We are in rural eastern Oregon (Ontario) and have been working toward starting a community radio station. We have a tower and building and are in the process of making applications. However, we need startup money. We have a few community supporters and sponsors but we need more. Do you have suggestions? Thank you.
Your Feedback
CPB seeks to make public broadcasting more accessible to the public it serves. To do so CPB maintains a toll-free, 24-hour telephone line (1-800-272-2190), an online contact form, and accepts letters sent directly to CPB.
All comments are available on this website to be viewed by the general public. Each year, by statute, CPB transmits this public link to the White House for its report to Congress. Additionally, comments pertaining to programming are shared with the CPB Board of Directors and relevant public media staff.
Search:
Startup money for noncommercial educational community radio station
PBS NewsHour
The MacNeil-Lehrer Report was a shiny city on the hill of the TV news wasteland. They would devote each show to a single topic, with opposing advocates being interviewed together. Robert MacNeil and Jim Lehrer did not tell us what to think. They trusted the viewers to listen to both sides of the issue and make up their own minds.
When Judy Woodruff took over the show, renamed as the PBS NewsHour, she destroyed the show. On virtually every issue, only one side is presented, the left-wing side. For the Friday weekly roundtable, they hired fake-conservative Jonathan Capehart as the counterpart to liberal David Brooks. Instead of offering conservative rebuttals to Brooks, Capehart seems to always agree with Brooks.
January 9 2023 misinformation on the current measles outbreak
Not ALL of the measles outbreak is due to not being vaccinated. You can also still get measles if you are fully vaccinated. Please stop spreading misinformation on just about EVERY topic!!!! https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/faqs.html
Finished with PBS
For years I have watched the PBS Newshour, I will no longer donate nor will I support CPB or PBS in any manner whatsoever. Your views are very misleading and one sided. Few people agree with you and your biased opinions. We are both red and blue in the USA and many of us are purple. We do not uphold your one sided values nor the misinformation that "you" are spreading. There are always 2 sides to a coin and 2 views surrounding each subject. This is what is wrong with the media nowadays. It is no longer fact based. Bad reporting. goodbye!
Constant audio drop-out
What is the issue behind episodic loss of audio during your programming. For example PBS NewsHour tonight, Jan 20, 2023 was full of loss of audio for 10 to 30 seconds over and over again during the program. The same issue is plaguing my car PBS radio station, 89.7 FM today. It is frustrating. There appears to be no recognition by your station at any time during the programming. Is this situation going to be the new normal? My cable provider is Spectrum. Thanks, Richard R. H**m, XXX B******g Avenue, Akron, OH 44310.
fundraising from local to you
As KQED is the local part of CPB, I am addressing my comments to you as well. Margaret G*** G*****e.
KQED 2601 Mariposa St. San Francisco, CA 94110
January 2, 2023
Hello,
I have supported KQED to the tune of $20 monthly and an extra $200 in donations this past year. This totals $440.00. My income is less than $60,000 annually. I am a renter.
I give what I do to KQED because I watch the PBS NewsHour 4 or 5 times a week and 5 or 6 other shows on channels 9 and 54 each week. That’s less than12 hours maximum KQED time a week, though it is less during your multiple 2 week long periods of fundraising. I mute all your long fundraising spiels if I happen to be tuned into KQED. I mostly avoid KQED apart from the NewsHour when you are fundraising. The filler shows are old, repetitious and of no interest to me and possibly others, .
During regular programming can’t you find a better way to bridge from 50-60 minutes? I wonder why you don’t have more corporate sponsors? The endless replaying of sponsors’ appeals in not encouraging of support. I mute these as well.
If other people are like me, I can understand if you don’t achieve the level of personal donations you wish.
I find it disrespectful to me as a consumer that you never tell us, the public, how much money you are seeking to raise as you beg for money, Likewise, you never tell us how you use your funds. I can’t go out of my way to support an organization so irresponsible to the public it at least somewhat depends on.
With my limited income I support a small number of aid organizations, e.g. Doctors without Borders, UNHCR, Immigrants Rising, for example. They tend to be much more forthcoming regarding the why’s of their appeals , $ goals, and often their progress in reaching those goals. Why aren’t you?
I would be most grateful for and interested in receiving a response.
Two final comments: I’m copying this to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; I rarely listen to KQED radio.
Sincerely,
Margaret (G*** G*****e **** O** S****** Dr. San Anselmo, CA 94960 415-***-**86
KRCC
I was in Co. Springs a few weeks in October, 2022. I listened to NPR online via KRCC. I returned to my home in Guatemala and KRCC came with me! It interrupts my NPR programming with its Colorado station. How can I remove KRCC from my laptop?
Obtaining copies of programs that I have seen on PBS and would like to own
In years past, you could go to the PBS website and purchase videos of programs you had watched (or missed) on your PBS channel. I see nothing like that service on this website. I'd truly like to have copies of several of the American Experience episodes -- if I can afford them! Is such a service still provided? And, if so, how do I access it?
