--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Coerced speech is a violation of > > the most fundamental principles of the United > States. > > It is ironic and revelatory that people who think > > preventing flag burning is an atrocity are fine > with NPR. > > So, are you saying that any entity that gets > government money for any > reason whatsoever is engaged in coerced speech if it > is produces anything > with any political content? I realize why that can > be problematic, but in > other areas you insist it isn't a problem at all and > an essential part of > free speech. > > Dan M.
No, I'm saying that when (as in the case of NPR) it pretty much forsakes all attempts at being neutral or apolitical and uses its government funding as a cloak to promote an agenda, then that's over the line. I'm not an absolutist on issues like this. NPR gets extensive government privileges that reach beyond just the funding, and they make its embrace of a wholesale agenda (often an anti-American one, even more often an anti-Israeli one) unacceptable. I recognize that there are organizations that get federal funding that engage in political speech - although this is something that should be viewed with _extreme_ caution - but NPR crosses way over the line.
Note that PBS, which is still liberally biased but not nearly as bad as NPR, doesn't draw my fire in the same way.
===== Gautam Mukunda
I don't see this in the breakdowns: NPR is a syndicated group of shows. If it had to compete against other shows on a level playing field it would fail. PBS radio stations broadcast the shows. Do any non-PBS stations air them?
PBS doesn't bid in frequency auctions, they don't pay business taxes. It was bootstrapped in 1967 with federal funds. I cannot find information on my local stations, but the Federal funding seems to be 11-15% for TV and 18% for radio. But that breakdown did not include money from CPB, another federal agency, and another 35% comes from state and local government.
That a slightly roundabout way of saying, would NPR survive without PBS? Can you say it's a private enterprise that can say what it wants, or a public charity that has a duty to be fair and balanced?
I cannot find the information, this is all from memory. A PA private college was being forced by the federal government (to do something. I want to say it had to do with collecting student information) which was a minor item, but the college asserted that it received no federal money, it shouldn't have to use it's resources to do work for the government. The government replied that since some students got federal grants and loans, it would force the college to comply. This went so far in the courts, with the college losing. Now the college only accepts students that have no federal ties.
It's a reach, but to say the federal government should have a hands off attitude with any institution it supports, yet do something like this... Wasn't there a case or a recent ruling that a college cannot refuse to have a ROTC branch?
Kevin T. - VRWC
Why am I watching the spirt awards?
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
