This shouldn’t be enough to save them, though:
The Board has expressed confidence in Vivian Schiller’s leadership going forward. She accepted responsibility as CEO and cooperated fully with the review process. The Board, however, expressed concern over her role in the termination process and has voted that she will not receive a 2010 bonus.
NPR also announced that Ellen Weiss, Senior Vice-President for News, has resigned.
As noted at the post, she was treated a lot better than Juan Williams was.
And NPR should still be defunded. This incident wasn’t a reason, but it will serve as a good excuse to do what should have been done long ago on principle.
Fire them all, defund NPR, sell the assets, tear down the buildings, sow salt upon the ground…..
And then get medieval upon them..
NPR functions as a virtual propaganda arm of the Democratic Party. If the Republicans don’t muster the guts to defund it they won’t deserve to retain their seats. Of course, even as we speak, each new congressman is being contacted and solicited to propose a not too bright communications or anthropology major niece or nephew for a job there.
Hi All,
I hate to ruin your day, but only about 2% of NPR funding is from government sources.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/ombudsman/2008/01/frequently_asked_questions_1.html
[[[How many of my tax dollars go to NPR?
NPR receives no direct funding from the federal government. Less than two percent of the budget is derived from competitive grants from federally funded organizations such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Science Foundation, and National Endowment for the Arts.]]]
Member NPR stations only get about 15% of their funding from government grants from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (about $400 million), so the belief that defunding CPB would close NPR is just a right wing fantasy. It would just give them the excuse for allowing more corporate sponsorships. And more freedom to rattle the right 🙂
http://cpb.org/aboutcpb/financials/
The discussion shouldn’t be about defunding it – that allows the opposition too much opportunity for railing.
If you auction it off, there’s at least a chance that they’ll jump at it like starving hyenas.
Now. Who wants to buy the space shuttle manufactories and pad?
The belief isn’t that it would fold – just that we wouldn’t be paying for it. And if I recall correctly, they don’t have to purchase the FCC licenses through the same mechanisms. (A not-so-hidden major subsidy.)
I don’t care whether NPR exists or not (I actually listen it it quite a bit), I just don’t think that the taxpayers should fund it.
Tom, if they don’t need the money, why do they squeal like stuck pigs when it’s threatened to be cut off?
Failtroll is fail. But thanks for playing.
Failtroll is fail. But thanks for playing.
I hate to ruin your day
You are woefully misguided to believe that anything you post has any bearing at all on how good or bad a day any of us have.
Thomas,
then they can tighten up 2% worth, quit calling themselves “objective” and move on with helping Nancy Pelosi regain her gavel. They’ll help anyway, but I’d like it better if I didn’t have to help.
I’ve run a few businesses, 2% can be saved easily.
BTW, how much of that 2% do Weiss and Williams salaries save them?
Rand,
I suppose they see it as a matter of principle, but if I was running NPR I would just drop government funding and move on. But then I believe in avoiding federal funding for businesses in general since there are too many strings attached.
Al,
[[[The discussion shouldn’t be about defunding it – that allows the opposition too much opportunity for railing.
If you auction it off, there’s at least a chance that they’ll jump at it like starving hyenas. ]]]
News flash. NPR is not owned by the government. Its a non-profit organization owned by its member stations, so you are no more able to auction it off then the Red Cross. As long as they are not bankrupt they have a legal right to operate as they have been.
Or are you advocating the federal government just seize private property because what they broadcast offends you? That the federal government should just violate the Constitutional protections for property for mere political reasons? I thought the Tea Party valued the Constitution. 🙂
All in favor of Tom Matula becoming CEO of NPR, signify by saying, “Meh.”
I formulated a theory the other day that the only allowed moods of speech for NPR reporters, anchors, and analysts are sententious, sentimental, sneering, unctuous and arch.
That leaves out Elmo, I guess, but maybe we could add a special category (“psychotic”) for him.
I for one recommend the removal of tax exempt status of all so-called “not-for-profits” from the Heritage Foundation to NPR. No more monasteries and no more holy orders. Everyone pays the same percentage. No deductions. No tax exempt status for anyone. No tax exempt status for churches. None for charities. If government is 24% of GDP then that means we tax 24% of revenues. That would help focus the attention of the NGOs on what is really important.
T. Matula writes:
I hate to ruin your day,
Don’t flatter yourself.
but only about 2% of NPR funding is from government sources.
So?
I’m in favor of him getting a fresh dose of Zoloft before he launches into another Sarah Palin rant.
Let’s make all organizations (income) tax exempt. And patronage-exempt – no more pork for Planned Parenthood, corn farmers, unions, universities, etc.
Tom, if they don’t need the money, why do they squeal like stuck pigs when it’s threatened to be cut off?
Being associated with the government is a source of validation for left centrists and progs alike. You get government grants to produce quality programming, then use the gravitas you acquire to sweeten the poison you inject into your audience.
OTOH, if the government wanted to contribute 400 million in grants to Judicial Watch or the NRA I could agree to let NPR continue in it’s present mode.
And patronage-exempt – no more pork for Planned Parenthood, corn farmers, unions, universities, etc.
But but, Alan… Someone will come ruin your day and point out that those entities only receive a fraction, perhaps less than 50% or less than 10% or less than 5% of taxpayer patronage. Therefore, it’s a waste of time to remove their funding for the effort of getting rid of those entities.
Oh wait, you never said anything about getting rid of those entities. You only said removing some funding subsidy that comes from taxpayers. I suspect you may even like corn. Never mind.
Have a good day!
Leland,
I hate to ruin your day, but I just completely thrashed your straw man. Are you saying you don’t like straw men? I thought Tea Party valued straw men. 🙂
RKV,
[[[I for one recommend the removal of tax exempt status of all so-called “not-for-profits” from the Heritage Foundation to NPR. ]]]
Tax exempt status becomes moot if you replace the income tax with a national sales tax. But then I believe in always fixing the underlying problem rather then just doing cosmetic repairs.
…and creating even more problems for other people to fix, too. 🙂
Yes, she was treated a lot better than Juan Williams. According to Juan Williams. Because, who could be a better unbiased judge of the alleged mistreatment of Juan Williams than Juan Williams?