NPR-PBS massively over-represents women, LGBTQ & fringe elements - ignoring bulk of nation

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

I agree with you. But then I'm the person that posted 3 reasons why women shouldn't have the vote last week.

All the funding to the arts should be cut off. Not only does much of this money fund degenerate projects but funding the arts is not really the business of government IMO. Personally, I enjoy art and music. Just don't think govt should pay for it.

That aside, I think PBS probably does do a good job with their choice of programs. They don't represent America; they cater to the people that donate money. And they air shows designed to get people to donate more money.

Not all of PBS is taxpayer funded. There are small donors that the telethon style music programs are aimed at. If you have ever watched one of their shows and paid attention to the credits; you will remember things like "funded in part by such and such foundation." They will often list 6 or 7 foundations. These philanthropic organizations are where their biggest money comes from. I guess the type of person that gives away money for a living tends to be a liberal.

They may get a lot of their funding from donations, but they get their license (which is THE MOST IMPORTANT FACT) form the FCC/federal government - on the condition they are to be non-bias - which they are failing miserably - which is why their charter/"bandwidth" should be revoked and sold off to someone else unless they live up to the national charter that was created to make NPR/PBS a "thing".

They could get 100% funding from donations, but they can still loose their station license b/c they aren't fulfilling their obligations. They could spend 1,000% of what it costs now (through donations) and still have their license pulled for failing to uphold their contractual obligations.

That is just something you CAN NOT get around, and no one has really thought it was a big enough issue to take on, so I guess i'll have to send out a form letter to conservative congressmen showing where they are not fulfilling their obligations to get their FCC charter. Add on top of that any of the studies that are completed showing discrimination against so much of the population and I think we will see a lot of popular support for not only pulling funding, but replacing their stations with a more balanced public radio programming system.

I can tell you that there would be more support now by the conservatives than just about any other time in history and it would make the Dems scream at the sky for years if they had to hear balanced perspectives!

You both are pissing in with wind...is there a song about that?

U think so, why? Care to elaborate, b/c I'm pretty sure I've reviewed charters that aren't being fulfilled.

Why do you think people don't care?

i think people are powerless without money and power behind them.

So are you basically saying that people who agree with what I said (or even have some other point of view they wish to see implemented in the topic of the OP) are powerless b/c they don't have $ or power to support/push their desired change? If that is the case I would say I agree with this in every other radio/TV network besides NPR/PBS, because they have a unique charter requirements that all the other independent networks's don't have.

Now it might be a problem to get a congressman to listen to their constituents (esp democrats), but I suspect there are many conservative politicians who are pretty tired of having to listen to FOX to get a conservative POV and would gladly welcome another venue to hear news the way it is supposed to be reported, non-bias and not opinions/editorials, and one that follows their founding charter.

"Attacking" NPR/PBS can only benefit conservatives in so many ways b/c it has a very large viewer/listening base and if they can reduce or give an alternative viewpoint to the political advocacy for progressiveness, it can only help the conservatives in some manner - possibly a lot, especially for "moderate" democrats or those on the fence.

There are a lot of old school democrats who listen to this network and I suspect they don't realize just how left wing the network has become (I know many who say NPR has no bias, hahahaha!!!!). If their coverage was more evenly distributed, those old school Dem's (again, often considered moderates - the extreme left would probably consider them Republicans, lol) might just realize there is more to the story and that the whole story has been hidden from them for the last 20+ years. This could lead to some convert's to, dare I say, Republican voters??

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Here you are talking about schools which are funded by a different program already. "this can seem like a waste of $$ but I'll tell you it is JUST as important as sports, if not more," Yes, in schools. The govt does not fund professional sports, it should not fund professional arts.

I'm not sure I'm following you or we are on a different "page".

I support arts and sports in school. They teach SO much that can't be learned in a classroom, especially sports IMO, lessons that carry over to so many aspects of a person's life.

Now if you are saying the gov has no place in funding "the arts" for people not in school (and I'm talking about K-12), I agree with this to a large extent but there may be some specific cases where my view might change, though I can't think of any.

