What's going on with PBS?

[SquireJons]

For a very long time, the only television news I have had any confidence in has been PBS. Unfortunately, that confidence has been severely shaken recently. On the News Hour, Jim Lehrer has been absent since the Abu Griab story broke - over a month. I have yet to see or hear any comment regarding his absence on either the show or at PBS.org. This was proceeded by the sacking of Bob Edwards, host of Morning Addition.

And now this. On the Friday News Hour show, they always provide analysis from a liberal and a conservative. It used to be Gergan and Shields, then Shields and Brooks. But tonight is was given by Brooks and Olephant. What the hell is with that? Right wing aaaaaand... right wing. This change was also made without comment by anyone on The News Hour. I have also noticed a purge in commentators who would be associated with liberals or even Democrats. And even anyone who would be critical of the administration. This is a terrible development, and I'm very concerned.

Can anyone definitively ease my fears? None of this "I think Lehrer's on a book tour" crap. He's an important person. There must be some published comments on his absence and the same goes with Shields. If they don't adequately address these issues, I'll never donate a penny to PBS again. And for those out there who also give to PBS, I would ask you to call or write you local stations and demand an explanation - and tie it to your donations. If the right wing has taken control of PBS, we have no business supporting it financially. Notice how the pugs have stopped calling for it's elimination? Hmmmmm.

[rhino47]

1. I have wondered about Leher`s absence also.

I thougth it was rather strange.You could be right.
Maybe rupert found another network to buy. <sarcasm>

[Wwagsthedog]

2. As long as they have "Now" in their lineup, I'll watch them.

Don't know what will happen when Bill Moyers leaves. You're "right" about their leaning the wrong way like other shills. I want my country back!

[SquireJons]

5. Me too...

Ya know, I really don't mind that the wing nuts have their stations and shows to watch. It's a free country (or used to be). But what's so infuriating is that they are on a mission to completely eliminate any respected voice of opposition. This is not acceptable, even if it were the wing nuts being eliminated. We must have the give and take of ideas or we are lost.

As for NOW, it seems to be a pretty non political show, which makes it window dressing. {Heavy Sigh} I'll tell you one thing, if we ever do get our country back, there MUST be large scale criminal investigations of the actions of right wing operatives. While out of elected office, they engage in underground activities that are just as reprehensible as what they do in the glare of the spot light. The hell with 'healing the country.' I want to see lots of right wing traitors go to jail for a very long time. And we must pass legislation that provides true over-site of political activities. These assholes are out to overthrow our system of government from within and they must be stopped.

[papau]

3. Oliphant is left - but he never stretches the facts in front of him - I 'd

wish he shot from the hip based on implied truth - just like the right wing folks at Fox pretend to do as they are in reality just telling lies - but he doesn't.

He has excellent sources because of this - what he says you can take to the bank. I rather like EJ!

:-)

[PROGRESSIVE1]

4. Since when has Thomas Oliphant been "right wing"?

He center-center left as a whole and much more to the left socially.

I do not see where he is a right winger.

:eyes:

[SquireJons]

7. Yeah, right...

He's about as 'left' as William F. Buckley. Just because he advocates a tiny handfull of socially responsible issues, does not make him even middle of the road. I will never accept Oliphant as anything but right of center, and pretty far right as far as I'm concerned. Has he been attacking shrub like he did bush 41? No, he hasn't, and the son is far worse than the father.

[SquireJons]

12. OK, I seem to be wrong about Oliphant

I went to the Globes website and read several of Oliphant's recent editorials. He is attacking the mis-administration and he is consistently bringing up good issues. I wonder when he changed, or why I failed to notice his other decent conttributions. I still remember him from the eighties and back then my impression of him was anything but liberal. I remember being delighted and shocked when he openly broke with bush 41, but I figured that was an anomaly. I guess I stand corrected. Perhapes I am confusing him with someone else. Isn't he the one whose poitical cartoons of bush 41 always showed him carrying a purse?

But he sure wasn't Mark Shields, that's for sure. You would have thought Brooks and Oliphant were twins on Friday.(As right wingers go, Brooks isn't that bad btw. My favorite Brooks op-ed was when he felt it necessary to completely re-write shrubs most recent state of the nation speech. That was hilarious)

[librechik]

6. Don't worry about that

I know someone who works there, so here is the straight skinny.

Lehrer's on a book tour and vacation plus he usually takes many weeks off during the summer. He's almost 71 and he owns the production company so he can do whatever he wants. A lot of the time he wants to take it easy & let the B team take turns running the show while they also revolve vacations.

Same with Shields & Brooks. Expect to see different Friday debate teams all through the summer.

It's an election year. They'll all be back with a vengeance come September.

I don't know what Lehrer could add to the dialogue on AbuGhraib. He is ultra careful about taking sides on anything, so even if he were there he'd mainly just be letting other people do the talking, probably without even challenging them on their facts, as usual. And all the wrong people too. That's how he plays (and wins) the WX game.

