POV: Now Is Not the Time to Cut Funding for Public Broadcasting

Photo courtesy of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting

President Trump’s proposed budget threatens to pull the plug on federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the major funder of Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) programming and National Public Radio (NPR) and the supporter of 350 local member public television stations. This proposed cut will do very little to fix the US budget deficit, but it will contribute mightily to the shortage of reliable public information available to citizens at a time when they need it most.

Federal funds provide approximately 15 percent of public television stations’ overall funding, or $435 million a year, which amounts to about $1.35 per citizen per year. To put it in perspective, the US government spends about the same amount per year ($437 million in 2015) on US military bands.

The CPB is a unique public-private partnership that has contributed greatly to enriching the intellectual, cultural, and ethical lives of millions of Americans through its support of PBS programming, among other things. Now is not the time to cut its federal funding.

Some argue that capitalist forces are sufficient to provide a robust array of news. While free markets generally maximize utility for all, there are some products and services where the free market model does not make sense.

The rationale is clear. First, the profit motive applied to things like military action is dangerous—we don’t want to encourage use of this “product” for profit, yet we might need to use it in ways and at times that would not make sense economically. There are some products and services, however, that fall into a gray area between inherently governmental and those that are appropriately pure free-market, profit-driven enterprises. One important such sphere is information provided by the news media.

We do not need, nor would we want, a single state-run news media. But we need to make room for more robust government-supported media options.

A free and democratic society can remain so only if the citizenry is informed—accurately and without bias—about current events and public policy. It’s also clear that we are failing in that regard. One major contributing factor to this problem is precisely because the news media is a private sector, profit-driven enterprise. We therefore get news that is the cheapest and easiest to produce and the most entertaining (i.e., profitable) to watch. In an age of alternative facts, we do not necessarily get news that is informative, substantive, or even accurate.

This is clear to anyone who watches the news (whether on TV, radio, social media, or the internet). We get breaking news with sensationalism and fluff. We usually get hired guns in the form of spokespersons for each side spouting 30 seconds of canned talking points, then a few minutes of indignant shouting. Many news outlets have become the equivalent of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., complete with predictable villains and heroes. Contrast that with the philosophy of Jim Lehrer, who cohosted PBS’s NewsHour for many years: “I am not in the entertainment business.”

Why do we get info-lite? Because it costs money to do in-depth analysis and to hire real experts who can provide thorough reporting. And it is more entertaining to watch people hurl insults and verbal jabs at one another than it is to watch an in-depth, balanced segment.

But canned talking points and verbal jabs aren’t necessarily good for an informed citizenry and for democracy. In fact, the news media, driven by the desire to increase profits, actively encourages and creates dissension by focusing entirely on what divides us rather than what unites us.

Some claim that government-subsidized news programming would constitute government propaganda. But there is a world of difference between autocratic regimes—like North Korea, where citizens can receive only one state-run radio channel and one state-run newspaper—and democratic regimes that promote government-funded contributions to public broadcasting to provide news in a competitive marketplace. In fact, CPB-supported public broadcasting programs received a record 54 nominations at the News and Documentary Emmy Awards in 2016.

It is true that some people might prefer cheap, empty entertainment to worthwhile education, just as some people prefer cheap, empty calories to sound nutrition. But we don’t disband public schools and just send kids to the circus and feed them French fries and donuts every day. Nor should we give up on attempts to convey real news to citizens.

Earlier this month, thankfully, Congress pushed back against Trump’s proposed cuts by passing a comprehensive budget bill that includes funding for CPB through September 2019. Nonetheless, Trump’s misguided zeal to cut all federal funding for public broadcasting erroneously denigrates any government-funded activity as somehow socialistic or contra free markets. It also overlooks America’s historic commitment to support infrastructure that provides a public good. And it ironically poses one of the more serious threats to our ability to remain a free, democratic, informed, and yes, capitalist, nation.

John D. Woodward, Jr., is a Pardee School of Global Studies and College of Arts & Sciences professor of the practice of international relations, a retired CIA officer, and a former Department of Defense official. He can be reached at jdwjr@bu.edu.

“POV” is an opinion page that provides timely commentaries from students, faculty, and staff on a variety of issues: on-campus, local, state, national, or international. Anyone interested in submitting a piece, which should be about 700 words long, should contact Rich Barlow at barlowr@bu.edu. BU Today reserves the right to reject or edit submissions. The views expressed are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent the views of Boston University.