I don't think the gov should pay for college sports or subsidize them (even stadiums and such) - that should be 100% on the University and not by raising tuition, but by raising ticket prices if they want a state of the art stadium (a new one every 20-30 years - uuggghhhh). I also feel bad for many college sports players who make nothing while playing while the university makes mega bucks on tickets and merchandise. So many players have zero chance of making it to the NFL but the amount of damage to their bodies lasts a life-time - and often the education they are supposedly getting is a total joke, with them being lied to by advisors or the players out-right cheating. It's a tough subject, but not one the gov needs to be involved in, unless it is passing legislation governing the player/school relationship.

I feel the same with the arts as with sports. I think in high school it is ridiculous to have multi-million dollar facilities (weight room, training room, not to even speak of the stadium itself) being paid for by raising property taxes, only to have it last ~15-25 years. These kids don't need professional grade facilities to learn the important aspects of playing on a team and all this extra $$ is turning HS sports into a business which I am 100% against.

Focus more on learning, good quality teachers, top quality curriculum and providing extra help for those who REALLY need it, not to those who are just lazy or won't put in the effort.

originally posted by: BoscoMoney
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Was that the sasquatch dude from youtube? I believe he had a sasquatch penis he defrosted one time. That guy is great!

You think this snip is a effing joke?!?



I'm tired of this kind of alt-right ridicule. I quit!

Compare your local NPR affiliate with a fantastic, authentic "people's radio"--KNON 89.3FM in Dallas, TX.

Basically, you can set up your own radio show if you get the signatures and financial donations to back it. You DJ the hour, and do whatever brings in the donations during pledge season.

It is hilarious to listen to the various subgroups interact with each other when they turn over the mike to the next crew.

One of my favorite shows is "Beyond Bows and Arrows." Produced by Native American notables (a lot of natives from OK and across the southwestern US are either working or attending college in Dallas. They give the run down of legal battles, where the best pow-wows will be held, talk about racism and especially play tribal music! Frequent guest are the DJs' many relatives, and friends from their tribe who are in town for the rodeo or the state fair, etc. They do a special segment for native Americans incarcerated at the Seagoville Federal Pen southeast of Dallas. BBAA has been on the air continuously since I first listened in, in the early 1980s. After them is I think the Ethiopian immigrant community. It's interesting to hear representatives of those two subcultures find common ground trying to use the studio equipment.

For years there was a polka channel on Sundays after church, advertising where the best polka dances were being held. Also a Jewish hour hosted by a local rabbi. A Grateful Dead hour. Several heavy metal programs. And "Lambda," which is the LGBTQetc news hour. They interviewed the new (lesbian) sheriff of Dallas county---basic local journalism and politics, by texans.

There's a Dallas music hour (several, in fact). They play different blues and jazz than you will hear anywhere else. basically if you can get people to donate in your name, you get to keep your time slot or move to a better one. It is market driven in a way NPR can never hope to be. And as far as I know, funded largely by contributions that determine content.

I wish that were the norm.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Youre nutters. That time they gave an hour to some maniac that had a book about meat and pet keeping being part of the patriarchal rape culture was brilliant programming.

BBHUUWWWAAAA!!!! I misread this the first time, lol! Yeah, this is exactly the type of programming that just seems a mockery of news media.

I recently heard one "expert" talk about the "newest" threat of "climate change" was the melting of glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica b/c the melt water is fresh water. This person said this effect is going to be one of the most damaging effects to the climate and oceans in the next 5-10 years b/c the fresh water is mixing with the salty ocean water, and in some cases, there are ice dams that build up and large amounts of fresh water are released when the dams break.

Well the amount of water they were talking about I compared to the yearly output of the top 10 rivers in the world vs the melt water (even with the large ice damns bursting) and the melt water was MUCH less than 1/2 of 1% of just those 10 rivers - so just those 10 rivers feed over 200x more fresh water than the melt water. The other 100's of rivers (and many other smaller creeks, streams, marshes, outlets. etc) that are well over 3-3.5x the volume of top 10 rivers, so we are looking at about 600-700:1 of fresh water from rivers : to : glacier/ice cap melt. They made this out to be one of the top ~4-5 things the world is facing due to climate change, so for every 600-700 gallons from the top 139 rivers (plus other outlets mentioned) there is 1 gallon of melt water. I'm sorry, but I just don't see the alarm even though the guest and host made it sound like it was every person's and government's job to take immediate action to stop this new flow of fresh water or the world would be ending in a few years.