[SquireJons]

8. I disagree

First, during an election year, an anchor can not just disappear for months on end. Second, it is the responsibility of the network to inform their regular viewers, which they have not. Third, I've been watching The News Hour for years and they do not change political annalist willy nilly AND without comment. Forth, I want a PBS issued statement or statements issued on behalf of the individuals mentioned. That is the responsible thing to do and what has always happened in the past. This is different. So far all I've seen posted on DU about him amounts to 'I think he's on a book tour.' That has about as much weight to it as when * says "They're freedom haters - they hate freedom." Statements must be based on fact, not conjecture.

As for Lehrer's style and credentials, I think he is unmatched and so do media watchdogs. Yeah, I know he has let some things slide, and folks here seem genuinely peeved that he stated for the record that Sadr's newspaper was inciting violence. But at the time he made those comments, that was the official position of the CPF and the administration. So it was a reasonable comment for him to make.

Over the damn near 20 years that I've been watching the show, he has regularly questioned official administration statements and policies. For example, about 3 months ago, he had a news maker interview with Rumsfeld, and the two of them damn near ended up shouting at each other. The tension in the air was so thick you could cut it with a knife. Lehrer questioned and contradicted everything Rummy said. That simply doesn't happen on any other TV show.

We need Lehrer. May and June are the months when many independents make up their minds, and 70 years old is nothing these days (especially if you're in as good a shape as he is). When I see comments officially release by PBS or Lehrer, then I'll accept that a purge is not happening, but not until then.

[librechik]

10. I admit the Rummy interview was excellent.

I'm just a jaded burnout, and wish he had jumped up like that Congressman who scolded McCarthy: At long last, sir, have you no decency?

Lehrer is definitely one of the good guys, and his journalism is quite impeccable, aside from the occasional unintentional error, like the Sadr thing.

I'm really just trying to reassure you. Lehrer will be back and there is no purge of Lehrer going on at PBS at this time. Or probably ever. PBS adores him. He will definitely be around for the Dem convention.

[SquireJons]

11. Thanks, I can use some reassuring

Alas, I won't feel comfortable with this until I see something released from either PBS or Lehrer. And having to watch Brooks and Oliphant crow and gush about how 'great' the economy is going and what a good week it was in Iraq is more than I can take.

I'm still worried. But thanks.

[JCRobinhood]

25. It's not just spin-doctors missing

A few months ago, the Nat Turner documentary was released and supposed to air. WUNLV (Chapel Hill, NC)decided NOT to air it??? Finally after a ton of complaints, they managed to find a slot for it around 11:00pm or 12:00am on a Friday/Saturday. As far as I know, that was the one shot at viewing it on the local PBS station. Ahhh, but at least they haven't turned their back that infamous trouble-maker on Lawrence Welk. Queue the bubbles please.

[DoBotherMe]

9. public broadcasting has been subject to intense ideological pressure

-- The observation by journalist Moyers, who told The New Yorker author Ken Auletta: 'This is the first time in my 32 years of public broadcasting that CPB has ordered up programs for ideological instead of journalistic reasons.'"

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=123-06012004

I read a story somewhere on the net that the programming may become more ideological. Dana ; )

[sampsonblk]

13. Maybe something BIG Coming

I thought I heard Gwen Ifill say he was on assignment. If so, then there may be something big coming. I have never known him to be gone for days at a time. ?

[SquireJons]

14. I heard different

While watching this last Monday, she said 'Jim Lehrer is off this week." Not 'on vacation' or 'on assignment', but just 'off.' I keep waiting for them to explain his absence, but so far nothing. I'm going to start making official inquiries and I'll post what they tell me.

Despite what has been said here in earlier posts, I have never known him to be off the air for more than a week. And never in an important news cycle. I mean, would Kerry just go off on vacation right when people were developing a positive impression of him? Of course not, that would be stupid. Oh, wait a minute... never mind.

"Cause you know something is happening, and you don't know what it is, do you Mister Jones?"
-Zimmerman

[sampsonblk]

15. Well what do you think it means?

Health problems? Internal politics? I think I may have heard the same thing you did. But I have no idea what to make of it.

[SquireJons]

20. I'm afraid to think about what it means

PBS is/was the only unbiased mainstream media outlet. Conservatives don't watch or listen to it, so the only goal, as I see it, is to demoralize and break up liberals and independents. Soon we will all be forced to watch Fox by law.

[Wickster]

16. NOW cut to 30 minutes!

According to an article from Chellie Pingree quoted by truthout (http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/060704L.shtml ), NOW with Bill Moyers is being reduced to a half hour and Tucker Carlson and Paul Gigot (neither of whom I can stand) have been given their own shows on PBS! All political. When I read that this morning, I just sort of caved in - I really don't know how to fight this anymore. NOW was the only show my husband and I looked forward to watching. We even stopped listening to Morning Edition. It isn't the same without Bob Edwards.

What can we do when the members of CPB are Bush appointees (and contributors)? Writing letters won't work, these people will just ignore them.

