Intelligence Report

Intelligence Report

Contributors: Lyric Wallwork Winik and Mark Naymik
Publication Date: 05/04/2008

YOUR MONEY
Should Your Tax Money Support PBS?

In the next few months, Congress will decide whether to continue supporting Big Bird—or give him the ax. Public broadcasting gets around $400 million annually from the U.S. government, which covers about 15% of local station budgets. (Most shows are funded primarily by producers, viewer donations, private foundations and corporations.) Now the Bush Administration has proposed cutting funding by half.

Those who agree with this decrease say that, with the availability of high-quality cable-TV shows, public TV is unnecessary. Its average nightly audience is 2.1 million—around half of the viewership of pro wrestling. Responds Eric Boehlert, senior fellow at Media Matters, a nonprofit media watchdog group: “PBS is a success story for the government, ranking up there with the national parks. Any cuts would hurt the millions of people who can’t or won’t pay for cable.” Should tax dollars support PBS? Vote at Parade.com


NEWSMAKERS
JFK: The Inside Story
Ted Sorensen, President John F. Kennedy’s closest adviser and famed speechwriter, maintains that JFK was a “moral President, regardless of his private misconduct.” In his memoir, Counselor, to be published this month, Sorensen describes the 10 years he spent as JFK’s confidant and acknowledges—for the first time—the President’s infidelities. Still active in politics, Sorensen, 79, spoke with PARADE about JFK’s legacy and today’s Presidential race.  


Do JFK’s personal failings lessen his legacy?

No. Just think about his principal achievements: resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis, the greatest threat to the survival of the world in history, without firing a shot; turning the country’s direction on its treatment of black citizens completely around; launching the first serious effort to explore space; the Peace Corps and so on. None of his achievements is diminished in the slightest by the speculation about his personal life.

How do you think JFK’s personal life managed to escape scrutiny by the press?
He was so discreet in his selection of friends and locale that there wasn’t much information for the press to write about. He was a man who knew how to keep secrets, especially personal secrets, and so was I. Kennedy and the press focused on the economy, foreign policy and governance. The candidates didn’t attack one another on personal issues, and the press in those days didn’t investigate personal issues.

You’ve publicly endorsed Barack Obama and made it clear that you value a candidate’s judgment above all else. So, what kind of experience do you think an effective President needs to have?

Experience that is required to make decisions and answer tough questions under pressure. Kennedy had some of that from the war and from almost four years on the road testing Presidential waters. People say he had no executive experience, but I’ll tell you that running a national campaign takes executive experience. It has a lot of similarities to running the country in terms of the kinds of people you have to win over and the ones you have to negotiate with, the kinds of people you have to stare down or run over. 

Has the relationship between Presidents and speechwriters changed since you held that job?  

Recent White Houses have had speechwriting departments of six to nine people, some of whom had met the President and some who barely knew him. It is very different from my first few years with JFK. I went to every state with him. Not only did I help him with speeches but with the politics, press relations, and hotel and plane reservations. That forges a personal bond between the candidate and the writer.

Is there a line or two from a JFK speech that deserves attention today?

At the 100th anniversary for the University of Washington, the President said something to the effect that “the United States is only 6% of the world’s population, and we have no right to impose our views or even system of government on the other 94%.”
Add Comment | View All Comments Total: 296
PBS is NOT liberal!
by Richard posted:09/16/2008 08:14:PM

One reason expressed by many who oppose public funding of PBS is that it is politically biased, specifically liberal. I strongly disagree with that assessment.

Here is my take on why people on the right of the political spectrum have that feeling. When one side (in this case, the right) lives in a fantasy world, and it hears information that would jar it out of that world, it would naturally blame the neutral reporter/commentator/analyst of bias.

When I wrote “fantasy world” above, I was not really off-base. See, for example, the survey undertaken by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks in Sep.-Oct. 2004. It found that a large percentage of supporters of President Bush had mistaken perceptions of many of the relevant facts in the 2004 election. It was presumably because of this erroneous knowledge that they supported him. PBS and others who would inform the public of the facts are simply rejected out-of-hand. Yes, everyone is entitled to his own opinions; but not his own FACTS.

PIPA’s own Web site doesn’t have this report anymore, but see these Web sites, among others:

http://badgerherald.com/weblogs/election/archives/2004/10/bush_supporters_miss.php

http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/2004/10/study-verifies-bush-supporters-poorly.html

http://volokh.com/posts/1098494107.shtml

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=7076

(Sorry for the delay in posting this; actually, I first posted it back on May 16, but it "didn't take.")

