Public Television Represents Freedom, Fears Cuts

Nonprofit Media: Expression of First Amendment, Target of Censors

Oct 2, 2008

Although public broadcasting was given federal funding and the official green light for freedom of expression in 1967, today its programmers fear cuts and censorship.

American public television, not unlike its predecessor, public radio, was “premised on the idea that stations should be independently owned and operated to further the full exercise of First Amendment freedoms,” writes Gina K. Logue, one of the contributing authors of the just-released, two-volume Encyclopedia of the First Amendment.

Specifically, public radio in the U.S. can trace its roots back to the 1920s when labor unions and religious groups, as well as universities, established noncommercial radio stations, Logue said in an Oct. 2 interview.

Public Broadcasting Act of 1967

Public TV’s history, however, is directly linked to former U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson, who signed the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 on Nov. 7. In doing so, he cleared the way for the establishment of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, or CPB, which is the largest single source of funding for public television and radio programming today.

Per Logue, who penned the First Amendment encyclopedia’s entries on public TV and radio, while the creation of the CPB was intended to enhance freedom of expression within American media, it didn’t take long for the programming on public-broadcasting outlets to come under fire.

"In the early, early days of public television, under what was then called National Educational Television, most programs were curriculum-based instructional shows or Julia Child cooking up a storm on The French Chef. All of that was good, but some people felt public TV could do even more,” she explained.

Public Television Gets Provocative

In turn, Logue noted, “After CPB was formed, public television expanded its programming through documentaries with distinct points of view and dramas that some people considered provocative.”

Thus, in the process of retooling its programming to “do more and go deeper” for its audiences, as it were, public-TV programmers believed that CPB would protect them from the kind of government interference the First Amendment is designed to block.

However, observed Logue, who lists two decades of covering politics as a radio reporter on her résumé, “In the politically turbulent late ‘60s and early ‘70s, when much of this programming expansion was taking place, the (Richard) Nixon administration felt threatened by the use of a governmental entity to express what it considered counterculture views."

Public Broadcasting Takes on the FCC

Consequently, these days the First Amendment-inspired nonprofit media the U.S. government sought to buoy and build during Johnson’s administration remains on alert and, at times, in court.

For example, as noted in Logue’s encyclopedia entry on public television, Public Broadcasting President Paula Kerger, in 2006, admonished the federal government for what she described as its “paralyzing” influence on public TV. In doing so, she referenced a $15,000 fine that Federal Communications Commission officials levied against public-TV affiliate KCSM in San Mateo, Calif., for its 2004 airing of a music-documentary episode by Martin Scorsese. The program, part of the acclaimed filmmaker/director's The Blues series, contained an uttered profanity in an interview. The FCC took issue with the utterance, deemed it unnecessary, and then fined KCSM.

Such FCC penalties against public-broadcasting outlets, while meant to keep programmers in line with acceptable standards of community decency, often stifle the freedom of expression that, reportedly, the U.S. government initially sought to enhance via its support for public broadcasting, some contend.

Moreover, public television, in its ongoing bid to secure viewership (as well as donations for program funding from its viewers), must now compete not only with traditional TV giants, such as the American Broadcasting Corporation and the National Broadcasting Company, among others, but also with a virtual cornucopia of cable broadcasters that are largely censor-free.

Future of Nonprofit Media: Audience Secure but Funding Not

"Despite inroads made in both entertainment and documentary programming by cable, public television probably always will have its unique niche audience.” Logue assured. “But, with public interest groups poised to lobby Congress if they sense a groundswell of resentment for a certain type of programming being financed with taxpayer dollars, PBS must remain vigilant and selective if it hopes to maintain its independence and its uniqueness in the face of political wrangling.

“In the hands of leaders who want to wage culture wars for political advantage,” she concluded, “the government that gave public TV life could try very hard to pull the plug."

Article Sources

Vile, John , David L. Hudson Jr., and David Schultz, eds. Encyclopedia of the First Amendment, . Washington, D.C: CQ Press, 2008.

What is the Corporation for Public Broadcasting?, n.d. Retrieved Oct. 2, 2008, at http://www.cpb.org/aboutcpb/whatis.html

The copyright of the article Public Television Represents Freedom, Fears Cuts in Television Journalism is owned by Lisa L. Rollins. Permission to republish Public Television Represents Freedom, Fears Cuts in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.