Though there was a thread in March regarding this subject
I thought it would interest others to the response I received.

Apparently they find that because they have declining
email/mail feedback, they have determined that the viewer
interest has declined.

So how about helping out and sending email to one or
more of the following and see if the tide can be turned:





V Serve wrote:
Thank you for your programming inquiry.

KCET periodically reviews its programming schedule and looks at ongoing=

viewer ratings and viewer feedback to determine possible changes in the=

schedule as new programs become available.

Both NEW YANKEE WORKSHOP and THIS OLD HOUSE have continued to decline i=
n
viewership and in email and mail feedback, which is a good barometer of=

viewer interest. That=92s why after much discussion, we decided to take=

these two shows out of the schedule and make adjustments to the schedul=
e
which we think our viewers will find more appealing. We have moved bot=
h
ASK THIS OLD HOUSE and FIND! to the 5:00 pm and 5:30 pm time slots on
Saturday. We feel that both of these are strong programs, which our lo=
yal
Saturday viewers will want to make a part of their viewing schedule. T=
hey
will be followed by the new addition of BBC WORLD THIS WEEK at 6pm.

Both NEW YANKEE WORKSHOP and THIS OLD HOUSE are currently available on
other local public television stations.

We appreciate your comments and your support.

Sincerely,

Diana Santos
Manager, Member & Viewer Services

Or, you could let your dollars do the talking and donate with a
dedication for what ever show you want to see.

They like all others respond to dollars

bruce wrote:

Though there was a thread in March regarding this subject
I thought it would interest others to the response I received.

Apparently they find that because they have declining
email/mail feedback, they have determined that the viewer
interest has declined.

So how about helping out and sending email to one or
more of the following and see if the tide can be turned:





V Serve wrote:

snip

"Randy" writes:

Or, you could let your dollars do the talking and donate with a
dedication for what ever show you want to see.

I absolutely refuse to donate money to PUBLIC television/radio, what ever.

The operative word is PUBLIC, let them get their money from the PUBLIC
trough.

Just my thoughts.


--
Lew

S/A: Challenge, The Bullet Proof Boat, (Under Construction in the Southland)
Visit: http://home.earthlink.net/~lewhodgett for Pictures

Greetings and Salutations..

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 04:55:12 GMT, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:


"Randy" writes:

Or, you could let your dollars do the talking and donate with a
dedication for what ever show you want to see.

I absolutely refuse to donate money to PUBLIC television/radio, what ever.

The operative word is PUBLIC, let them get their money from the PUBLIC
trough.

Just my thoughts.

That is a problem, actually, since the trend has been to CUT
funding for NPR, in spite of the fact that it is a drop in the bucket
of the flood of money that the Feds hose away. It seems like the
Republicans get in, and cut funding...(because the medium is too
elitist, or, biased or whatever) then, when the Democrats get in,
they either continue the cuts, or, conveniently forget to try and
restore funding.
It seems like most of the attitude now is "If it has public
support, then, it should be able to get enough funding from private
sources to survive". Now, the Kroc estate pumped a chunk of cash
into NPR, and, while it was one of their smaller bequests, it was
still a great and helpful thing.
However, that did not help our local NPR stations...that was
only applied to the National organization. The fundraising drives
that annoy us once or twice a year are there because Federal funding
for local stations has dropped a huge percentage. IT costs a chunk
of change just to keep the transmitter on the air, and staff to
keep the station going, much less to produce content to add to the
mix.
The question is now, and, always has been, "how important
is the alternative programming provided by Public Radio/TV stations
to YOU?". If it is important and adds to the quality of your life,
then, each of us should take on the reponsibility of helping keep
it going on that local level.
I, for one, think that the content provided by the public
broadcasting stations available to us does, indeed, add an
important alternative view to our lives. Some folks feel that
the proliferation of channels available on cable and other media
have filled the niche that used to be reserved for NPR stations.
WHile there is some validity to that view, I don't think that
it is true enough that Public stations should disappear entirely.
A vast majority of the programming available on the alternative
channels is profit motivated, and, constrained by the same rules
that have made broadcast television such a vast wasteland.
As a small example...Ken Burn's Civil War series, which
is probably one of the most evocative and complete examinations
of that period of American history was not funded by a cable
channel...but by Public Broadcasting. I suspect that if it HAD
been done by a commercial entity, it would have been shorter,
had a lot more "eye candy", and, far less interesting. It was
not "commercial"...but it was a great success. There are many
other examples of programming which would be difficult or
impossible to do on a commercial channel, but, which are
supported by Public Broadcasting.
By the by..."supporting public broadcasting" does
not simply mean writing a check, although that might
be the easiest way. To keep this from being TOTALLY off topic,
one of my contributions a few years ago was a toy, wooden
pickup truck that I made. It was used as a premium/thankyou
gift for one of the generous contributors, and, was quite
popular. Most PBS stations do this sort of thing, and,
would be more than happy to take an item for auction,
or as a premium...Every little bit helps.
Regards
Dave Mundt

"Dave Mundt" writes:

That is a problem, actually, since the trend has been to CUT
funding for NPR, in spite of the fact that it is a drop in the bucket
of the flood of money that the Feds hose away.

snip a commentary from some one who appears to have an inside perspective

It is my understanding that it was the Nixon administration that tried to
cut funding because NPR was covering the Watergate hearings on a continuous
basis.

It is also my understanding that those who listen to public radio/television
basically split down the middle on a conservative/liberal mix.

IMHO, the executives of public broadcasting have lost the will to fight for
what I believe is the proper source of funding for their operations.

I don't know about your area, but here in SoCal, "begging" by public
stations seems to be their primary function.