Richard H, Milwaukee

REPLY TO THIS | Number of replies:0
PBS Liberal slant
by John posted:06/22/2008 01:17:PM

I listen to PBS often because of the format, lack of commercials, and in depth treatment of subjects. However PBS is not balanced reporting given its heavy liberal slant. I am a conservative and often take issue with the bias I'm hearing. Sometimes I just have to switch to another station because, while informative about the views of the "other side" it just appals me that govenrnment money is spent on this biased view.  If the government would demand a balanced view then I might be in favor of funding to keep commercials and big money from controlling the content. As it is it seems big money is already having an effect.

REPLY TO THIS | Number of replies:1
RE: by ted PBS liberal bia...
PBS liberal bias assertion
posted:08/02/2008 08:11:PM

There may be natural inclination for persons to perceive a media bias in news analysis when they disagree with the content of the analysis. Those who see a liberal bias from PBS may  have such a strong opposite bias that they would even see a totally neutral analysis as liberally biased. In addition any reporting that is critical of a political administration's actions will also evoke cries of political bias from those supporting the administration. I would hope all citizens would happily support all media outlets, especially PBS, who view all government,  political, and business actions critically and actively voice those criticisms.

PBS
by William posted:06/08/2008 09:59:AM

Funding of PBS is simply not authorized by the Constitution, so no matter whether we think it's good or bad, it must be stopped.  Any member of Congress who votes to continue funding of PBS is acting in violation of the law and his oath. 

As a practical matter, there is no justification for government funding of any television network.  There are a huge array of private channels that do anything and everything that PBS might be expected to do. 

REPLY TO THIS | Number of replies:5
RE: by Maria pbs
pbs
posted:08/07/2008 10:52:AM

As a practical matter, the government has a vested interest in nurturing the ethics, and the public and personal standards of its citizens. There is the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. The numbers of incarcerated people in our country, the quality of life in our low and no-income communities, the desire of all citizens to remain informed, inspired and entertained without the barrage of poor quality commercial media, and indicate the need for increased support for public broadcasting from many corners. All of us, private citizens, local, state and federal government agencies are stakeholders in the power and the thinking and working arms of public media. It is time to consider the spirit of many of our laws. Besides, I for one, wish my government to reward and support excellence in technology, communication, and innovation!

RE: by ted commercial trip...
commercial tripe
posted:08/02/2008 08:20:PM

If there needs to be a "constitutional basis" for funding PBS, there are probably legal issues involving the deba*****t of the national portions of the electromagnetic spectrum with the tripe and mind rotting presentations blissfully shown on commercial TV. There are persons who won't and don't have cable or satellite services and watch commercial only sufficiently to confirm how vacuous many of the programs are. The few worthwhile commercial programs need to be augmented by the PBS offerings so  thoughtful persons can watch programs that enlighten as well as entertain.

RE: by John constitutional ...
constitutional hogwash
posted:06/29/2008 03:16:PM

Oh, tut, tut. The Constitution doesn't address it one way or another. PBS provides a source of programming that may not be commercially viable but still has value to our culture. In short, some things are not considered valuable commercial commodities like PBS and thus are not offered for sale. This does not compromise the inherent value of PBS programming.

 

RE: by Jonathan PBS and the U.S...
PBS and the U.S. Constitution
posted:06/11/2008 12:22:PM

William, on your claim that the U.S. Constitution doesn't authorize funding a little for some of PBS' expenses:  As an experienced constitutional lawyer, I'll use technical legal term for your claim: Total Bulls**t. You must be reading Libertarian screeds. Cite some authority for your claim. In fact, nothing in (or not in) the U.S. Constitution bars funding of PBS.

RE: by JD Completely agre...
Completely agree!
posted:06/10/2008 10:58:AM

You said it well.

Add Comment | View All Comments Total: 296
Share
delicious Reddit
Stumble It!
MOST POPULAR
1

Kate Winslet

The actress opens up about home life and working with Leo

2

Pop Culture in '08

Take our poll and enter to win a trip to Hollywood!

3

Something for Everyone

Looking for that perfect gift? We've got you covered

4

Stars of Twilight

How the young stars deal with the phenomenon

5

Caring For a Loved One

A tragic injury altered their marriage—but not their love