Jerold M. Starr wants a trust fund for PBS

Tom Paine posted parts of Jerold M. Starr's essays about American public broadcasting and PBS. Starr advocated in both articles for independent funding for PBS so the station can have freedom to air what it wants.

In Starr's one article, "PBS Discriminates Against Alternative Views," there are examples of PBS canceling shows because they were funded by groups who supported the cause of the show, which is something PBS does, Starr pointed out.

This goes back to my recent blog about transparency being the new objectivity. In this case, there is nothing wrong with supporting something you are passionate as long as you are honest about it. Shows are going to be funded by the people who have a bias towards it and there is nothing wrong with that. As long as the directors make it clear what the purpose of the show is and the support they received, there is nothing wrong with a show funded by specific groups.

I still think it is better to be balanced and show different sides of a story but shows such as documentaries can and are one sided. The good point though is that they are usually showing the side that people don't talk or know about.

If PBS had a trust fund from the government and public broadcasting was more independent, it would definitely change the way PBS runs. Right now they do have a loyalty to their supporters and I agree with Starr that they are struggling to survive. However, it is questionable what a trust fund would do for a public station.