Colorado Republican Wants to Cut CPB

Colorado Representative Republican Doug Lambron says he is introducing legislation that would eliminate the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Details are in an article in The Colorado Independent. Rep Lambron says the country no longer needs this choice in a time when 500 channels are available through cable and other pay-for-use services like the internet. Pam Osborn, spokesperson for Colorado Public Broadcasting said in the article that 18% of the television audience still gets their TV "free" over the air. Many of them cannot afford $100 a month for cable or internet phone service. 

Can PBS and NPR be Self-Sustaining?

Lambron also said that NPR and PBS will survive without CPB. That day may be coming for NPR with direct funding from on-line and internet radio users. But, NPR is not anywhere near the critical mass needed to sustain itself. Most of its funding comes from member stations. Stations get some funding from CPB, some funding from contributors and some funding from underwriters. The article ignores other program suppliers like Public Radio International, American Public Media, WFMT and the Public Radio Exchange. PBS does not directly create any programming.

Public Broadcasting is Driven by Memberships

Membership contributions for public radio are driven by programming. Listeners send money to public radio when they rely on its service and consider it important in their lives. According to research from ARA (Audience 98), public service and public support are linked so tightly that listener support can be used as a proxy for the public service that causes it. Public support, like public service, is the product of two factors: the value listeners place on the programming, and the amount of listening done to the programming.

We found at the station I worked for the listeners who valued the station most (core listeners) were most likely to support us. Typically the core tuned in about ten times a week for a total of about 10 hours a week. On-line usage does not come anywhere close to that threshold, at least not yet.

Not a New Idea

This is not the first time cuts have been proposed. The Reagan administration actually cut funding in the 80's with a rescission of at least 50%. The recession came as the result of a flap over program content on PBS. The Reagan Administration wanted more control over the content.  Newt Gingrich later proposed "The Glide Path to Zero" where all funding was to be cut for public broadcasting. There have been other proposals. The most recent proposal came from the Bush Administration. Some states strapped for cash are proposing cuts. The stations hurt most by these cuts are the smaller stations, usually in rural areas.

A Change is Coming

The funding equation will change as listeners and viewers change how they acquire their content. According to what I’ve been reading, that change is coming in this decade. What that means for local affiliates is not clear. If NPR does find itself in the position where it can cut the local affiliates loose, the affiliates will have a difficult time supporting their coverage of local and regional issues. Most public radio listeners today come to their stations looking first for the national programming. Without those listeners, stations will find sustainability to be a problem. Funding local news on public radio will be difficult. In this case, new alliances and new funding models will need to be found in order for public radio and television to continue provide in-depth news and information programming.

UA-12112039-1