When FAIR released a study of the PBS‘s NewsHour (then known as the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour) in 1989, one finding stood out:
The Exxon Valdez oil spill was the major environmental story of the period. MacNeil/Lehrer had seven segments on the spill; not one included an environmental representative. Several discussions were limited to Exxon officials and friendly officials: The March 30, 1989 program, for example, featured Exxon’s chairman and Alaska’s governor (“The chairman of the board of Exxon, I think, has been to heavy on his own company”).
Andthe summaryof a segment from last night’s broadcast of the NewsHour (4/29/10):
Costs Climb as BP Struggles to Contain Oil Spill
The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is threatening sensitive coastline and commercial fisheries, following last week’s explosion at an offshore oil rig. Jeffrey Brown talks to a BP spokeswoman about the implications of the spill for the company and for offshore drilling.
Let’s hope the company wasn’t too hard on itself.
I also noticed and have emailed PBS a couple of times about this; their coverage seems to weigh more heavily on the Conservatives. For example, their coverage of the Tea Party usually includes sound bites by obviously senior citizens, protesting the federal government’s “takeover of health care” or “Hands off of my health care!” Not once have I heard anyone asked if they are willing to give up their SS or Medicare. I do not recall anyone ever mentioning that “Death Panels” already exist– in the Health Insurance companies, who delay and deny life saving medical care to their clients. PBS should change their name to Profit Broadcasting System.
I guess you’d call this “on-air fundraising”?
Why has PBS remained so conservative? Is because the Bush administration stuffed the organization with right-wing political commissars? Or is because of the need to get corporations to underwrite their programming?
Barry, it’s for that corporate underwriting (just look at the sponsors). Same goes for Nice Republican Radio, which I listen too less and less. I’m glad FAIR calls out these guys regularly. Where would we be with out FAIR!?
NPR has it’s problems too. The NPR Ombudsman has devoted two of her most recent columns on conflicts of interest in NPR’s coverage of books and records. FAIR, do a blog report on this. Thanks.
I might’ve mentioned this before. I stopped contributing to Public Broadcasting when Mobil became prominent as sponsor. As far as I know Mobil is innocent of most of the awful spills, but maybe not.
With the retirement of Bill Moyers and the NOW program, PBS will now be more like a boring CNN where the corporation is king and the groups representing the people will be ignored. Corporatism will run amok at PBS as it has elsewhere in the news media.
I listened to a parade of economy experts speak on the economy on the various PBS news shows. Not a single one of these experts mentioned the effect of the wars as well as the destabilisation of the oil regions as a cause and effect. So now I tune them out. This is standard US propaganda of trying to dissect the perpetual war from having any factor on the Western Economy. The constant threat against Iran helps spark speculation on oil and the US has already effectively trashed Iraq. PBS was as guilty as the NY Times and Wall Street Journal in the Jingoism about invading Iraq. Now we are too suppose that the current economy’s funk is due to mortgage foreclosures and deriavatives with no relationship to the war. Germany and France had to eat up billions in unpaid bills due to the overthrow of Hussein’s government as did Russia. You will not hear any correlation by the PBS interviewees how could they be anything but compliant to their corporate sponsors?
Peter Hart also filed a 5/4/10 FAIR blog report entitled
“NewsHour Finds Drilling Critic.” He and those who’ve replied to both reports haven’t done their fact-checking homework. In his “Drilling” of PBS and the NewsHour he says in part:
“We noted last week that the PBS NewsHour’s coverage of the Gulf oil disaster one night included a one-on-one interview with a spokesperson from BP. Going through the show’s coverage since then, a remarkable fact emerged: The show had NOT interviewed an environmental advocate opposed to the White House plan to increase offshore oil drilling. The reticence to talk about this obvious policy angle was bizarre–though not at all limited to PBS.” [Emphasis added]
–That’s misleading: On 3/31/10, the day the White House plan was announced, the NewsHour aired two pieces in which Phil Radford, the executive director of Greenpeace USA, and Democratic Senator Benjamin Cardin of Maryland strongly criticized the plan.
From the piece entitled “Obama Proposes Lifting Coastal U.S. Drilling Bans”:
“KWAME HOLMAN: In response, a spokesman for the environmental group Greenpeace called it a disappointment.
“I think it’s a real let down, and I think it’s a betrayal of people that voted against ‘Drill, baby, drill’ and for President Obama’s vision of a clean-energy future.”
From the piece entitled “Obama Eyes Energy Development in Drilling Plan; Opponents Point to Alternatives”
“JEFFREY BROWN: What is your chief objection to this?
“SEN. BENJAMIN CARDIN: Well, I think Secretary Salazar is right. There are places that are too special to risk offshore drilling.
“I’m disappointed that he didn’t include the Mid-Atlantic, didn’t include the Chesapeake Bay, didn’t include Assateague, and the valuable resources that we have there. That’s equally important to the Pacific. And I was disappointed that that risk now is greater.” [In the rest of the interview he further criticizes offshore drilling.]
In his “Drilling” Hart also describes Mark Shields as a “PBS liberal,” then says: “It’s good that PBS is letting its viewers in on that [opposition to the drilling] NOW.” [Emphasis added]
–That’s misleading. By law PBS cannot produce programs; Shields is a NewsHour commentator, not a PBS spokesman; and each NewsHour episode must include the standard PBS disclaimer that MacNeil/Lehrer Productions “is solely responsible for its content.” Moreover, Hart has not reviewed all of the PBS-distributed programs to validly conclude that “PBS is letting viewers in on that [opposition to the drilling] NOW.” [Emphasis added]
The NewsHour pieces can be reviewed online via Google; it makes fact-checking easy for those who desire to do it.
Please note: I’m a retired longtime staffer at a major-market PBS-affiliated station.