Showing posts with label NPR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NPR. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Remember When Republicans Were Trying to 'Kill Big Bird'?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
the Most Interesting Bird in the World™

There I was, minding my own business, waiting for this Lipton Tea ad to finish loading so I could close it without crashing my computer again (long story!), when I noticed it was being pitched by... a Muppet. That's right. The same Muppets singing the praises of Toyotas night after night...these guys are grubbing for money everywhere! That does it! The gloves are off!

Back in 1995, in 2010 and once again during the presidential race of 2012, there were discussions about reducing or eliminating federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, as a "low hanging fruit" means of starting to cut the Brobdingnagian colossus that is federal spending. Each and every time, principled liberals (stop laughing!) managed to muster one essential, substantial argument against it: 'Republicans Hate Big Bird'.

'Republicans Hate Big Bird'. 'Republicans hate Sesame Street.'
'Republicans want to kill Big Bird'. 'Republicans Hate children'.
Yada, yada, yada.

The facts, that liberal minds are apparently too pure to look upon, suggest otherwise.

Federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting increased from $250 million in 1992 to $350 million in 2002. It has since increased to $450 million for fiscal year 2012. At the current rate of funding, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would take in between $5-6 billion from taxpayers over the next decade. While the figure is not huge in terms of the overall budget and spending crisis, it’s just a small piece of the entire pie that could be cut.

The taxpayers, you and I, have subsidized CPB/PBS/NPR and Big Bird to the tune of billions of dollars. That's "Billions" with a "B". We are poised to spend Billions more. The question, apart from whether a country so far in debt can afford it, is: Will cutting federal spending for public broadcasting "kill" Big Bird?

When pressed, PBS admits that federal funding is a small portion of their overall funding*. If they had to compete as a privately owned cable network, how would they fare? According to PBS themselves:

Over the course of a year, nearly 90% of all U.S. television households - and 217 million people - watch PBS. The demographic breakdown of PBS' full-day audience reflects the overall U.S. population with respect to race/ethnicity, education and income. (Nielsen NPower, 9/24/2012-9/22/2013

In a typical month, 104 million people watch their local PBS stations. (Nielsen NPower, 9/30/2013-10/27/2013)

PBS' primetime household audience is significantly larger than many commercial channels, including HBO (PBS' audience is 98% larger), Bravo (93%), TLC (93%), HGTV (74%), Discovery Channel (64%) and A&E (53%). In addition, PBS' primetime rating for news and public affairs programming is 119% higher than CNN’s primetime audience. (Nielsen NPower, 9/23/2013-3/30/2014)


So, their audience share is larger than quite a number of cable channels who manage to get along just fine without government subsidies...so why can't PBS?

And Big Bird??

Back in 2010, I wrote a piece called "Demagogues-R-Us", in which I referenced the illustrious Mr. Bird:
Back in 1995, when Republicans suggested a cut back in support for public television, the issue was (and is again) being couched as "Republicans hate Sesame Street", or "Republicans hate Big Bird". Never mind the fact that the Muppets, a division of the Disney empire**, have garnered huge financial rewards via licensing, toys, books, movies, clothing, DVDs, etc.*** In the demagogues' mind, moving Big Bird away from the public trough is to "hate" Big Bird.

In the wake of the Juan Williams debacle, the wisdom of public funding for such a slanted media outlet comes again to the forefront, and still the demagogues trot the Muppets out as if Republicans hate children.

Is Big Bird now part of the 1%?? Should we "Occupy Sesame Street"?

Sesame Workshop (formerly the Children's Television Workshop, or CTW) is the owner and sole proprietor of Sesame Street as well as television properties Dragon Tales, Sagwa, the Chinese Siamese Cat, The Electric Company, 3-2-1 Contact, Square One TV and Big Bag.

In December 2000, Sesame Workshop bought the rights to the Sesame Street Muppets for $180 million, from the then German owned Jim Henson Company. The rest of the Muppets were sold back to the Henson children for $78 million, who later sold the characters to Disney for an undisclosed price, but probably under $200 million. There's a reason why the Muppets sell for hundreds of millions of dollars: they're worth it. The Tickle me Elmo doll alone sold a million units in 1996, at around $30 a pop. (Up to $1,500 on the black market by Christmas). The Weekly Standard reports that in "...2011 Sesame Workshop took in $46.9 million in licensing income from Sesame Street."

Year in, year out, after thousands upon thousands of different products and commercial ventures, I think Big Bird is solvent enough to pay his own way. And if he wishes to light his cigars with $100 bills, he is perfectly within his rights. He just shouldn't expect the rest of America to pay for it.






* NPR Doesn't Hate You, Middle America. They Still want Your Money (video)

** At that time, I didn't know that there were Muppets and then there are Muppets!

*** some 100,000 different Sesame Street products licensed by CTW/Sesame Workshop.


Original art by John Cox. More at John Cox Art
Cross posted at LCR, Political Clown Parade




Tuesday, March 8, 2011

NPR Doesn't Hate You, Middle America. They Still want Your Money



Typical liberal schizophrenia: "Very little" of NPR's funding comes from the government.
But, if the government funding to NPR is cut off, Big Bird will die.

"NPR would survive without federal funding".
Show us, don't tell us.