[suzijane]

19. Ombudsman for NPR

I've been complaining to Ombudsman Dvorkin about NPR for 6 months, ever since the primaries. He responds but ducks answering questions. I make, or rather USED to make decent donations to my local station. Have held back this year after they gave Krautheimer the Nazi airtime for an opinion piece said that Howard Dean was insane. I figured why would I donate to Dean AND NPR? I'd be canceling out my donations.
What I think is very strange is how every program I hear on NPR seems to have a religious component or slant to it now. They covered Passion of the Christ extensively and today did the movie "Saved." Last week it was a huge program on "Christian Rock music."

[nodictators]

22. There was a curious event on NOW re Gigot

Bill Moyers had a segment with Paul Gigot (editorial page editor for the Wall Street Journal) a month or so ago.

Moyers easily bested Gigot on every point that they discussed.

Curiously, the following week Gigot returned for a 10-minute (or so) segment with Moyers. Moyers let Gigot do the talking and never took issue with anything he said.

It sure seemed then that the "fix" was in. Now, it appears that indeed it was. Liberal ideas must not be allowed to prevail on PBS.

[jdsmith]

17. Last week's "New Yorker" has 6-8 pages on it

Now even Newt Gingrich likes it!

[swhisper]

18. wake up, the Reagan snowstorm has covered up the report that Bush* ordered

the media to "balance" the programing and add conservative feed. Hense, Fox extremists are now on new radio programs and PBS tv programs, usurping our honest hosts. Big brother has arrived in force folks.

Meanwhile, the coming week of Reagan swill has forced me to turn off the tv and swing into spring cleaning of house, garage and weeding the garden. First, I sent complaints to CNN, MSNBC, and Sirius.

[cprise]

26. Please provide sources!

I heard about this elsewhere (can't reacall)... This has to be stopped NOW if it is true.

Thanks.

[abrupt]

21. well..

If Frontline starts to get screwy, then I think PBS might be doomed (except for Teletubbies)

[Senior citizen]

23. I tuned out PBS years ago.

When Clinton was first elected, I notice that despite how respectful PBS had been of Reagan, they always referred to Clinton as "Mr. Clinton," instead of, "President Clinton." The reason it struck me was because no matter what horrible things Reagan had done, he was always referred to as respectfully as possible. Naturally when the chimp was (s)elected, PBS returned to their policy of being fully respectful of U.S. Presidents, and it was always "President," instead of "Mister." One commentator DID take the liberty of referring to "Mister" shrub instead of "President" chimp, and I wondered how long he would last. He apparently found a better job within the next couple of weeks--but that could be coincidence.

Fortunately I don't have a TV, but PBS doesn't get a dime from me. They have more commercials than the mediagopoly networks, and they still won't call them commercials. Anybody more hypocritical than FAUX is just too far gone to think about. My local station has the slogan, "the home for growing minds." I know they have small minds, but whether they are growing is debatable.

:kick:

[sampsonblk]

24. Really Does Look Like a Book Tour - Interesting too!

http://www.tribnet.com/entertainment/story/5107655p-5034601c.html

The Lehrers' love story plays out on the road as newsman, novelist sign books, strike sparks
DIANE DE LA PAZ; The News Tribune (Tacoma, WA)
===>May 24, 2004 <===

Jim Lehrer, hardboiled newsman, has gone mushy about his bride.

Kate Staples was moving into the apartment building where he lived. Jim, just out of the Marine Corps, was working at the Dallas Morning News. Seeing a young woman carrying a box of books up the steps, he asked if he could help.

"I proposed to her two weeks later," Lehrer recalls. "I'd grown up on lovey-dovey movies. I wasn't sure if all that stuff was true, but my God, there she was."

Love walked up the stairs as a Texas-raised schoolteacher named Kate.

How did he know she was the one?

"I just felt it. I really did know it. There was not a lot of to-ing and fro-ing," said Jim, who's been married to Kate for more than 40 years.

In a phone interview from their Washington, D.C., home, both Lehrers talked about the twist Kate just introduced to their apparent fairy tale. She wrote a book about infidelity - and then some. "Confessions of a Bigamist," her fourth novel, was published this month. So now everyone's looking at Jim Lehrer.

"I've been asked, 'What would prompt your wife, Jim, to write a book about a woman having more than one husband?'" His answer: "It was a terrific idea" for a novel.

...

"When she reads my stuff and says, 'This doesn't quite work, sweet baby,' or when she says, 'This is the most beautiful piece of writing,' I know she's saying that as a writer, not because she loves me."

...

Less thrilling is the book-promotion tour the Lehrers are on now. It's "eight or nine years" long, Jim jokes. Yet both partners say it's not so bad traveling together. They're starting to sound like they could get work as marriage counselors - or just marriage models - in addition to their other careers.

"Correct me, honey, if you disagree," Jim says to Kate, "but we're not just hanging together by our thumbs. We're arm in arm. We really do enjoy each other's company. We make each other laugh, as much so today as the day we met."

Kate doesn't exactly correct him, but adds, "That doesn't mean we haven't worked very, very hard in the marriage, and on compromising," she says.

The good husband agrees. "You get out of a marriage what you put into it."