Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 26 Jan 1995 14:46:29 CST |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Arthur Lizie Jr <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> the most frightening thing about the whole debate might be that the
> monetary issue is only $285 million. In other words, it costs each
> person in the US about $1 to support public broadcasting. Can we
> possibly even understand what a small portion of the budget that is?
> Probably not. Privatize=eliminate. PBS, NPR, NEA and the other
> "leftie"- funded organizations wouldn't even buy a decent high-tech
> plane. sorry to ramble, it just pissed me off.
As a comparison, a few years ago the Australian Broadcasting
Corporation ran an advertising campaign saying that the ABC cost 8c a
day per person and claiming that this was great value. This works
out at about $30 per person per year. In addition we have a separate
public channel, the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) which is a lot
cheaper than the ABC and takes some sponsorship, but nevertheless has
a substantial amount of government funding. Both channels show PBS
programs so we also would be affected by a reduction in their quality.
I wish you good luck in the campaign to continue the funding of
public broadcasting.
Maggie Exon
Dr Maggie Exon, Senior Lecturer, School of Information and Library
Studies, Curtin University of Technology, PO Box U1987, Perth, 6001,
Western Australia. Phone (09) 351 7215; Fax (09) 351 3152
email: [log in to unmask]
|
|
|