Yeah, my feelings haven’t changed appreciably since the last time we talked about this. I have been listening to more NPR, though…

I like the way the McGrath sums it up--not sure I entirely agree with him, but I like it anyway:

At its best public television adds a little grace note to our lives, but public radio fills a void.

Who else broadcast “Eye on the Prize.” Maybe for the umpteenth time, but to so many it totally irrelevant. I am still alive and so are others who are being misunderstood, because many have no understanding of our past and do not understand why we don’t think we live in Disneyland.

Is it NECESSARY?  No.  Am I glad it’s there?  Yep.

I hardly ever watch PBS, but I have to admit that the War series they did rocked, and lately they’ve been running this series on Mormons, that I really hope branches out into other religions.  It was really good.

I watch History Channel for that stuff now or I get the DVD--PBS doesn’t really offer me much that I couldn’t see somewhere else. I can’t say the same for NPR which gives me stuff that nobody else carries or even comes close to carrying. I think that’s a result of wildly divergent paths between the radio and television stations of today.

TV has diversified to the point where it’s much easier to find an amazing variety of content serving all sorts of interests. Radio, on the other hand, has homogenized--especially on the FM bands--to the point where it’s a struggle to find something outside the samey-sounding pop, R&B, country, Latino, hard rock, “alternative,” and classic rock stations. I swear, the stations here in Denver, at least, are almost impossible to distinguish between when they play the same format. Perhaps it is different in other markets.

The Blues, jazz, old school R&B, classical, radio programs that aren’t either sports or political personality (Rush & Savage are about politics, of course, but they are at least as much about the personalities) based isn’t well served at all. If you do find something interesting, it’s probably playing at 11pm on a Sunday and lasts for all of two hours.

That’s not an argument for an abandonment of principles--that is, the tiny bit of my brain that leans libertarian wonders why the government should fund public accommodations like this especially when the needs can be served (typically better) by the free market. I think that cable and the tree gazillion channels of entertainment, education, and news on TV has served the market far better than PBS ever could. Radio is another story--although the reasons for the failure aren’t exactly self-evident and may well be because of government interference.

I know that I wouldn’t be happy without NPR, though.

I don’t have cable and in my market I rather contribute to PBS. You only mention The History channel, you mean you don’t find the game show channel exciting. What I have seen of cable is that it has rehash every TV show I have seen since my childhood and a lot stuff I am just too old to enjoy. I guess cable is great for that 25-45 demographic. I have found cable to be as homogenized as you say radio is. I not saying that there is no problems with the PBS programing, but I would prefer that it be on the public airwaves, even if it would have advertising.