No, I am not. I’m saying any government funding of media is illiberal. No media should be funded by government, at all. It creates an environment that may, and always does, favour the government.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
And I am pointing out how you argument holds no weight when you look at what PBS airs or has brought us. Didn't think educational programming, Britcoms, and theatre/cinema was anti-liberal.
We could also talk about Public access too, but then your argument really blows up.
No, I'm not saying it has value. I am comparing the state run media of North Korea and Russia, which is where the argument works, to public broadcasting. They are two different beasts, and you act like it isn't.
Yet PBS has given us Mr. Rodgers, Sesame Street, Where In The World Is Carman Sandeigo, Ghost Writer, classic Doctor Who, Monty Python (at least for me), Red Dwarf (again, might just be me), Masterpiece Theater...
That's so awful odd anti-liberal stuff there. Me thinks you are acting in bad faith.
Comments
We could also talk about Public access too, but then your argument really blows up.
You’re talking about two comp different things. “PBS has value” is much different than “government should not fund media”.
Like, you’re not very good at this. At all.
You cannot argue for “free flow of information” and “informed electorate” and argue “we need government supported media”. They are antithetical
That's so awful odd anti-liberal stuff there. Me thinks you are acting in bad faith.
You really don’t get this, do you? CBC in Canada isn’t the same model as PBS in the US.
My opinion is PBS has value. PBS consciously detracts itself from politics and election/political coverage. They are not a news broadcaster.
You don’t know what you’re talking about, that’s obvious. You’ve never really thought this through.
https://www.npr.org/2025/04/15/nx-s1-5355896/doge-nlrb-elon-musk-spacex-security