Your Feedback

Yamiche constantly omits truth to change context. Tonight it’s the border wall is falling over in winds. . Wow. It’s almost as if she wants to mislead her audience and keep the fact that the cement wasn’t dry yet at the time. Because she did that very thing.

I have watched PBS for years, but lately judy Woodruff is too much to take, the bias she is showing takes away from this station as being the last decent place to get unbiased news, the debacle that this country has gone through for over 3years has made a lot of us have no faith in the media in general, understand she is entitled to her own personal views, but wish she could temper her responses when she hears a different point of view from her own.

the ceaseless demands seeking donations is counterproductive

how many more times will you show the carpenters or whatever, then interrupt for the shameless pleading. we don't need to be told. i regret providing support at these times as it is a fortnight where i don't watch any pbs

get your act together

I noticed your coverage totally omits Bernie Sanders from consideration of his candidacy for President of the USA. I consider this to be a grave infraction of your duty to function as a "Public" Broadcasting System as PBS is to be. You are evidently quite biased or partisan in your coverage. This is a disservice to the public and betrays your mission. It also makes you liable and vulnerable to being seen as just another propagandist news outlet, similar to FOX. There is a reason Sanders is so popular right now, and you must take this seriously, or you are guilty of misleading the public with a false impression. Please do your job as a public entity for the News. I am quite offended by your lack of coverage of Bernie Sanders.

Make it stop It is a hideous distraction and a cheap ploy

Impeachment notice during nova You’re running of a subtitle message to view Impeachment procedures during are you daughter da Vinci nova Copperside is disgusting. I find it insulting when watching a non-political program to be subjected to liberal attacks on our president. I quickly change the channel and will re-examine my donations to PBS in the future.

Revelations concerning widespread abuse by many commercially available social media platforms are deeply troubling.  These huge platforms have become purveyors of false advertising, both political and commercial, have participated in providing insidious foreign influence and become vehicles for rampant cyber-bullying as well as child pornography. Public trust has been violated in numerous ways, including the sale of private information, the reliance on a lack of user understanding regarding privacy settings and a paucity of legislative and self-regulation in the industry. We have all observed a failure to monitor policy and practice until finally compelled by public and political pressures.  Most alarming is the willful use of the First Amendment as a shield to ignore or avoid actions that will eliminate abuse and regain public trust with ethical behavior.

There is an approach that would effectively address many of the aforementioned unacceptable realities. That approach would be a Public Option Social Media Platform. A nonprofit platform that would offer all of the original family and friend communication services that are not problematic. There would be no advertising and no ability to disseminate false, dangerous or destructive news sources.

Conveniently, the vehicle for this concept already exists. According to its published goals and objectives, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private, nonprofit corporation created and funded by Congress in 1967. CPB’s mission is to ensure universal access, over-the-air and online, to high-quality content and telecommunications services that are commercial free and free of charge.

Just as National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) were originally designed as public options to commercial radio and television, so would this Public Social Media (PSM) option be available to those who choose to enroll.

It should be emphasized that this public option, as part of the Corporation For Public Broadcasting, like the proposals for a health care public insurance option, would be a choice to be made by each individual and would in no way be mandatory. In fact, there would be many who would want more than such a public option might offer and choose the commercial options that presently exist. It is also possible that enough individuals would support the public option so that market place forces could generate positive changes in the commercial environment.

There would certainly be many challenges to the development of an appropriate Public Option Social Media Platform but perhaps the time has come in this country for serious consideration.

Michael Rolnick Farmington Hills, Michigan 248-763-2916

I treasure and look forward to PBS news broadcast since I feel it is the most objective. I must say though that I think much of the time of the reporting is focused on the small details who said what where did they say it. Equally important is the big picture. Take a step back and look at the president's behavior both verbal and actionable. The entire situation regarding the Ukraine demonstrate the behavior of a bully. He demeans any opponent, he deflects any criticism of him to be the work of others. He does not see the bigger picture. Certainly he does not see the importance of the big picture of the United States relationship to Ukraine. He reacts positively to other person's bully behavior and of course all his focus is on himself. How often has he used the term we or the term our? I would invite the NewsHour to interview behavioral professional. I see his overall behavior as typical of what we would expect from the mob boss. His behavior has been unlike any other president in the modern era. I invite PBS to take a long broad total look at his behavior in the context of the office of the President.

My local community radio station has one signal, two repeaters and an FM translator covering our rural/semi-rural Northern California region. The station created three advisory boards for its three frequencies -- one original and two translators -- but recently consolidated them into one central advisory board. Consolidating the CABs into a central advisory board excludes reporting from most of the population it serves. Some listener areas -- including the county seat and a state university -- are a two-hour drive from the board meetings and there are diverse and distinct ethnicities, local traditions and economic, educational, and environmental concerns that I believe should be represented. Does each repeater/frequency require a community advisory board? Thank you, Emma Nation