I’m a fan of both, and UH HAS both, so this is good for me and for UH.
It’ll be interesting to see what the appeals courts and USSC do with this though, as it will surely be appealed.
Stay CLOSELY tuned.
5 Likes
It’s the right decision, but I’m afraid the damage has been done.
1 Like
Viva PBS…
3 Likes
Or maybe your hero is doing a lot of illegal things that need correcting. Maybe check out all the rulings by Republican and DJT appointed judges that have not gone his way.
3 Likes
What you and others keep writing DJT is my hero? Are you trying to be funny? That does not work Jason. You can do better than that. You of all people should know the “weight” of a one liner.
Do you understand how a case gets to be decided by a federal judge? Hint: it is litigated.
I doubt you even read the decision. It has nothing to do with whether taxpayer funds can be allocated in a certain way. It addresses the fact that Congress has the power to make those decisions and had, in fact, provided for funding, and that the president does not have the power to unilaterally take that funding away, particularly on the basis of their exercise of free speech.
If you disagree with this conclusion, then you agree that the next president can unilaterally defund literally any organization that he doesn’t like. That’s not how it works.
The decision doesn’t matter, though, because Congress has exercised its Constitutional power to rescind funding to the CPB. This is how it is done legally.
Crying about judges is so, so tired, and it’s the height of laziness.
5 Likes
I love PBS programming (Frontline, NOVA, and Nature among other things). Hope that keeps coming
1 Like
Yeah this was a wrong decision from the beginning when they tried shut them down.
A public, not private media company does not deserve our tax money if that same media outlet is overly biased.
What should happen to a “media source” that has been forced to dish out $240,000,000 for lying in order to boost stock price? Isn’t lying worse than bias?
1 Like
Because they are simpleton binary thinkers. It’s either/or. Black and white. Nothing in between.
Who decides if something is overly biased? Is there an objective test for that?
The difference there is that media source isn’t receiving taxpayer dollars to fund it, as far as I know. So it isn’t an apples to apples comparison.
1 Like
Though not perfect, I think https://mediabiasfactcheck.com does a reasonable
job of helping us to determine sites that are far left or far right biased. As well as giving
a credibility rating.
1 Like
NPR and the PBS news hour are both usually a little bit to the Left of center, but not so much so that they are unobjective.
On election nights, I usually watch PBS’ coverage, and I listen to NPR with some regularity during my hour plus long commutes each way, ESPECIALLY when there’s some big event in the news.
Why does a country need a biased public radio and TV? The government wastes a lot of my money and this is definitely not a big part of it but Hell.
2 Likes
It’s not super biased, as I said.
And it benefits THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON…which has both Houston’s PBS station, and its local NPR affiliate on campus.
If it’s good for UH…then it should be good for ALL of us!
1 Like
True, but a tax deduction for paying out settlements that will save it over $200MM in taxes, so in that sense the government is supporting their efforts.
People crying about how their tax dollars shouldn’t go toward PBS because they don’t agree with some of their programming literally makes me laugh. You’re not special - nobody wants their tax money to go to things the don’t like.
2 Likes
I really appreciate how you answer your questions sometimes
Side note, Catherine Bell was underrated as a hottie back in the day.
1 Like