H/T Legal Insurrection

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Simon Says Obama gets "Street Cred" for Busted Lip

NPR, (No Penetrating Reporting), is really outdoing themselves over the Obama Smash Mouth incident. They're saying it might give Obama some "street cred" in dealing with foreign policy. First, Scott Simon starts by sounding like he is mocking Obama (and rightly so) for the number of stitches for such a small injury:

I'm not sure that Joe Frazier needed 12 stitches after the Thrilla in Manila, though the White House stressed that a smaller filament was used, which increases the number of stitches, but leaves a smaller scar.


Then he launches into an Onionesque imagining:

I wonder if having a larger scar wouldn't actually fortify President Obama's profile, as he contends with Kim Jong Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Vladimir Putin. Imagine a president with a gnarly, vivid scar telling the rulers of China, "Nice country ya' got here. I'd hate to see something happen to it if you didn't stop foolin' around with the value of your currency. Know what I mean?"


Please tell me this guy is kidding, right? Street cred off an amateur sports injury? This guy Simon must be smoking the good stuff!

I would say that it is exactly the opposite. Obama gets hit in the mouth and at the first sign of a little pain, he goes home. The street cred would have come in, had he kept playing through the pain.

This reminded me of what I have formulated as the
Three Reasons A Guy Goes to the Hospital

1.) Uncontrollable bleeding. It makes a mess and it's like oil...if you don't have a certain amount in the crankcase, something bad is going to happen.

2.) Bones protruding through skin. This may be accompanied by #1. Unsightly and usually painful

3.) Unexplained loss of consciousness. Technically, this isn't a reason you go, but a reason why your buddies might take you.


That's it. Only three reasons. Poor Obama's busted lip wasn't one of them.

Street cred would have said, "Suck it up, Mr. President". Not. "Ooh! Do you think that will leave a mark?"

More at Say Anything
H/T memeorandum

Thursday, November 18, 2010

GOP to Vote on Defunding NPR

Image and video hosting by TinyPic


About frikken' time!

House Republicans announced Wednesday they plan to force a floor vote on defunding NPR in response to the firing of analyst Juan Williams last month.

House GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) and Rep. Doug Lamborn (Colo.) said that cutting funds to the publicly subsidized news organization was the winner of the conference's weekly "YouCut" contest, in which the public votes online on spending items they want eliminated.


Expect the squealing of stuck pigs decrying how Republicans are "Philistines" who hate the arts!

"When NPR executives made the decision to unfairly terminate Juan Williams and to then disparage him afterwards, the bias of their organization was exposed," the two Republicans said in a statement. "Make no mistake, it is not the role of government to tell news organizations how to operate. What is avoidable, however, is providing taxpayer funds to news organizations that promote a partisan point of view. Eliminating taxpayer funding for NPR is precisely the kind of commonsense cut that we have to begin making if we want to fundamentally alter the way business is conducted in Washington.”


L'affaire Williams is simply the straw that broke the camel's back. From "Morning Sedition" on, NPR has had a very leftward tilt. Let them compete on the marketplace or if they want to remain non-profit, let them rely on like minded contributors, not the taxpayer.

H/T memeorandum

Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Quote du jour

Williams is a liberal and a Democrat. It makes just as much (if not more) sense to presume that a fellow liberal was incensed over his firing as it does to presume it was a conservative or Republican.
I suppose it would be too much to ask that all the facts be in before npr draws their conclusions? Otherwise, it's just opinion, and then they'd need to fire themselves!

-Proof, on npr's alleged bomb threats

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Krauthammer on Juan Williams' Firing: Illogical and Hypocritical



More at Newsbusters

Juan Williams Hammers Last Nail Into NPR

Another schadenfreude moment:



Mr. Williams goes through a litany of things liberals have said on NPR without losing their jobs. As they say on Sesame Street, Can you say...double standard?

Kudos to Bill O’Reilly for giving him a forum to air his grievances.

Via American Glob

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

Friday, October 22, 2010

“I Always Thought the Right Wing Were the Ones That Were Inflexible, Intolerant”

Juan Williams on Good Morning America:


It's been said that a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. Perhaps we can consider this as Juan Williams' mugging?

Video via Say Anything

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

New NPR Logo

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

-dedicated to former employee Juan Williams

Cross posted at Left Coast Rebel

NPR: Thought Police

by Lady Cincinnatus


Ah. So, we now learn that Juan Williams has always been a thorn in the side of NPR. And according to NPR, it is expected that proper political analysts must, "give his own analysis – while carefully choosing his words on any given subject."

And if those words are not chosen carefully enough for p.c. muslims and NPR, then you'll be fired...or just fitted with an electro shock collar. The electro shock collars just haven't come in yet.

NPR also goes on to whine that, "NPR's values emphasize fact-based, objective journalism" except when the "fact-base" relates to the real unease of a modern plane boarding caused by 19 muslims who flew planes into buildings that sent almost 3,000 innocent men, women and children to a fiery, violent and hellish death all in the name of Allah (peace be upon him).




Cross posted at Lady Cincinnatus

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Bill O'Reilly Interviews the Fired Juan Williams



Liberals with the pretense of tolerance fire another liberal for appearing on Fox News expressing an opinion.

Video via Say Anything