While I'm at it...
Okay, one more thing that bugged me today. I was reading an article about the unfortunate wimpiness displayed by PBS, as they succumbed to Bush Administration pressure (even though they claim it was an independent decision) and refused to air an episode of "Postcards from Buster" in which one of the children Buster visits has a mom, and her mom has a "friend", Gillian. Although it is not a big part of the episode, the children apparently have lesbian parents. In the article, they quote a Baptist minister from Kansas who states, in Jesus-like fashion, "Tolerance is a dangerous word." I think that might actually be in the New Testament. Somewhere in Luke, I think. I also love that a bunch of conservative groups have come out against "No Name-Calling Week", because it includes prevention of harassment of gays. I love those guys! Don't call people names, as long as they conform to your idea of what is acceptable. Yikes! What do we do with these people?!?!?!?
posted by Carolyn P @ 2/03/2005 11:49:00 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I hate to say it, but unless and until the left and the middle-left get a party and a platform together that puts them back in some semblance of power, these sorts of "incidents" are going to happen. In fact, they're going to happen more frequently, in new and different places, and they're going to pass with a minimal amount of attention or consternation. Welcome to the New World Order, kids.
Shame on PBS. Shame on them for knuckling under to the prevailing -- and horrifying -- political climate. You know Congress approves their budget, though. If we want a PBS that can think independently, we must protect them from those in Congress that would not only seek to control their editorial decisions, but determine whether they exist at all.
I'm still in the dark as to why the taxpayers subsidize PBS in the first place. I know we discussed this issue way back when (NPR being the main focus, I believe) but I'd like a refresher on the justification for publicly funded television.
The federal covernment funds many, many, many programs that are "in the public interest": educational, economic and community development, social services, etc. I think in the simplest terms, PBS and NPR are classified and funded by virtue of their being in the public interest. I suppose it's a separate question to ask whether the federal government vis a vis Congress has the power to legislate and appropriate these funds. I suppose strict consitutionalists might argue they don't... Pete? Fox? Any thoughts?
Post a Comment
<< Home