----------------------------Original message---------------------------- With a population of approximately 30 million Canada spends up to 1 billion per year on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - the public broadcaster for both radio and television with services in several languages (French, English, Inuit...) It makes for a very interesting comparison. >----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > > >On Mon, 30 Jan 1995 [log in to unmask] wrote: > >> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >> Again, Paul doesn't seem to be relating the matter to questions of film and >> television. I assume there are other political activism listserv's available >> for cheerleading and so forth. The fact is $285 million in tax dollars are >> being spent. Is this subsidy truly necessary? >> >> Larry Jarvik >> Center for the Study of Popular Culture >> > >Mr. Jarvik -- > >YES, thought should precede action. So how about a little thought on the >part of Congress before ramming a bill through the legislature during the >first month which would significantly cut funding for public broadcasting?? >Certainly there are those who will argue that the "public" in "public >broadcasting" ceases to be relevant, what with the influence of AT&T and >other corporate "underwriters." Perhaps the need of NPR and PBS to turn >to corporations and foundations for additional support is symptomatic of >a larger problem with regard to how we, as a nation, through public (as >well as private) policy decision making, have tended to value the role of >culture, education and the arts. >In response to your question, "Is this subsidy truly necessary?" many >factors need to be considered. The fact is, in the Big Picture, $285 >million is not an exorbitant amount of tax revenue to allocate for public >broadcasting when you consider that it comes out to roughly one dollar >per citizen. Add to that our total spending on the arts is about $14 per >person annually, compared with nations like Germany, Japan, France, or >Great Britian who spend anywhere from $25 to $70 per person annually, and it >becomes clear that we already spend SIGNIFICANTLY less than other nations on >various cultural forms. What could possibly be the incentive for cutting >it more? >While I'll grant you that channels such as American Movie Classics, TNN, >Discovery, A&E, and so forth provide decent quality programming (despite >particular problems some of us might have with the level of corporate >interest involved), these channels appear on cable and/or satellite TV. >Approximately 24% of the communities in the United States proper (i.e. as >a geographical entity as opposed to a penetrating Market) are not yet >wired for cable. These are mostly rural communities who depend on >"public" broadcasting to bring them anything which is even remotely >dissimilar from the commercial fare on traditional "broadcast" >television. Secondly, and I think this point is crucial, cable and/or >satellite requires, by definition, capital outlay from its consumers in >order to participate at all. Certain members of the public, because of >economic barriers, would be denied access to these forms of cultural >capital. The best part of this arrangement, of course, is that we (read: >those of us who can afford it, or perhaps those of us who skimp on the >groceries so we can afford it) get to pay for the privelege of being >targeted as potential customers of the national and multi-national >conglomerates, who determine to a significant extent >both the types of cultural forms which will be made available for >consumption, as well as defining the limits or boundaries of "legitimate" >public discourse. >Lastly (although there is certainly PLENTY more to discuss), as >subscribers to these lists I can assume that we are all either scholars >of media forms, or at least individuals with something more than a >passing interest in the relation of mediated forms of cultural expression >to the larger social mileu. We have a stake, whether we like it or not, >in the fate of public broadcasting. Therefore, I would argue that it is >perfectly legitimate to post a call-to-action to this list, especially in >light of what I see as Congress' irresponsible knee-jerk reaction. >Forcing PBS and NPR to become even more accountable to private capital >interests than they already are by having to compete for market share will >mean the death of public broadcasting as we know it. > >And I for one shall not have the blood of Big Bird on MY hands! > >Edward B Hargrove >Department of Curriculum & Instruction >University of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign > >"Listen, I've said enough. You do what you want with this thing. There's >just one more thing, though. This town needs this little measley >one-horse institution if only so that people can have some place to go >without crawlin' to Potter!" > -James Stewart as George Bailey in "It's A Wonderful Life" > [as though I really needed to cite that one] > >