Big Boob takes over PBS

April 30, 2005

Guest Post by Morbo

A few years ago, I stopped sending money to PBS.

I’m not quite sure what pushed me over the edge. Probably, it was turning on the TV during pledge week and seeing the upteenth guru/con artist promise me ancient wisdom and quantum happiness if I would buy his book and tapes.

Occasionally I felt guilty. Although I stopped watching all television (with the exception of “The Simpsons”) in 2001, my kids still watch a few programs on PBS. They were using PBS, but I was not paying for it.

I’m feeling a lot better about my decision these days, especially after reading the April 25 New York Times Magazine Q&A with Ken Ferree, the new president of PBS. Read it and be enraged.

Ferree, a Republican who served as an adviser to Michael Powell, ex-chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, was asked about old-time liberals, said to be PBS’s most loyal constituency, some of whom have of late been complaining about the network. He said he doesn’t care.

“Well, maybe we can attract some new viewers,” Ferree said. He added that he would be happy to replace the old-time lefty fans with conservatives.

Ferree’s casual dismissal of liberals adds to growing concerns that PBS is titling rightward these days. An anonymous PBS official expressed concern about this to The Washington Post in a recent article. A variety of political voices is fine, but some PBS staffers believe increased political diversity isn’t the goal.

A senior FCC official, who would not speak for attribution because he must rule on issues affecting public broadcasting, went further, saying [the Corporation for Public Broadcasting] “is engaged in a systematic effort not just to sanitize the truth, but to impose a right-wing agenda on PBS. It’s almost like a right-wing coup. It appears to be orchestrated.”


Curiously, Ferree, who is leading the charge, admits to being “not much of a TV consumer.” Asked to list his favorite PBS shows, he replied, “I like ‘Masterpiece Theater’ and some of the ‘Frontline’ shows. I like ‘Antiques Roadshow’ and ‘Nova.’ I don’t know. What’s your favorite show?”

The Magazine interviewer asserted, “You don’t sound like much of a PBS viewer.”

I’ll say. Sure, go with “Masterpiece Theater” and “Nova.” Anyone could have said that. It sounds to me like Ferree just named the first few PBS shows that popped into his head.

(Ferree also doesn’t listen to NPR, which he oversees as well. He admitted he doesn’t listen to public radio, claiming that he always rides a motorcycle to work “and there is no radio access.” What about his office? Is there no radio there?)

Perhaps worst of all, Ferree seems to have no ideas for PBS other than dumbing it down – a process one could argue has been under way for the past few years. He told the Magazine about a new show called “American History and Civics” that will allegedly teach teenagers about American government but won’t be “TV-centric.”

Naturally you wonder how a television program can avoid being “TV-centric.” To this Ferree replied, “It uses new media. Interactive media. Games.”

Great. It’s Playstation 2.

PBS is apparently just too darned intellectual for Ferree. One gets the impression it makes his head hurt. Asked about longtime PBS newsman Jim Lehrer, Ferree was quick to say that of course Lehrer is great — but then admitted he does not watch “Newshour” either.

“I don’t always want to sit down and read Shakespeare, and Lehrer is akin to Shakespeare. Sometimes I really just want a People magazine, and often that is in the evening, after a hard day.”

You know what? There are already enough People magazines on TV. PBS was supposed to be better than that. It was supposed to be Shakespeare — because some people, even after a long day at work, still feel up to challenge of intellectual stimulation. That was the whole point. PBS was supposed to give us programming the networks would not — mainly quality.

Over the years, the free market has brought us “The Love Boat,” “Three’s Company” and “Laverne and Shirley.” Sure, networks occasionally get bold (anyone remember “Twin Peaks”?), but by and large they bow to focus groups and play it safe with stale formulas, childish titillation and overbearing laugh tracks. Cable has provided more options, but cable is costly and, quite frankly, often lousy as well. Usually it’s just the same stupid formulas from network television except with breasts and the f-word. Plenty of us just aren’t going to pay through the nose for the privilege of 52 channels and nothing on.

Public television was supposed to be a cut above. It was meant to give us a little culture among the kitsch of ABC, CBS and NBC. Of course you could take it or leave it, and many did choose to leave it — but at least it provided the option of culture for those daring enough to experiment. Viewers might still opt for 95 percent kitsch and 5 percent culture — but hey, the 5 percent was something, right?

I know PBS still produces programs of quality. I hear people talk about them. I sometimes think, “I probably would have liked that.”

