Sunday, November 4, 2012

After This Election, Does PBS Deserve Public Funding?

During the first presidential debate, Mitt Romney injected the issue of funding public television into the campaign.  He was widely attacked by liberals in the media, and by President Obama himself, for wanting to kill off Big Bird.
Is that really such a bad idea?  The behavior of some in public media during this election suggests that it isn't.
Based on the reporting of several of its major contributors, one has to question PBS's objectivity during the current election.  On Oct. 25, PBS highlighted a TIME poll showing Obama leading Romney 49% to 45% in the key battleground state of Ohio.  Just four days later, the Cincinnati Enquirer showed the race tied, while the Rasmussen poll showed Romney ahead by 2 points.  On what basis did PBS select the TIME poll for its report?
On Oct. 26, Gwen Ifill provided her "take" on the election.  Among her observations: Obama commands 80% of the non-white vote, and the nation "is becoming less, not more, white."  Take that, white voters.
Just imagine the situation reversed.  What if PBS had been reporting on the chances of a white presidential candidate, noting that the candidate controlled 80% of the white vote and snickering that the nation was becoming more, not less, white?  That sort of comment would earn most journalists a ticket to Palookaville, but because we're talking about an "historic" black president who happens to be a leftist as well, PBS deems such talk acceptable. 
Another Ifill tidbit: Obama's field offices outnumber Romney's by 131 to 40.  I suppose that reminder was intended to afford comfort to nervous PBS viewers.  Perhaps it affords comfort to Ms. Ifill as well.  She is, after all, author of The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.  Beginning with Obama's "stunning presidential victory," according to its published description, the book focuses on "the bold new path to political power" for a new generation of African-American politicians.  Ifill sounds like just the right person to provide a thoroughly objective account of this election, doesn't she?  In any case, she is one of those PBS has chosen to cover it.

No comments: