PBS and "Citizen Koch" - Show Us the Movie

Jane Meyer has written a must-read article about the interplay between David Koch and PBS flagship station WNET.

Jane Meyer on New Yorker: How Far Did PBS Go to Avoid Offending Board Member David Koch?

From the "Citizen Koch" Website

Statement about “A Word From Our Sponsor,” by Carl Deal & Tia Lessin

Our film CITIZEN KOCH tells a story about how the money of the few drowns out the voices of the many. Set against the Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Citizens United and the rise of the Tea Party and Occupy movements, the film explores the consequences for democracy when private interests determine who is elected to deliver public good.

Public television had commissioned our film last spring, but fearing that our film would displease one of its large contributors, public television abruptly backed out on our deal.

Investigative journalist Jane Mayer exposes the self-censorship process in her New Yorker article “A Word from Our Sponsor: Public television’s attempts to placate David Koch.” The carefully documented piece reveals how the role of billionaire industrialist and conservative activist David Koch as a trustee of and donor to PBS flagship stations WNET and WGBH compromised the independence and integrity of public broadcasting. It also tells the story of how we, as a result, lost our own public television commission for CITIZEN KOCH.

Public television viewers also lost out by being denied an opportunity to participate in a discussion of the issues our film raises.

After much thought, we decided to go public with our experience hoping that, like the film itself, it will spark conversation about how power wielded by high-dollar political donors like Charles and David Koch distorts the public dialogue.

With the possibility looming that the Kochs’ may purchase the Tribune Company of newspapers, this conversation takes on vital relevance to the public.

Documentary filmmaking is the nexus of art and journalism, and we hope that Mayer’s exposé informs honest conversations within and outside public television and the independent filmmaking community about the role and importance of public financing for public arts institutions and that it also encourages people to take a stand against censorship in any form.

- Carl Deal & Tia Lessin

Here's the trailer. I want to see the entire thing, and if PBS is too scared to show it, then it should go out on YouTube or Netflix - somewhere! And soon!

Mr. Rogers Goes Viral (Again) After Newtown Shooting

Photo by Jim Judkis
I'm such a huge fan of Mr. Rogers, and I can't imagine what he would think about the way some are shrugging off this massacre of young children as just "business as usual" in America.

But with the magic of video, Mr. Rogers is still around spreading his wisdom. There happens to be a video he made after the assassination of Bobby Kennedy beseeching parents to realize the effect that the news coverage has on the minds and emotions of children. The original doesn't seem to be around on the internet right now, but I bet PBS will put it up soon. For now you can see a clip of it in the video discussion below.

There is also an amazing picture (see above) that was taken for magazine spread and went viral on Facebook just hours after the shooting. It truly captures the innocence of childhood, and gives us hope that not everyone in the world thinks guns are the answer to everything. I would HATE for any child to believe that.

PBS has the story:

"When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, 'Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.' To this day, especially in times of 'disaster,' I remember my mother's words, and I am always comforted by realizing that there are still so many helpers -- so many caring people in this world."

On Friday, 170 Million for Public Broadcasting posted the image and quote on their Facebook page. Since then, the post has been seen by hundreds of thousands of people and shared more than 90,000 times on Facebook.

The quote was taken from a timely video in which Rogers advises parents on how to help their children during times of tragedy....

. . . Photographer Jim Judkis captured the photo in 1978 at The Children's Institute in Pittsburgh, then known as the Memorial Home for Crippled Children. On Tuesday's NewsHour, Judkis's daughter Maura Judkis talks about the virality of her father's photo.

Snark in Pictures

PBS and Big Bird Funny Part of Election Message

via gifsfln

PBS asked Obama yesterday to stop using Big Bird in his campaign even as the campaign launched a new ad featuring the feathered fowl. I think Obama can make the case that Big Bird is a cultural icon and a public persona, and therefore fair game (no offense to game birds).

From NBC News First Read

In a statement, Sesame Workshop objected to the ad: “We have approved no campaign ads, and, as is our general practice, have requested that both campaigns remove Sesame Street characters and trademarks from their campaign materials.”
. . . President Barack Obama has seized on Romney’s Big Bird comment to argue that his Republican challenger would crack down on beloved American institutions such as Sesame Street but would allow Wall Street to run wild.
Speaking to a crowd of 15,000 in Columbus, OH the President said, “Today (Romney) decided we’re going after Big Bird. Elmo’s making a run for the border and Oscar is hiding out in a trash can.”
Emphasizing the Sesame Street theme, recording artist will-i-am kicked off his performance at the Ohio event by playing the Sesame Street theme song.
. . . the Obama campaign stands by its strategy.
“The point we’re making here is that when Mitt Romney was given the opportunity to lay out how he would address the deficit … his first offering was to cut funding to Big Bird and that is absurd and hard to take seriously,” Obama campaign spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters.

This ad is hilarious - I don't understand why PBS would object.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Big Bird on Saturday Night Live

Big Bird stayed up past his bedtime to appear on Saturday Night Live's Weekend Update last night. He chose not to confront Mitt Romney over possibly firing him from Sesame Street, saying he didn't want to "ruffle any feathers." But he did make a debate joke and was his ever-charming childlike self.



Conan O'Brien had his own spin on Romney "killing" Big Bird:



And Rick Santorum made this disturbing remark on CNN:



via gifsfln on tumblr
Rick Santorum on CNN's Piers Morgan Tonight, October 4, 2012

MORGAN: Finally, would you kill Big Bird?

SANTORUM: Well, as a matter of fact, I voted to kill Big Bird in the past. I have a record there that I have to disclose. That doesn't mean I don't like Big Bird. You can kill things and still like them, maybe to eat them, I don't know. That's probably that. Can we go back on that one?

MORGAN: That was beautifully badly phrased. I think we should end on that note, just to let you feel really uncomfortable. You can kill things but still like them, Rick Santorum. What a perfect way to end the interview.

Big Bird Art is rampant on the internet since Romney chose to target PBS last week in the first Presidential debate:

Fact Checking the Big Bird Debacle ~ Mitt Needs Educational TV

After watching the debate last night and the Big Bird sympathy all over the internet, I realized the problem is that Mitt just doesn't know much about PBS and how it works.

Nearly every show has a corporate sponsor all ready, from children's shows to Masterpiece Theater, and guess what - they always have! So his new "plan" to defund PBS and make it commercial is redundant and stupid. Same thing with sister channel "Create" - they don't need advertisements because they get sponsors for the products they use for cooking and crafts, and those are displayed at the beginning of the shows. It's a win-win for the network and for the viewers who watch without commercials.

It's as if Romney just wants to strip PBS and NPR bare the way Bain Capital did all those companies before selling them off piece by piece. He's a scorched-earth kinda guy and he likes to prey on the weakest link - in this case, television that helps children, the elderly, shut-ins, and those who need more education.

What Mitt Romney doesn't understand about everything would fill volumes, but if you are going to attack a beloved childhood icons like Big Bird and Sesame Street, at least know what the hell you are talking about!


CNN Interview with PAULA KERGER, PRESIDENT AND CEO, PBS (via telephone):

Joining us now by phone is Paula Kerger the CEO of PBS. Welcome, Paula.

PAULA KERGER, PRESIDENT AND CEO, PBS (via telephone): Thank you for having me on Carol. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you.

COSTELLO: Oh we're excited to talk to you. I mean -- I mean, the Big Bird moment was funny but there's a serious issue here and that is funding for PBS. Were you surprised that Mitt Romney brought up Big Bird?

KERGER: I was. I mean with the enormous problems facing our country, the fact that we are the focus is just unbelievable to me, particularly given the fact that you know at another part of the debate, both candidates talked about the importance of education. We are America's biggest classroom. We touch children across the country in every home, whether -- whether you have books in your home or computer or not, almost everyone has a television set.

And so we're able to bring kids across the country, not just enjoyable programs but programs that really help them prepare and get ready for school with core curriculum and math and science and literacy. So the fact that we're in this debate, this is not about the budget. It has to be about politics.

COSTELLO: So -- so tell us how much money does Big Bird get from the government?

KERGER: Well, actually, Big Bird doesn't get money from the government. In fact, the money that comes from the government into the corporation for Public Broadcasting actually doesn't even come to PBS. It goes to our member stations.

And so that is actually what's at risk if, in fact, we are defunded because the money is going to stations across the country. In aggregate our money is 15 percent of our budget. But you know when you look at it station by station, there are some stations, particularly in rural parts of the country, that they are a part of the federal budget is 50 percent, 60 percent, 70 percent. Those stations will go off the air. And so for people sitting in communities across the country, that is at risk. That is the consequence if, in fact, our money is zeroed out.

We have been for the 40 years of our history a great public/private partnership and we take the federal money and we leverage that with resources that we -- that we raise.

COSTELLO: I want to talk a little bit about Jim Lehrer. Because there are critics this morning just annihilating his performance last night. What did you think of Jim Lehrer's performance?

KERGER: Well I think you know that it was a very complicated debate structure and so you know and I think that in -- and you saw that I think in the debate last night.

COSTELLO: Well, there was criticism even when Jim Lehrer was initially named to be a moderator. People said oh another old white guy. He's too old to be doing this we live in a new world, we don't need an old-fashioned journalist doing these things any longer.

KERGER: Again, I think it was -- it was a complicated structure for the debate. And -- but, I -- you know again, the fact that we were, you know, singled out early in the debate, to me was just -- it was -- it was stunning. It was just a stunning moment.

Romney Plans to Cut PBS, Welfare, Amtrak and the Arts

I'm speechless. To me, whenever the Republicans try to cut PBS it seems like an attack on children in particular. These types of cuts have been going on since the Nixon years and I can't figure out how any of it helps most Americans, except making things more difficult or less interesting. Also it puts the burden back on the states, especially with PBS, which most people love.

And as far as sending housing and food stamps back to the states, and cutting funding for Amtrak . . . um . . . that would make Romney a very unpopular president, if he was ever going to be president, which I doubt.

Stupid is as stupid does.

From Huffington Post

Romney identified subsidies for Amtrak, PBS, the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities as things he would eliminate. The government spends $444 million a year on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (the parent organization of PBS); Amtrak received $1.56 billion in federal funding in 2010, with $1.3 billion in stimulus funds; while the National Endowment of the Arts lists the current level of federal funding at approximately $146 million.

Romney said he would block grant Medicaid and send programs like housing vouchers and food stamps back to the states. This, he argued, would save the federal government "approximately $100 billion a year within four years" (the House GOP budget claims to save $771 billion over 10 years). It would also mean dramatic cuts to each of these programs, as states are already dealing with major budget shortfalls.

. . . In sum, Romney's plan would put off entitlement reforms for 10 years, and rules out reductions in defense spending and major changes to the current tax code, while promising to bring federal spending below 20 percent of GDP by 2016. The Washington Post's Ezra Klein argues this is either fantasy mathematics, or Romney would essentially have to cut every single federal program by 40 percent.

Boehner and Cantor tried this a few years back, and got slammed for it. I hope the same thing happens to Romney and Ryan.


I wish Mr. Rogers were still around, but here he is pleading the case for Public TV back in 1969. Everyone should go and like this video, repost it, email and Facebook it. Mitt is as clueless as the guy interviewing Mr. Rogers who has never seen his show. Romney's handlers just told him that if they cut PBS they can have a war with Iran someday, and that's all his budget is about.

PBS ~ Obama Created Mitt Romney's Worst Day Ever

This comes via eXtina on Daily Kos... and I'm glad she brought it to light because while my husband loves PBS, I'm an MSNBC addict. So I often miss these little political gems.

Mark Shields of PBS said that Friday was  "The Worst Day of Mitt Romney's Life" because President Obama usurped him completely with his announcement about immigration.

That makes me smile. :)  Shields said:

But, very bluntly, this is the worst day of Mitt Romney's life, as the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party. Being president means that you are at a negative end when there's bad job numbers. But being president when you can take an affirmative action that makes your opponent squirm, even though it is an action that is totally consistent with where you have been in a policy sense -- and this for Mitt Romney is a character issue, because in 2008, 2012, he ran to the hard right of John McCain, of Rudy Giuliani, of Mike Huckabee there 2008, and of Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry in 2012 on the immigration.

He embraced the Arizona -- controversial Arizona state law. He said he would veto the DREAM Act. And they're looking at the fastest growing constituency in the country. And he really is scrambling now to get back.

What does Mitt Romney do? Does he reject the president's action? Does he promise to repeal it? Does he promise to honor it? Does he support legal challenges against it? He -- I thought he was terribly slow off the mark today. His answer was equivocal.
It reminded you of the 3:00 in the morning phone call. What does a president do? Is he going to have to poll his consultants when that happens? I just think this is really dangerous, dangerous territory. And the White House effectively changed the entire terms of the debate and the narrative, where they have been on the defensive and losing, and put Romney I think squarely on the defensive, where he is squirming.

Mark Gerson of Washington Post:

Romney's promise to veto the Dream Act is a serious vulnerability from this campaign. The President drove a truck through that vulnerability today. He pre-empted Marco Rubio, whose legislation he's proposing on this topic.
This smacks a little bit of the "Chicago Way" to promise a benefit to a major target group in these key states five months before an election. I think that's a risk. There's also a procedural risk that the Congress is going to be concerned about. . . . the President went around the normal procedures. . . . but it is primarily a vindication of the power of incumbancy to change the dialogue.

And on Sunday Romney is going to be interviewed on CBS by Bob Schieffer, and while we can't expect hardball questions - eXtina calls Schieffer "that marshmallow" because he is always so pro-Republican - Romney doesn't need much help to trip over his own tongue and get mired in controversy once again. Stay tuned.

Watch Shields, Gerson on the Politics of Immigration, Watergate on PBS. See more from PBS NewsHour.