PBS & NPR - Liberal Bias? 80% can't be wrong.

http://tv.msn.com/tv/article.aspx?news=195508&GT1=6703

This is an article about PBS new chief - but is relevant due to the study mentioned inside.


PBS Under Seige
With partisan politics running the show, public television is under siege
By Frazier Moore
Associated Press

Is there anyone who doesn't have a beef with public television? Me, I've never quite recovered from when PBS was airing John Tesh music specials nearly a decade ago.

On the other hand, neither Tesh's symphonic treacle nor any of my other PBS peeves has ever caused me to doubt the value of public television, even in the 500-channel TV universe, as an indispensable cultural resource.

What viewer would? Why would anyone single out one or two PBS shows they object to as justification for wrecking the whole institution?

And why would taxpayers get riled that their hard-earned money helps support it ?- when the federal tax bite for public TV (public radio, too) for the average American is about $1.30 a year?

The truth is, most people wouldn't. Whatever their beefs, the majority of viewers apparently like what they see on PBS. One clue: Recent efforts by a House committee to slash funds for public broadcasting were met with a citizen outcry and, last week, the House by a 284-140 vote restored $100 million.

Indeed, 80 percent of U.S. adults say they have a favorable impression of PBS and National Public Radio, according to surveys commissioned by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the private agency responsible for distributing federal funds to public media outlets. Nearly half those respondents say the $1.30 annual tab is "too little."

The same two polls suggest that CPB Chairman Kenneth Tomlinson has little popular support in his crusade to fix what he characterizes as public broadcasting's liberal slant.

"The studies demonstrate that the majority of the U.S. adult population does not believe that the news and information programming on public broadcasting is biased," CPB's own Web site declares. "Approximately one-in-five detect a liberal bias and approximately one-in-10 detect a conservative bias."

Because public broadcasting is threatened with change. Under Tomlinson, CPB is getting an extreme makeover, to look more pleasing to the far right and the Bush administration.

Never mind that CPB (which provides about 15 percent of public broadcasting's revenue) is meant to be a buffer protecting programmers from political intrusion. Tomlinson, a Republican appointee, has thrown the doors wide open.

A few months ago, he tapped a White House staffer to write guidelines for CPB's newly created ombudsmen office, according to The New York Times, which also reported that last year two GOP lobbyists (one of them retained by Tomlinson, the other by his Republican predecessor) were paid $15,000 through an arrangement withheld from the CPB board. An inquiry by CPB's inspector general is under way.

Meanwhile, CPB last week named as its new president and chief executive Patricia Harrison. Tomlinson's top choice, she was President Bush's assistant secretary of state for educational and cultural affairs, and a past co-chairwoman of the Republican National Committee.

But there's more to Tomlinson's balancing act, which has largely targeted one man, Bill Moyers, and the weekly public-affairs show, "Now," from which he retired six months ago.

In an effort to gather ammunition, Tomlinson, unbenownst to the CPB board last year, paid a consultant long associated with conservative causes $14,170 to monitor "Now" and tag its guests' political leanings: conservative or liberal, pro-Bush or anti-Bush.

Last week, 16 senators sent a letter urging Bush to fire Tomlinson because he "seriously undermines the credibility" of public broadcasting.

But right-wing zealots are quick to back his campaign, deploying the same familiar code they use to indict the mainstream media overall.

Public broadcasting? "A perk for coastal elites," said American Spectator Executive Editor George Neumayr last week on PBS (which moments earlier he had blasted as "a liberal monopoly").

A bit less extreme was Peggy Noonan in a recent online column for The Wall Street Journal. She conceded that PBS (despite being "the TV funhouse of the Democratic Party") at its best "does the kind of work that no other network in America does or will do."

Still, it needs "rules and conditions," Noonan cautioned, proposing in part that it spurn dramatic works less than 50 years old (thus assuring no public TV revival of "Angels in America") and that it put the kibosh on current affairs, "with which PBS, alas, cannot be trusted."

"Nobody needs another Bill Moyers show," wrote Noonan, clearly speaking for officials who resent being held accountable by "Now" and are lashing back.

The result, in Moyers' words, "isn't a duel between Kenneth Tomlinson and Bill Moyers. This is a duel between government and journalism."

Of course, defending "Now" and all the rest of public broadcasting from government interference should be the mission of CPB ?- not running interference for the right wing. But thanks to Tomlinson and those he serves, that's where balance is really under siege.