40 years ago, Newton Minnow described broadcast television as a "vast
wasteland".

IMHO, it is still a valid observation.

Lew

40 years ago, Newton Minnow described broadcast television as a "vast
wasteland".

And as a reward, he had a ship named after him. But it got lost at sea on a
three-hour tour.

Lee


--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

Greetings and Salutations....

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 23:32:44 -0500, WD wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 07:19:01 GMT, (Dave Mundt) wrote:

Hi Dave glad to see you again. I still remember very kind of you helping me to
get my Crapsman going. Beside keeping the crapsman, I bought 4 Oldham 1040
Signatures Series saw blade and a 14" bandsaw. Thanks!

Thanks for the kind words. I *do* try to be helpful *smile*.
Glad to hear things are working well for you.

Not to get off the subject, I agree with what you said below. I watch and listen
PBS, NPR and C-Span more than any other stations. Beside Ken Burn, I like Nova,
Washington Review, Jim Lehrer's News Hours, Charlie Rose, BBC News and Now with
Bill Moyers.

ALthough I don't always like or agree with some of the views
broadcast on PBS/NPR, I do think it is important to have a diversity
of views. Which, parenthetically, is why I think EVERYONE should
go see "Fahrenheit 9/11". Whether or not one agrees with Moore's
point of view, it raises some questions well worth asking.
One of my comments about the proliferation of cable channels,
which I am sure I have said elsewhere, is that having 14 channels
presenting a range of conservative views is NOT better or "more
diverse" than having ONE channel with strongly conservative views.
We have to have that synthesis of opposing views to be able to come
to an understanding of the issues and to be able to find the
"best" path to deal with them.
Regards
Dave Mundt

If there's one thing that drives me nuts, it's those PBS beg-a-thons! I
turn on the TV to watch NYW, but instead of Norm, I get some all-day Yoga
"special programming". Why in the heck would anyone financially reward PBS
for screwing with the programming half a dozen times a year?!?!

"Nobody provides you with the quality programming that we here at PBS do,
but we need your help to pay for it. And to show you how much we appreciate
your financial committment to support your favorite programs, we're
cancelling all of them while we beg for money. In their place we will run
(and re-run) hours of hack self-help gurus and has-been music acts (mostly
insipid), a few helicopter flyovers of your favorite places (up to 10 full
seconds over your town), and every Ken Burns opus ever filmed. But that's
not the best part. We will interrupt these "special" programs several times
each, not for 3 to 5 minutes at a time the way those horrible commercial
stations do, but for 20 to 25 minutes with people who have no business being
on TV (but are thrilled for the opportunity) and who have absolutely nothing
to say but blather on incessantly nevertheless. Oh, and by the way, you
won't miss a single minute of This Old House or New Yankee Workshop because
at some time toward the end of our pledge drive, but not on their regular
day or time, we'll catch up on all the show's we have preempted by running
five or six episodes back to back (with more pledge breaks, of course). We
won't tell you exactly when that is. You'll have to guess, unless you
subscribe to our Program Guide which you can have for a gift at the $300
level."

Lee


--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

"Lee Gordon" writes:

If there's one thing that drives me nuts, it's those PBS beg-a-thons! I
turn on the TV to watch NYW, but instead of Norm, I get some all-day Yoga
"special programming". Why in the heck would anyone financially reward
PBS
for screwing with the programming half a dozen times a year?!?!

snip the rest of a rant I totally agree with


--
Lew

S/A: Challenge, The Bullet Proof Boat, (Under Construction in the Southland)
Visit: http://home.earthlink.net/~lewhodgett for Pictures

Lew Hodgett wrote:
"Randy" writes:

Or, you could let your dollars do the talking and donate with a
dedication for what ever show you want to see.

I absolutely refuse to donate money to PUBLIC television/radio, what
ever.

The operative word is PUBLIC, let them get their money from the PUBLIC
trough.

Just my thoughts.

The "public" would be us. Other "non-public" stations get money from ad
revenue.

If there's one thing that drives me nuts, it's those PBS beg-a-thons! I
turn on the TV to watch NYW, but instead of Norm, I get some all-day Yoga
"special programming". Why in the heck would anyone financially reward PBS
for screwing with the programming half a dozen times a year?!?!

And it's not like they do it for 1 weekend a month - they go on for a month
at a time.

Personally, I much prefer watch NYW on HGTV and putting up with a couple of
DIY related commercials. Besides, it's not like PBS doesn't have money
coming in from commercials. What do you call all those things before and
after each program?? As much as I like the Delta & PC promos before NYW -
they are commercials and PBS is getting paid to put them there.

These guys are making a killing while professing poverty:

- they get money for commercials - they call them program sponsors
- they get money from cable and satellite service providers who carry their
broadcasts
- they get money from you

Not bad eh?


Brian


"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news

"Dave Mundt" writes:

That is a problem, actually, since the trend has been to CUT
funding for NPR, in spite of the fact that it is a drop in the bucket
of the flood of money that the Feds hose away.

snip a commentary from some one who appears to have an inside
perspective

It is my understanding that it was the Nixon administration that tried to
cut funding because NPR was covering the Watergate hearings on a
continuous
basis.

It is also my understanding that those who listen to public
radio/television
basically split down the middle on a conservative/liberal mix.

IMHO, the executives of public broadcasting have lost the will to fight
for
what I believe is the proper source of funding for their operations.

I don't know about your area, but here in SoCal, "begging" by public
stations seems to be their primary function.

40 years ago, Newton Minnow described broadcast television as a "vast
wasteland".

IMHO, it is still a valid observation.

Lew