I just checked the local public radio website and got the following number
"Nearly 90% of Houston Public Radio's annual operating budget comes from the local community"
60% comes from individual listeners, a lot comes from local companies. I don't think Houston has a budget for public radio. If you think of the national non-governmental support the radio station could get, Federal money has to be less than 10%. 5% might be a decent guess.
So, even at a local level, federal government money is only a small fraction of the income of public radio.
Dan M.
KOSU in Oklahoma says it gets 13%. Does that count the satellites in orbit or the ground equipment that can be federally funded for up to 75%? Does it include the cost of the airwaves and broadcasting license? What about the savings in using student workers and not having to compete for market share?
I do want to say, I like my local public radio and the ones I pick up on the drive between here and my hometown. I would be against shutting them down or restricting their content. But to listen to them and think they are moderate? I heard one story about wind power that Erik would have blown apart. I wouldn't have know how bad the information being presented was if I hadn't read it here on the list.
There was an editorial I read, it may have been on here, about science reporting. How many times have you saw, heard or read a general information article that was in your field and there is enough misinformation that you wondered who this idiot is? Probably not a deliberate effort, but still. Yet these same reporters talk about Israel or outsourcing and you swallow it whole?
Kevin T. - VRWC
Yeah, my bike is fixed! Boo, it's going to be 40 F tomorrow.
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
