Isn't the whole idea of public broadcasting that it doesn't need to be commercial, that it can go for quality of entertainment value?
this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
984 points (99.5% liked)
196
17071 readers
1484 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts require verification from the mods first
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Defund an evil foreign billionaire dork.
That 1% number is a bit misleading. Federal funding isn't paid to NPR directly and instead goes to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The CPB gives money to non-profit radio/tv stations and those stations pay NPR, PRI, APM, etc for content. Without the CPB, tons of radio stations, mostly rural, couldn't afford to exist and wouldn't be paying NPR anything.
it has always been so weird to me that national public media isnt 100% funded by the government. i honestly didnt realize that the funding was this low, but i figured it would be at least in the 10's of percents :(
I guess that’s a good thing considering the state of things. Better to go from 100 - 99 % funded vs 100 - 0 because some clowns decide you shouldn’t exist anymore.
I think RT is about 100% government funded, do you like them?
NPR is essential for national security.
Wonder why the oligarchy is targeting it then
What's good for the goose is good for the fascist.
Seeing this SICK BURNS! in 2025 as I remember Biden re-upping and expanding SpaceX contracts in 2024.
Liberals will post this EPIC SLAM WITH FACTS AND LOGIC on Facebook, then roll their eyes and tell the stupid Leftist Tankies to go sit at the kids table when you ask why the fuck prior administrations were bloating a fascist's bank accounts during the four years prior.
Are you ok? Literally most of the people who are pissed at Musk being a welfar queen were just as pissed at Biden for being a weak centrist about the whole thing. Anyone even slightly to the left has been going after Elon for years.
That country has next to zero nuance available come election day. You can’t just say everyone who’s against the obvious fascist was therefore all-in on Biden. If they had a better option they would have taken it. Well, I suppose you can say that stuff if you aren’t paying attention or acting in good faith.
Literally most of the people who are pissed at Musk being a welfar queen were just as pissed at Biden for being a weak centrist
If I had a dime for every 2-pt font "You fucking leftist idiots don't know what Biden's done for you, here's a big list!!! He's the best progressive since FDR!!!!!" posts I've seen in the last year, I'd be clinking glasses with Warren Buffet.
You can’t just say everyone who’s against the obvious fascist was therefore all-in on Biden.
Biden's not against the obvious fascists. That's the primary critique of his administration. He wrapped himself in the language of liberalism while funneling enormous fortunes into the pockets of the far-right through government contracts and public-private partnerships.
Well, I suppose you can say that stuff if you aren’t paying attention or acting in good faith.
Acting In Good Faith would mean prosecuting people like Tulsi Gabbard, Devin Nunes, Jared Kushner, and Steven Miller for espionage, divorcing the Treasury from far-right plutocrats like Musk and Bezos, and downsizing government departments that have been co-opted by extremists.
Instead of using the authority of the federal government when he had them, he dumped the powers of the presidency directly into the lap of a known asset of foreign powers.
I think you’ve completely confused the Dems and the people who vote for them because they have no other choice.
Something about appealing to moderate Republicans, as if that has even been a thing.
The Democratic Party is flush with them. Bloomberg hosted Bush Jr in NYC for the 2004 RNC and now he's one of the Dems' most mega of donors. Neocons like Bill Kristol and the Cheneys have been getting dumped over the line by disaffected Republicans for the last decade. Candidates like Charlie Crist and Lincoln Chafe have been fleeing to the Dems in order to escape contested Republican primaries.
Appealing to moderate Republicans is also a great way to fundraise. Lots of wealthy midwesterners and coastal small business tyrants that love neoliberalism as economic policy and just hate the Wokeness that comes along with it.
Those are all wildly unpopular people with all but the wealthy donor class. They are all ghouls who Democrats hated 20 years ago, and trying to emulate them today is when they keep getting shit on in elections. No one wants a Diet Republican Party. They want the real deal or progressivism.
The problem with the Trillionaire Class is that one trillionaire carries the weight of a million millionaires.
Wealthy donors carry so much more weight than rank-and-file voters. And if you don't support the donor pick, you must be a MAGA sympathist.
But, would NPR approve of my desire for a harem more than my space opera novels? I think not.
Why is it framed like that though revenue vs budget?
Revenue is money received for work done etc.
Budget is money allocated for the purpose of getting things done.
So Space X provides a service NPR is floated along.
Unless the poster was genuinely wrong on their terms here.
Not that I'm defending any of this but just don't make unfair comparisons and think it's great.
Bro what, am I reading this wrong or is your premise that NPR doesn't provide a service?
Because they absolutely do.
I suspect it’s because NPR doesn’t have consistent revenue year to year, because they do rely on donations, and spacex probably doesn’t have a consistent budget (because extra revenue would immediately be allocated for executive bonuses, or more charitably, expansion).