Do these people who come on these shows, let alone the hosts, really believe that no one is going to check their figures? Do they take for granted that people just believe what they are told and are too lazy?


There needs to be some kind of "false news bounty" where when a legitimate news program (not opinion program) spouts lies such as this and people do the research to prove them wrong, they should have to pay a "truth and lying bounty/fine" - a bounty/reward to the people who find the provable real information, and a fine to (IDK who should get the fine $$, gov I guess for supporting better news stations) the station for reporting such trash.

The more I listen to the media, the more I see them as the enemy of the people in many cases, and I hate that Trump has said that, b/c I think he brings a lot of that on himself. But to the normal person, they truly are the enemy b/c they omit vital info in order to make you think what they want. Vile, evil, corrupt, malicious.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Look. I only had to read the first sentence of this entire thread to be in proper position to spout off like a crazy person. This kind of alt-right nut-baggery, you know what? This place is an echo chamber sir! We even ended up having poor poor bigfoot ridiculed for not being transgendered. WTF! I cant take it anymore!!

originally posted by: Graysen
Compare your local NPR affiliate with a fantastic, authentic "people's radio"--KNON 89.3FM in Dallas, TX.

Basically, you can set up your own radio show if you get the signatures and financial donations to back it. You DJ the hour, and do whatever brings in the donations during pledge season.

It is hilarious to listen to the various subgroups interact with each other when they turn over the mike to the next crew.

One of my favorite shows is "Beyond Bows and Arrows." Produced by Native American notables (a lot of natives from OK and across the southwestern US are either working or attending college in Dallas. They give the run down of legal battles, where the best pow-wows will be held, talk about racism and especially play tribal music! Frequent guest are the DJs' many relatives, and friends from their tribe who are in town for the rodeo or the state fair, etc. They do a special segment for native Americans incarcerated at the Seagoville Federal Pen southeast of Dallas. BBAA has been on the air continuously since I first listened in, in the early 1980s. After them is I think the Ethiopian immigrant community. It's interesting to hear representatives of those two subcultures find common ground trying to use the studio equipment.

For years there was a polka channel on Sundays after church, advertising where the best polka dances were being held. Also a Jewish hour hosted by a local rabbi. A Grateful Dead hour. Several heavy metal programs. And "Lambda," which is the LGBTQetc news hour. They interviewed the new (lesbian) sheriff of Dallas county---basic local journalism and politics, by texans.

There's a Dallas music hour (several, in fact). They play different blues and jazz than you will hear anywhere else. basically if you can get people to donate in your name, you get to keep your time slot or move to a better one. It is market driven in a way NPR can never hope to be. And as far as I know, funded largely by contributions that determine content.

I wish that were the norm.

That sounds AWESOME!

IDK if something like this would work here. I'm not far from Philly and I think the radio dial is pretty well "clogged" /spoken for and I suspect it would cost a pretty penny to get space on the airwaves.

What I am interested in is digital radio, like 89.1A and 89.1B which I think some stations have but I think it has to be on DIGITAL. One might be talk/news and the other might be music or similar programs all the time. Now that could be something interesting.

I also think that people can start their own radio station online but the problem is that people w/o internet can't access the program, and if you are driving, I guess you are SOL, unless you have a data plan.


Eitherway, this doesn't fix the issue that our tax money is being spent to push a far left marxist propaganda network which, where I live, only a relatively small percentage of people want to hear any of this, but if you move to Philly, then you have a lot more support for that kind of programming.

So what do you do when 96%+ of counties in the state vote red (and the VAST majority of land owners) are conservative. They don't want their $$ going to 95% of what is on NPR/PBS, but b/c Philly and Pittsburg are high population centers, they tend to control what is being broadcast across the state. It would be different if the cities had their own specialized broadcast, but they are shared across the state (and other states like MD, NJ and NY), so we have about 9-12 different broadcast locations (each taking up a different station dial..) across the state that push out this liberal vomit (well, it's not all that bad all the time, just struggled for a better descriptive word..) so that is a huge number of stations in the "red counties" that don't want to hear what is being broadcast in the cities.

