Here's another voice of reason from Kim Elliott, his comments in italics, who predicts that the hardest hit stations would be rural, and would open the band to more religious broadcasting.
Will US noncommercial FM frequencies cast out BBC World Service and bring in the gloryland chorus? Posted: 13 Feb 2011 Print Send a link City Beat (Cincinnati), 31 Jan 2011, Ben L. Kaufman: "NPR and our local public news station, WVXU (91.7 FM), get a small but important part of their annual budgets from Congress. Rightwingers want to cut or end federal funding because politically neutral NPR isn’t the GOP’s Fox News. It’s another reason to support WVXU and other public radio stations with cash and supportive messages to House members, senators and the White House. Meanwhile, Brits offer a timely lesson of what happens when a conservative government pleads poverty and decides to slash its most famous and reliable modern export, the BBC World Service (heard here at night on WVXU). Unlike its domestic services, BBC’s World Service is funded by the Foreign Office. Despite taking the Queen’s shilling, it rarely danced the Queen’s tune; BBC has a sterling reputation for neutrality and accuracy, especially where uncensored news media do not exist. So far, cuts haven’t targeted English-language broadcasts to North America. Rather, BBC’s decision to close some foreign language broadcasts and fire of hundreds of linguists will impoverish the information available to listeners everywhere." Mr. Kaufman mentioned both NPR and BBC World Service, but did not completely make the connection between the two. (BBCWS is actually distributed by Public Radio International, but to stations that are mostly NPR affiliates.) If the Republicans who want to "zero out" the budget for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting succeed, public radio stations in non-urban areas will lose a large part of their funding. Not only will they no longer be able to purchase the rights to relay BBC World Service, they might have to go off the air. Because their frequencies are between 88 and 92 MHz, their licenses must be sold or transferred to other non-commercial entities. They would likely become religious radio stations, which almost certainly will not carry BBC. In addition to their theology, or as part of it, these stations would advocate for socially conservative causes. This gives Congressional Republicans another incentive to eliminate funding for public broadcasting. On Feb 13, 2011, at 1:50 PM, Scott Royall wrote: > A voice of reason. > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Buch > Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 11:29 > To: Shortwave programming discussion; Internet radio discussion > Cc: Internet radio discussion > Subject: Re: [Swprograms] [Internetradio] [dxld] Defunding public broadcasting > > As one who has worked as a volunteer for over 10 years at NPR-afiliated > stations in Maryland and Florida, I have been able to see first hand how > important the Federal $$$ are to capital improvements. But the Federal $$$s > make up only about 15% of the operating budgets of the stations I have been > associated with. It will not be the end of the world if the legislation > passes. > > It might even be beneficial to have public broadcasting stop sucking on the > federal teet. The government can use their puppet-master power to put > pressure on NPR to conform to the party line. When the network deviates off > the track, the threat of federal fund withdrawal causes the network to do a > mid-course correction. Pacifica does a good, albeit biased, job of public > broadcasting with no federal support. Their financial supporters contribute > to their operations because they believe the message is worthy of their > support. > > Many folks refuse to contribute to their NPR-affiliated station because they > claim that their tax dollars already pay for public radio and they do not > feel obligated to pay twice. It is a reasonable argument that will be > blunted if this legislation passes. So it might even be beneficial to the > long-term health of public broadcasting to make the system more efficient and > responsive to the public by cutting out government funding. > > Joe Buch > > --- On Sun, 2/13/11, Richard Cuff <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Richard Cuff <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Internetradio] [Swprograms] [dxld] Defunding public broadcasting > To: "Shortwave programming discussion" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Internet radio discussion" <[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, February 13, 2011, 2:44 AM > > Many public stations have edited their websites to mention this. > > There have been threats before, I believe Newt Gingrich led the last > unsuccessful defunding attempt in the second half of President > Clinton's first term. > > Speaking as a fan of Public Radio (and a longtime member of WHYY in > Philadelphia) I am also hopeful this effort will see a similar fate, > since, given the variety of the USA's public radio segment now broadly > enjoyable via the Internet, Public Radio remains an important > component of my own listening. I have already contacted my > congressman's office. > > I would also suggest personalizing any message or communication, > stating how important the public radio station in *your* district is. > Positioning your member of Congress as an enemy of station XXXX, I > believe, helps to bring the threat to a very visible local level. > > Richard C > > > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:42 PM, Glenn Hauser <[email protected]> wrote: > > More about this from the manager of KGOU: > > > > http://kgou.org/index.php?manager-rsquo-s-desk > > > > --- On Sat, 2/12/11, Glenn Hauser <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> IMPORTANT LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: > >> > >> IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS, the House of Representatives will > >> take action on a bill that provides continued funding for > >> government operations. Under this measure, large funding > >> cuts have been proposed, **including the likely elimination > >> of federal funding for public broadcasting**. > >> > >> This is on an extremely fast timeline and it's critical > >> that your representative hear from you. The House > >> switchboard is (202) 224-3121 or (202) 225-3121 and it is > >> operational 24/7, so truly, you can call ANYTIME and it > >> won't take but a minute of your time!! Additional > >> information is available at http://www.170millionamericans.org > >> > >> We appreciate your continuing interest in and support of > >> WUOT Public Radio (WUOT mailing list Feb 12 via DXLD) > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > > Need Mail bonding? > > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. > > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091 > > _______________________________________________ > > Swprograms mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms > > > > To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to > > [email protected]?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL > > shown above. > > > > > > > > -- > Richard Cuff / Allentown, PA USA > > International broadcasting / shortwave blog: > http://www.intlradio.blogspot.com > > _______________________________________________ > Internetradio mailing list > [email protected] > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/internetradio > > To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to > [email protected]?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL > shown above. > > > > Need Mail bonding? > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. > _______________________________________________ > Swprograms mailing list > [email protected] > http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms > > To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to > [email protected]?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL > shown above. >
_______________________________________________ Swprograms mailing list [email protected] http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to [email protected]?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.
