I offer Fred Rogers testifying before the senate subcommittee on communications as a refresher on why we must continue to fund PBS and NPR.

https://youtu.be/fKy7ljRr0AA?si=Wei_cwJcF56rXl_w

The person on the other end of that call is thin skinned and likely not hugged much as a child. Sad.

If PBS and NPR had shows of the caliber of Mr. Rogers then perhaps a strong case could be made continuing that funding.

Instead they now focus on messages like this: https://x.com/NPR/status/1491520306036543496

Sell the spectrum and let them compete fairly in the marketplace of ideas. Half the country should not be forced to fund broadcasting they do not agree with.

These stations and networks still have about 80% of their previous funding, so nothing is really going to get shut down right away.

Also, in many cases the TV and radio spectrums in markets these stations are in are not saturated to the point where new licensees are prevented from operating just because of saturation.

So this is really just some group asking for public broadcasting to be punished even more.

Yeap. The one-word description is "censorship."

in a properly functioning government old unused services must depart for new uses. The NPR and PBS you knew is gone - its completely different people, different management. if people want the idea it represented they have to go elsewhere to find it anyways.

What do you mean? The local shows and personalities on the local community-college-run station are still the same ones I've known my whole life.