 71% of scientists overall – believe that these practices occurred more often during the Bush administration than during previous administrations.

Among the public, most of those who heard about the claims about the Bush administration and science say they are true, but this constitutes a relatively small proportion of the public overall (28%). And just 17% of the public says that, compared with previous administrations, the Bush administration more often prevented government scientists from reporting research findings that conflicted with the administration’s point of view.
Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media: Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
 

CptlA

DTVUSA Member
#20
Wow! Sounds like double talk if I ever heard it. How does this relate to PBS reporting?
because extreme right wingers sometimes have a habit of rejecting anything scientific if it's negative against religion or anything that doesn't further their cause. PBS news and some PBS shows aim to provide information based on scientific fact as opposed to some of the Fox news crap.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top