Hosts/Anchors
Why won’t Channel 20 reward their staff rather than bring people in from elsewhere. You have several women doing a great job in the field, etc., and you ignore their service. Jaffnie Gray is a great example of bringing someone in and ignoring current staff. Even Brittany Spears who fills in when the morning staff and does a great job (and there were others there longer than her) was ignored. If she’s good enough to fill in why was she ignored. Also, if you choose to ignore current staff to bring others in, the least you could have someone choose her outfits. It’s sad to see her on air in such horrible outfits and it seems someone could help her!
Programming on pbs
I would neverdonate money to pbs.I watch the series but as far as the rest,nothing much I agree with .All of the hosts and guests are liberal,not a pretty picture of democracy !
Reporter
Captions need improvement
The pro basketball player being released
Judy interviewing mike pence
News Hour and Washington Week
I am a regular listener and watcher of both programs and I know you are replacing Judy Woodruff on the News Hour. I am a senior and many of my friends also watch and listen but because we are older we have trouble hearing people who speak fast like Amna Nawaz, Lisa Des Jardins, and Yamiche Alcindor. Young people do not get the news from TV but older ones do so they are the major portion of your audience. Also I have noticed that many of your guests on both programs also speak very fast. I suggest you do not replace Judy with either of these three mentioned but rather with Stephanie Sy, Jeff Bennett, John Yang. William Brangham, and/or Jeffrey Brown. If the programs continue to have people who speak rapidly and not clearly I will reconsider my yearly donation to PBS so please speak to them.
donations
how do I make a contribution to the public broadcasting system. Do I do it on a local level?
PBS News Hour
The closed captioning on the PBS News Hour is consistently not synced with the audio. It really makes it difficult for those of us who are hard of hearing.
Please consider creating a PBS/NPR equivalent for social media (a National Public Forum)
To Whom It May Concern,
The current events involving Twitter are posing a great risk to our society. Many people, like myself, use Twitter to get snapshots of the news to investigate further. The CPB was founded on a mission to create a more informed public.
Is it possible for CPB to create a National Public Forum) for "civil discourse" that was monitored for truth and accuracy? It would provide a place for journalists committed to public truth to publish verified content. It would be monitored for accuracy which would create jobs. It would provide an additional avenue to increase private donations.
I would be happy to discuss this with anyone who will listen.
-Mike C****o (484) 288-xxxx
I would have given more
I used to give thousands of dollars to PBS as it was a big part of my family's life. Passport was a great idea and I was sympathetic to its limitations due to costs. However, I have moved to another city and am forced to use their passport which does not support the shows which I like. I have to log in way too often. In short it is a hassle for what I don't care for. This year, PBS will get the bare minimum for us as we feel that is what we get from you. We feel the rules imposed by CPB are the reason for the failure. We fear that by watching the pennies, you have lost the dollars. PBS has become irrelevant through a lot of its own doing. This is a tragedy. Please consider another structure for online viewing. A little upfront organization on your part could be way more profitable in the long run. I often make recommendations to people who reject the offers because they aren't members. Free samples has always been a successful model when the content is good. PBS still has the best content... but people have become used to sad offerings on other platforms. Please tempt them with something better. To prove my point, people donated when the television showed things for free. During these hard times, people could use something other than YouTube as a free options. We urge you to do something soon.
What is your function?
First, I think it’s strange that you’re a *private* corporation created and funded by government and managing government resources. Shouldn’t you be public under those circumstances? The public deserves to have more insight and influence into what we’re funding and de facto authorizing. Why is this organization not public?
Second, I think people need more help understanding what it is you actually do. You’re apparently using taxpayer funding to help stations by providing ‘grants, seed money, and operating support’, and you make the comment that you “make “major investments in national content”, but anytime someone has a question or criticism, your standard response is ‘we don’t have any influence or input to programs or content’. I’m trying to understand how this is possible and what your function actually is. Are you purely processing disbursements from government direction without any strategy or analysis on your part? If so, who is providing the direction? And do we really need a private corporation to do that? Where’s the taxpayer benefit? If you do have some true managerial/ developmental/ operational oversight, how is it you give the same form letter response to everyone saying you don’t? If you keep getting comments talking about bad reporting and bias for instance (in violation of NPR/ PBS posted mission statements and code of ethics), how is it that your only response is to say that’s not your area? If you’re making managerial/ developmental/ operational investments and have that kind of business relationship, shouldn’t you at least be collecting these comments for feedback, internal policy/ process decisions, or at least some kind of report? Shouldn’t you be able to point commenters to some kind of official surveys or feedback process you have for your taxpayer funded entity? From this vantage point (with such limited/ non-existent information) it seems kind of like a shell game. It looks as though you are either an unnecessary organization, you’re not being fully upfront about your role, or you’re being used as a means to intentionally block public input into public broadcasting.