But then I read something like this interview with this cretin and am filled with despair. I can see the writing on the wall. It’s so typical of our Republican overlords in Washington. Bush appointees now control the PBS board, and Bush’s philosophy is simple: When you have a government-run thing that you don’t like, you put a guy in charge of it who does not have a passion for that thing. After all, a guy with passion might make the thing better, something you can start to like. Instead, you hire a guy who is indifferent to or hates the thing. Then you reduce funding. You let it wither on the vine. You ruin it slowly. It’s death by a thousand paper cuts.

Count me out. I have no desire to watch PBS languish in a persistent vegetative state. There is an option: Before most of those “Masterpiece Theater” shows were shows, they were books. Used bookstores still populate our land, and the internet has even linked them together. I often buy books through Bookfinder.com. Turn off the set. Cancel the cable. Save $50 a month (or more). Plow it in to books.

Call me a snob, but I’ve concluded that life is too short to spend huge blocks of time sitting in front of a TV. You want ancient wisdom? Start with a cool book I know of that has some. It’s written by a guy named Homer (not Simpson).

My newest nickname for Republicans like Ferree – wrecking ball republicans – seems fitting since all they want to do is tear down anything that they don’t like.
And the thing that I like best about reading is that I don’t have someone shouting in my ear every 10 minutes trying to sell me something that I neither want nor can afford.

  • People Magazine!??

    See, here is the problem. Ferree considers thinking– and learning– to be a *chore*. Something tedious and time-consuming, which distracts from the more “fulfilling” pursuits like *making money* and acquiring useless consumer crap… or sitting in front of the TV, mainlining feces directly into his brain. Real “relaxing”, huh?

    Many of us consider thinking, learning, creating, and discovering to be a *joy*, a great privilege, and ideally even a right in a perfect world. I dread the time I spend working; I cherish the time I spend reading or thinking. After a particularly hard day’s work, I’m devastated if I don’t have energy enough to think or read, to use my brain. I deliberately save up my energy so that I maintain enough at the end of the day to actually think. Life is too short.

    In fact, the success of democracy depends on thinking, curiosity, learning, and reasoning. A populace who hates thinking shouldn’t vote. Oh, wait… most of them don’t! Well, a populace who doesn’t vote isn’t a democracy anyway. Houston, we have a problem.

    I am convinced that I’m not a citizen of the same country as Ferree. I’m not sure I’m even a member of the same *species* as he. His world-view is utterly alien to me, and frankly too empty and bleak to even attempt to comprehend.

  • It’s pretty much a hallmark of dictatorships and authoritarian regimes that the thinkers, teachers, inventors and intellectuals get rounded up in the beginning to remove the wild card of freedom of thought.

    Ferree obviously takes pride in his lack of inquisitivness and imagination. The programs like Masterpiece Theater and Frontline may have come out first as programs he takes note of because those are the ones he dislikes the most and has the hardest time getting a handle on.

    If PBS becomes a watered down nothing, then the donations dry up and it disappears and the right has accomplished what it has always wanted. “Sesame Street” with cereal commercials. “NOVA” with people riding dinosaurs. They don’t care if PBS, (or NPR for that matter), exists at all. They don’t need intelligent shows like “The Newshour” and “Frontline” analyzing their motives and actions. They HATE it. They don’t need “NOVA” talking all scientific and stuff about evolution and things that happened more than 6,000 years ago. It rocks the boat and upsets people. When will we see our first “NOVA” show on Intelligent Design?

    This sucks but it’s been coming for a long time. The right has made no secret of it’s dislike for the far flung open-mindedness of PBS. The network’s vulnerability is being demonstrated right now. With the placement of a few key people, the usefullness and credibilty of the whole concept is brought into question. People who have taken for granted that a natural constituency existed for the support of curiosity, creativity and intellectualism in this country may be very surprised at the ease with which the right can neuter PBS, one of the standard bearers of enlightened intelligence.

    That all sounds pretty negative and I feel bad about that because I’ve always thought that public broadcasting in America was one of the shining beacons of thought over ignorance. Unfortunately, ignorance often can provide a stronger, less questioning base of support. That base of support is being created before our very eyes.

    Sad isn’t it?

    Thanks for highlighting this topic.

  • These jerks have been gunning for PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for a very long time, and they are probably creaming their jeans over Ferree’s coming reign of terror to render PBS worse than irrelevant, all the way to a Rush-type clone. And, PBS was already headed that way — both on TV and the radio.

    Good post, Morbo – but the bottom line is that unless they can make money out of it by letting the private sector take it over, they don’t give a flying fuck about it. Bastards.

    P.S. I wonder if Bush’s “3-sentence-in-the-budget-program-death-squad” known as the Sunset Commission will kill PBS once and for all as it doesn’t meet any goal they view as worthy of funding?

