It's hardly surprising that The Washington Post would run an op-ed on Friday that argues about maintainting taxpayer-funded broadcasting in its current liberal-pleasing status quo. But it is surprising that the writers, Laura Walker and Jaclyn Sallee, would be so feckless in denying the bias of PBS and NPR. As usual they use a liberal poll instead of a content analysis:
Some will argue that public broadcasting should not be funded by the government it needs to hold accountable. But CPB's role as a buffer has worked remarkably well. The Pew study found that 72 percent of Americans feel that "most news sources are biased in their coverage." But they don't feel that way about public broadcasting - among the most trusted news sources anywhere.
These public-radio lobbyists are citing a poll by Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm that works with the leftist website the Daily Kos. This year's poll found PBS was the "most trusted" news outlet -- but PBS was just added this year. Is someone trying to defend their taxpayer subsidies? They found 50 percent said they trusted PBS, and 30 percent did not. They surveyed 632 Americans in January, but did NOT ask: do you actually watch PBS? Could you name a PBS news anchor?
Walker and Sallee also avoid breaking the poll down by ideology. You quickly find that 76 percent of liberals trust PBS, and only 11 percent do not. By contrast, 54 percent of conservatives do not trust PBS, and only 22 percent do (and they need to survey MRC's research, like this Special Report). Moderates tilt the poll, with 65 percent saying "trust" and 16 percent saying "not trust."
You might say moderates are relying on the honored government-enhanced brand of PBS -- or you could wonder just how "moderate" they are. Asked about Fox News, 28 percent of the "moderates" say they trust it, and 60 percent say they do not. (Last year, PPP found Fox was most trusted.) But in the end, the charge of liberal bias is not proven or disproven by relying on polls of viewers who may have never spent five minutes watching the PBS NewsHour or Frontline.
The most flawed claim in this Post piece is the idea that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a "buffer" that "works remarkably well" in building trust in public broadcasting. But CPB's board merely funds the content and almost never monitors what it's funding -- unless it's derailing a conservative project on Islam vs. Islamism like Frank Gaffney's. The "firewall" is not to protect the public, but to protect the liberal bias from any troublesome demands from conservatives for a content analysis.
Instead, the Post prints goo like this from Walker and Sallee: "At its core, public broadcasting belongs to the American people; it stands as a testament to our generosity and curiosity. In the midst of cynicism, public media organizations firmly believe that learning is a lifelong and joyful pursuit. "
Oh yes, they're shameless enough to argue public broadcasting stands for "generosity, curiosity, and lifelong learning." A voluminous list of public-broadcasting bias examples is here.
