I am SO disappointed advertising has come to public television. How can these companies say they are contributors/benefactors when we are forced to watch their advertising. Not OK.
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:
Advertising
Newshour
How bout having a conservative viewpoint since your liberal biased news is taxpayer funded. David is a flaming liberal. Sad. Please provide balance. You do not. Cape hart and Brooks are only giving the liberal media perspective and spins left and does not ask any hard questions. Sad. No press inquisitiveness, just spew liberal blather. Please hire someone that represents the other 50% of America. McNeil and Leyer are vomiting Woodruff and Brooks in projectile fashion.
Music performance rights for indy TV program on a PBS affiliate.
As an indy producer, are the song performed in a program I provide to a PBS affiliate covered under the CPB music rights umbrella under which PBS affiliates operate? Thanks.
Pakistani perspective of Afghanistan Judy Woodruff style
Negative comments about PBS programming
I support CPB, but you need a new tag line
Hello:
I absolutely support the mission and the role of CPB. I am a longtime contributor to public broadcasting and have NO problem with my taxes going to CPB.
That said, as a retired communications person, I find your long-time tagline laughable: "A Private Corporation Funded by the American People” is an oxymoron. If it is funded by the American people, it is by definition, NOT a private company. A private company is funded by shareholders. Or customers. Or donors. Or benefactors. Or trusts. Or venture capital. Or private equity. You are funded by the public. And NOT by volunteers but by taxpayers, whether they like it or not.
As I said, I like it and support it.
But in a time where alternative facts have run of the rhetorical landscape, your attempt to have it both ways comes off as naïve at best and downright dishonest at worst.
Bill Baker
PBS NewsHour
I like Stephanie Sy and the article she did on homelessness.
Capitol Fourth
We were very disappointed with the Capitol Fourth presentation with how they had such a divisive song at the very end. It does nothing to unite the nation, in fact, it does quite the contrary. We have one national anthem and not two. As long as people who are at the top of their world and jobs and education and are doing very well are in your face trying to say they don't have anything. If they're the problem and they are presenting this, look in the mirror and say I made it in this country. Why are we trying to divide it by saying it's not possible to make it when it certainly is. We're not a systemic racist country. We are a country that has made mistakes, but a country that deserves better than to have two national anthems. It was very disappointing and we won't be watching it again.
Brooks and Capehart program on PBS
This program used to be my favorite feature Friday evening. Capehart is such a mouthpiece for Biden and Kamala Harris and so strident in the Democrat propaganda that I have elected to turn off the program when it appears on Friday evening. Mark Shields or is remarkable in his broad perspective on politics. Capehart is just a Democrat who loves to spin the spending siren song.. I am so sorry that he was chosen to be the spokesperson on your Friday evening feature. Thank you, Fred Winston
The weak Strength of the SF PBS Signal
I live At xx, and there is no PBS signal. Zero. Even using 2 Antennas. What excuse is there for any city in America not to provide enough PBS signal strength to reach the whole community? None. Especially since the people have already paid for the PBS services. ? The correct Answer should be, OK we at PBS Will Double And Triple and Quadruple and daily increase the transmitter signal output. Hurray. Kw.
idea for a public option social media platform
This message and attachment came to the OIGemail hotline. The OIG has responded that it is not our area of responsibility. OIG is forwarding here so that you can send to either strategy and innovation or some other department.
OIG and Board of Directors CPB, I am a 79 year old grandfather……My wife and I, like you and the rest of the Country, are very concerned about Facebook.
There is increasing attention and frustration regarding the negative and even destructive, aspects of this problematic social media platform but few viable ideas to “clean up” the problems.
How about considering a unique approach that doesn’t threaten First Amendment free speech rights and gives people a choice??
I am asking you to consider legislation that would create the possibility of a Public Option Social Media Platform. A nonprofit platform that would offer all of the wonderful original family and friend communication options that are not problematic. There would be no advertising, no personal data collection and no ability to disseminate dangerous false news sources.
Conveniently, the vehicle for this concept already exists. As you know, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private, nonprofit entity that was 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. We can all remember how we, as young parents, chose Sesame Street for our children because it was available as an alternative to commercial TV programs. Why can’t today’s families have an alternative to Facebook?
There would certainly be many challenges to the development of an appropriate Public Option Social Media Platform but it sure looks like the time has come for serious consideration.
On the back is a letter, with more detail, that was never published.
Am I too naive or is this a viable option? Is it possible that we as Americans have a possible legislative solution that would allow us to have the choice to select an appropriate social media platform??
Thank you for taking the time to consider a proud grandfather’s quest for a better future for my granddaughters!
Michael Rolnick Farmington Hills, Michigan 48331 248-763-2916
The next material was attached but Rolnick said he has not sent to NYTIMES New York Times To The Editor: 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. Public trust has been violated in numerous ways, including the sale of private information, presumed confidential, the reliance on a lack of user understanding regarding privacy settings and a lack 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 non-profit platform that would offer all of the original family and friend communication options 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. serve.
Just as National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) were originally designed as publjc 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
Quit being liberal
I try to watch PBS, but more than it should happen, I have to find another station as the liberal wonks on the news come on. The majority of the programs are great, but PBS is not trustworthy with news. Stuck with documentaries and informational programming and stay away from News. And, the next time am anchor cheats for a presidential candidate, fire Her.
Funding
None of the programming CPB supports interests or benefits me. Why do I have to pay for it? You should transition to an advertisement supported platform instead of using money that could be better used for the betterment of all taxpayers.
Media/New Hour
YOU ARE TOO BIASED!!! My God, please stop the bias. You are definitely not serving the American People. You are partisan.
Washington Week
I appeal to Yamiche Alcindor to stop beginning her questioning of each week’s guests by saying to them that she is going to “turn to you, so-and-so. Talk to me a little bit about ….” It’s a verbal tic that is both annoyingly repetitive and uses many more words than needed to accomplish the same objectives.
News stories
I was a avid watcher of your programs. But now our sees that you only choose to petal to the left and their radical extremisms. That is not the America we love. Therefore my family and I will no longer watch your stations, programming or contribute to you and yours in any way!!!!
Publicly funded media needs to drop its bias
It is much more important for public media to get defunded than the police. Over the past five years public media has done a nosedive away from positive, culturally improving content, to slimy, bottom of your shoe, dregs of 'I'm offended' devisive content. This shouldn't be rewarded with grants and high paychecks. These 'writers' are a disease.
Defund NPR
We are fed up! NPR does not deserve federal funding. NPR cut down the “Declaration of Independence” and we do NOT trust anything NPR reports. NPR is anti- American and should NOT be getting grants, federal funding or any tax dollar help. We demand defunding of NPR now! Cheryl Thompson
NPR funding
It is long past time to defund NPR. It has had a biased, liberal agenda for years and now outright states such beliefs opening by holding the Declaration of Independence in derision, and at taxpayer expense.