  • While complaining about the liberalism of the media, the conservatives have managed to have their message become the mainstream, and put whatever vestiges of media liberalism still exist on the defensive.

    Once government funding for public television was cut back, the rest was only a matter of time. Money talks, and those now providing the funding (and advertising) also are at the controls. A public devoted to bread and circuses (and People magazine) is not going to mind.

  • Jay nails it:

    If PBS becomes a watered down nothing, then the donations dry up and it disappears and the right has accomplished what it has always wanted.

    They drive the reality-based community away PBS withers and dies. Conclusion: don’t turn your back on PBS & NPR in a hissy fit and let them kill a very important alternative source of constructive and responsible programming.

  • As a kid, way back in the 60’s and early 70’s, I watched as much television as any kid, so I’m not claiming special virtue. Once I was 17 and left home, I never had another television. Consequently I can’t make informed statements about the quality, and I do have something of a disconnect with American culture and priorities. Once in a while at a friend’s or relatives’ homes I am exposed to enough TV to realize how very limited it is, how very much it sucks, and how zombie-ish people get around it. In addition to the cost savings, I really appreciate the extra 20 or 30% of waking time liberation from that distraction gives me. That’s good surfing time 🙂 .

  • Indirect segue: Yet another reason why voting for Nader in 2000 was such a disaster. Nader kept saying that the main parties weren’t all that different. No, they are – the Republicans are much worse. Over and over again, we can say: this or that wouldn’t be happening if Gore had won in 2000, or Kerry in 2004. That pretentious little prick ruined everything. I will never forgive.

    Hey, I like that question thingie at the end – cute and apparently effective!

  • Good post. When you have a government-run thing that you don’t like, you put a guy in charge of it who does not have a passion for that thing. This M.O. goes back at least as far as the Reagan administration with his HUD secretary who mismanaged and just plain stole from his department.

    With PBS and NPR, it is not a funding issue, because only a small portion of budget is covered with gov’t subsidy (around 10%?). The issue is controling the media. It’s an anti-intellectualism that goes along with the anti-reality-based mindset.

  • PBS started a downward slide when they hired that bow tied little chicken Clucker Carlson.

  • A couple points here:

    1) “Wrecking ball Republicans”… I love it. Never forget that Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld first connected while both were working in the Office of Economic Opportunity, that relic of LBJ’s Great Society initiative, during the Nixon Administration. I have no doubt that the right-wing wackos, if they can’t remake PBS in the image of the Wall Street editorial board psychopaths, will happily send PBS down the path to oblivion that OEO eventually trod.

    2) Morbo’s (best online name ever, by the way–I’ve been desperate to start a band called “Sunset Squad Robots”, from the same source) note about his decision to stop giving money to PBS is doubtless a part of this right-wing strategy. Those of us who feel out of step with the political direction of this country already have a difficult enough time paying taxes; I’m certainly not pleased by the thought of my dollars going to support missile defense, faith-based anti-gay counseling, or whatever else floats Karl Rove’s boat. Giving money to PBS, as the powers that be pull PBS farther and farther from where we want it, will become increasingly repellent to longtime donors. (It also occurs to me that as PBS relinquishes its long-held ideological position, a market opportunity opens for an avowedly liberal TV network. Too bad Al Gore chickened out on that point.)

    3) This whole process of unmooring PBS from its traditional audience probably accelerates today, with the New York Times publishing a front-page story on its website (and, I assume, in the print edition) about the Republicans’ bringing pressure to bear on the network’s content.

  • ok, I confess: I played the sucker with a capital S. I was sucked in by some very deliberate fundraising campaign when PBS played a memorial concert to George Harrison. So, now I have a CD I’ll probably never listen to. At least when I sent in my check I included a small list of grievances about the insidious creep of thinly disguised corporate advertising followed by perfunctory feel-good bows to “viewers like you”. I also sent a copy of the New Yorker article addressing the issue of the PBS takeover, probably futile gestures but my attempt to protest. There remain some fantastic programs that need to get out to the regular TV viewing public. I can only try to regard my contribution as a vote of support for those earnest programs and people.

  • Unless you see something better out there, you better support PBS.

    Millions of people see things on PBS that our overlords hate. That’s why they’re going to try to kill it. They went after “Now” because it cuts them to the bone.

    If you watch ONE program this year that makes you say “Damn Straight!” you need to send PBS a check. Because it’s on PBS, millions of other people saw it too, and got seeds of reason planted that may come to fruition someday. People like Morbo WON’T send them a dime, because something on PBS ticked ’em off. And which ones do you think the Republicans will laugh about?

    • Comments are closed.