Your Feedback

I have a question I hope you can help me with. A news station in Alabama has aired a story that I know without a single doubt is a lie, is one sided, and was not checked for accuracy in the slightest. The other party involved is accused of theft of a dog, which is a lie to cover up other facts to avoid the worker at a shelter getting in trouble. The other person has been harassed by strangers, had her daughter who is 12 posted on social media along with their home address by total strangers who were also harassing through messenger (Facebook) and she had animal control called to investigate her animals, and was also harassed and threatened bby police officers (2 that I know of) all because she went to the shelter got the dog and took it to the vet. She DID lie to get the dog by claiming it as hers because in order to get it out of the shelter, she needed to claim it because it was on a stray hold. The dog is 14 years old and the vet said it was severely mistreated through neglect, they removed teeth that were necrotic, a sebaceous mass on the dogs back, and gave the person meds to treat a skin infection and also staph. When the dog was treated, she picked it up from the vet and was home for a few minutes before the human shelter called her and started threatening her. She went there to speak with the people and she admitted to the lie and she apologized. She told them she would give the dog back but didn''t bring it with her because it was just out of surgery and she had 5 children with her. AT that point her boyfriend was threatened because he had outstanding tickets and she was told he would go to jail. She was told they would arrest her for taking the dog because it was a felony, which it is NOT. The dog would need to be worth over $250 for a felony charge and I don't know a single person in their right mind who would pay that for a neglected 14 year old dog that was rotting from the inside out. The channel ABC 33/40 aired a supposed ' FEEL GOOD CHRISTMAS' story detailing how the owner who was responsible for the original pathetic condition of the animal got the dog back after it had been "missing" for 12 days. We don't know how long the shelter had the dog but I do know that they are lying about everything, right down to the fact that she gave them paperwork saying the dog belonged to her (Obviously she couldn't do that if the dog DIDN't belong to her, which she'd already said.) The "journalist" did not attempt to contact the person to get the other side of the story or to check facts. Now this young girl is STILL having her information posted on social media along with the pictures of her children. I am drafting a letter to send the Cynthia Gould, who is responsible for the story, explaining this to her and telling her to retract the story because I am absolutely fully prepared to sue on behalf of the girl in the middle of this gang of old ladies. I am also including the caveat that she is more than welcome to re-publish the story when she has all her facts. I am well aware that the 1st gives permission to report the news, it does not however give any news station the right to publish or prepetuate false information or to defame another individual. Is there anything else that I should include befor sending the communication? I would appreciate your help and I certainly appreciate the mission CPD.

There was a short segment on St. Nicholas on Ch. 25 in New York @7am today. It came on after the broadcast of the exercise show Sit and Be Fit and I found it objectionable as a Catholic. In trying to separate the history of the (Turkish) Bishop St. Nicholas from the commercial Santa Claus it was disrespectful in portraying him as a tyrant. And when discussing how Amercans perceive him, it stated "America was too late for the whole saint thing." The graphics were also derogatory. Please stop attacking Christianity. Thank you.

Why is PBS/NPR paying BBC? Why did BBC have Alan Dershowitz on commenting on conviction of Ghislaine Max (https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59828961)? Not even Sky (no) News had Dershowitz on, but BBC did! Why the Corp. for Public paying BBC (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jan/19/bbc-strikes-deal-with-pbs-to-create-factual-programmes)?

I posted the above to kera.org at its contact/feedback page.

Regards, Aram Azadpour Grapevine, TX

Judy Woodruff is one of the most talented and intelligent interviewers in the television world. She is deliberate, balanced and fair at all times and with all guests appearing on The News Hour. Unlike many in the news business, she is also non- ideological.

It's long past time for Judy to retire. She stumbles over her awful words, she can't control the interview and asks the most gosh awful questions. I will no longer donate to PBS while she is employed.

As a regular listener to PBS News Hour, I appreciate your comprehensive and unbiased coverage of the climate crisis. My concern is that having partial sponsorship by BNSF Railroad might be a conflict of interest as they are one of the biggest transporters of fossil fuels in the US. While I understand that financial support of PBS is important, I think that there is also a priority to be true to ones message.

Again,I appreciate your commitment to the presentation of quality and consequential news each night. I encourage your conversation on this important topic.

Sincerely, Daniel Price

The second largest cost of BBB is the DALT provision. PBS Newshour appears to intentionally avoid talking about SALT to sell the bill to the public. PBS can’t use public money to advance socialist agenda. There are to many critical thinkers and please stop insulting our intelligence.

When I was young, shows on PBS were free. Now, in order to watch most of your programming, I must pay a couple hundred dollars per year to become a member. So in effect, you have become a very expensive pay channel. Why the change in policy?

Why is EASTENDERS being cancelled, on December 11,2021,in the United States.?