We are left to deal with AM radio, which is either sports of FOX news, and I have the same feeling about FOX radio as I do NPR - can only take in small amounts - AND AM has SOOO many commercials, where NPR really has none, so they get that benefit as well.

Something is going to change, if an alternative "NPR" has to be created and demand equal funding, or NPR is going to have to change. There are some battles that are worth fighting and I think this is one of them, along with my other post on re-introducing things like Civics into school curriculum.

originally posted by: Namdru
Jeez you sound like my dad.

The fact of the matter is, women and queers like to work in media.

So if you don't like so many women and queers in NPR, why not go and get yourself a job in media and go to work for public broadcasting?

Oh, I almost forgot. You don't like women or queers.

You could also try not paying any taxes. That might make you feel better also.

It's interesting that you're the first person to post sounding disrespectful about those groups.

The point is that we are constantly told in the US that we need "proportional" representation everywhere, especially if someone comes in and thinks the place is unfair to some group or other.

For example, there are enormous campaigns to force little girls into STEM fields even if they may not want to be there because there is a perceived unfairness in how many women are in certain STEM fields, not all STEM fields (there are more women doctors now than men, for example), just a chosen few were men tend to be dominate.

But when you point out that there, in fact, some places where certain groups dominate or certain points of view are pushed all the time, people come out of the woodowork to tell you there is suddenly no problem, and they are often disrespectful about it. And in this case, NPR will tell you they are neutral.

NPR is a publicly funded station? I never knew that. You would never guess....huh I learned something today.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

yes, choose your poison wisely, I truly believe there is not one news organization that lacks bias. yes, NPR is far left, they have been there for years. I listen regularly and do find great programming on NPR. I hear the bias, I hear the smug liberals behind their microphones, how they view us as part of the problem that needs fixing. I get fed up with NPR, switch over to the far right screaming heads, its a balance thing, too much of any one thing is too much and NPR if that is all that you listen to will give you exactly what you want to hear. Amerika hating NPR, gotta love it....

a reply to: dug88

12 percent of NPR funding comes from the feds....

www.npr.org...

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Your wish has been granted.

While NPR does not receive any direct federal funding, it does receive a small number of competitive grants from CPB and federal agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. This funding amounts to approximately 2% of NPR's overall revenues
Source: Wikipedia

The bulk of their money comes from programming fees, foundation grants, grants from business entities, individual contributions (like mine) and sponsorships.

So you can rest in peace and find something else to listen to.

NPR has definitely expanded their broadcasting from a few hours a day to all day and into the night. Mostly local college radio stations broadcast NPR. Back in the 90's and early 2000's most of the broadcasts from these stations consisted of NPR news shows interlaced with classical music in the daytime to rhythm and blues and Jazz at night with no NPR broadcast. To tell you the truth, back then, I enjoyed the music platform.

The only LGBT programming I recall was a show called "All Things Considered". Not all of there shows were LGBT oriented. Many of the shows featured opinionated men and women.

Currently, the company is run mainly by men who are avid supporters of the Democratic Party. Over the last couple of decades NPR has evolved into all day news with guests who are female and/or LGBT oriented. It is a listener supported company.

I called the local college station and ask why they have evolved from a Jazz, Classical, Rhythm and Blues station to LGBT programming. The female station manager promptly hung up on me.

Is there a conspiracy to make college less attractive to non-gay males? Maybe so since the Democratic party is making a great effort to launch women and the LGBT crowd into the upper echelons of society when all they are doing is demonizing all people that have a college education.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

thanks for making this thread. I have called and emailed NPR multiple times. because of stories they report from a completely leftist perspective. it is really offensive to me because its called Public Radio, but it certainly doesnt represent the public as a whole. Ive even called during membership drives to tell them why I wont donate to them. I gave up and stopped listening.

originally posted by: Metallicus
A Federally funded media should never have a political bias. Sadly, it is well documented how biased NPR is despite the fact we ALL pay their operating expenses. I believe there should be laws that require unbiased fairness in any media that takes public funds.

Seems LGBTQ is just flavor of the week. They are starting to eat their own now anyways as what seems to be the natural progression of the left lately. It is funny that lesbians and trans are not getting a long as much as people would think.