By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Filmmaker Ken Burns criticized the potential elimination of funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, labeling it as shortsighted. The White House has targeted public media entities like PBS and NPR, prompting a request for $1.1 billion to be clawed back. Burns, whose documentaries often air on PBS, expressed concern for the network’s future, emphasizing the vital services it provides, especially in rural areas. He argued that PBS is a crucial American institution that supports democratic ideals.
Read the original article here
Ken Burns’ use of the word “shortsighted” to describe the potential elimination of funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is a bit of an understatement, isn’t it? If you’re looking for a more blunt assessment, well, some folks would call it “fucking stupid.” It’s a relatively small amount of money in the grand scheme of things. The real motivation here seems to be about control – preventing Americans from accessing non-commercialized content that these folks can’t manipulate. It’s a strategy they’ve been eyeing for quite some time.
The reasoning behind such a move, according to some, stems from a deep-seated ideological opposition. Figures from the right wing, specifically those aligned with the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, view concepts like “neutral education” as a form of indoctrination, a threat to their vision. It’s a philosophy you might have to dig for, perhaps through PragerU or some of those other sources, to fully understand the underlying sentiment.
And the implications? Well, eliminating funding for PBS could be a major win for those who prefer a population that’s less inquisitive. As the current administration seems to denounce any information it dislikes as “woke,” the potential loss of this form of quality media could be a massive blow. This is about more than just budget cuts; it’s a deliberate effort to shape what Americans see and hear, pushing them toward division.
This isn’t just shortsighted; it’s a long-term strategy, a calculated move to reshape the country. For some, it’s about controlling the narrative, ensuring a certain kind of message dominates the airwaves, which is the point. Think about it: the kind of folks trying to kill PBS probably wouldn’t understand the value of “Sesame Street,” or any of the other educational and entertaining programming. They’re more likely to gravitate towards mindless entertainment, favoring the kind of content that reinforces their worldview. It’s a pattern we’ve seen, one that benefits those in power.
For those on the opposite end of the political spectrum, this attack on PBS strikes at the core of what public broadcasting should be: non-partisan and educational. The idea that they don’t care for PBS because the programming uses “big words” is part of the issue. It’s about creating a carefully curated version of reality. It’s also a blatant move to push the country towards a state of decline, and the destruction of democracy.
If you’re living in rural areas, then it’s PBS or nothing. Burns pointed this out as a key fact. The cuts are designed to do a few things. Destroy democracy. Control the narrative. Provide an advantage to those who want to destroy the country. They are attacking the very concept of what is good and moral and right. They are, in the words of some, sociopaths.
This isn’t about being unaware; it’s a targeted approach. The goal isn’t just the immediate impact but the long-term consequences: limiting access to diverse perspectives and critical information. PBS offers children’s programming, continuing education, critical information on homeland security, crop reports, and essential weather emergency updates. Removing these services can cause a massive disruption for several reasons. If you truly want to destroy the fabric of the American system, this is the way to do it.
The whole point of defunding these public media entities is to cement the lock conservative propaganda outlets have on rural voters. That makes it seem like the news has to be partisan and commercial and it emphasizes the idea that the government won’t help you. It’s playing into the hands of those who are solely concerned with acquiring and maintaining power, regardless of the cost to the country.
Ultimately, these cuts are designed to reshape the country into something else. The idea that the country needs to be “reshaped” in the image of this current administration is just another way to say that we are facing a fascist hellscape.