Speaking of PUBLIC broadcasting, I keep hearing from conservatives on this web site and elsewhere that PBS and NPR are the most blatant of the liberal media. They are the worst of the worst, to hear conservatives tell it, despite PBS and NPR's efforts to keep their programming really "fair and balanced." I have a couple of theories as to why this idea is so popular with conservatives.

FIRST:   There is no shouting and desk-pounding on PBS and NPR. No WWF "Smackdown" factor. More information, less mayhem.

They really make an effort to keep the straightnews unbiased. And in the cases where they do broadcast something that someone might construe as partisan (SOME of the Frontline or POV programs, or, among conservatives, the notorious NOW with Bill Moyers, recently, with Moyers' retirement, taken over by David Brancaccio), the position the program takes is made abundantly clear ahead of time. Anyone who hasn't lived in a cave for the last forty years knows that Moyers is a liberal, and he has never claimed to be otherwise. Likewise David Brancaccio makes no bones about his liberal viewpoint either. So you know where they're coming from. Furthermore, when they interview someone who also has a liberal viewpoint, both Moyers and Brancaccio took the "Devil's Advocate" position and asked questions or raised issues that conservatives would have asked or raised. And when interviewing someone with a conservative viewpoint, they did not challenge, argue, shout at them, or tell them to "shut up!" I have never seen any of that kind of barbaric behavior on PBS or heard it on NPR. On Fox News, or on Rush Limbaugh's program, it's almost a daily occurrence.

On the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, toward the end of the program, they have a sort of "Point-Counterpoint" segment in which Jim Lehrer, Ray Suarez, or Gwen Ifill asks questions on current issues to be discussed by two guest columnists, one liberal, one conservative. What is striking about these discussions in comparison with something like Fox News is the civility of the discussions. Disagreements, yes, different viewpoints expressed, yes—but no shouting and no insults.

And just in case anyone has forgotten, in 1966, William F. Buckley, a hard-charging conservative writer and commentator, began hosting Firing Line, a political talk show on National Educational Television, the forerunner of PBS. 1,429 weekly episodes were produced over the next 33 years, until Buckley retired in 2000. In contrast to people such as Bill O'Reilly, William F. Buckley was urbane, cosmopolitan, intellectual, and every bit the gentleman. O'Reilly, in contrast to Buckley, is an offensive, hate-spewing boor, and I can't stand to listen to him for more than a few minutes. I used to listen closely to Buckley. As far as I can see, the conservative media has none like him today.

SECOND:    Programs on PBS and NPR (such as Frontline and POV) often call attention to news stories that haven't actually made the news—or stories that various factions would rather not be mentioned on the national media, and were it not for PBS or NPR, would not make the national media. And these are not always negative stories about the current administration or some corporate scandal, although there is certainly opportunity for much programming like this. For example, one segment on NOW with Bill Moyers a couple of years ago featured a machine tool company in one of the southern states that, in contrast to companies all around them downsizing, cutting benefits, laying people off, and "outsourcing' much of their work, kept their work-force steady and hadn't had a lay-off in years, paid wages that were equal to or better than other wages paid in the area for similar work, and had an excellent benefits package including a solid and secure retirement program, full health care coverage (including an on-site infirmary), and free on-site day-care. And because the company (which was family owned, and had not gone "public" ) made products which were consistently top quality, was operating solidly in the black and had done so for years. The owners attributed their consistent quality to a long-term, stable, and experienced work force. It sounds like a real American success story. The point of this feature was that "when company loyalty is a two-way street, it can be done." Yet—this feature drew a lot of flak from various sources, saying, among other things, that this was subversive, un-American, and socialist! Socialist? How was this socialist?

Nevertheless, this is the kind of thing that gets PBS and NPR branded as "left-wing."

Not that I get all of my news from these sources. Far from it! I take all of this with a large grain of salt as well as all the others. But what I have seen and heard, these two news services are indeed the most "fair and balanced" in the country at the present time.

Okay, folks. Let's hear those shrieks and bellows! All together now? Let 'er rip!!

Don Firth

P. S.   You want "liberal?" Try Air America or Pacifica. Al Franken. Phil Donahue. But they don't try to palm themselves off as "fair and balanced" like our friends at Fox do.

P. P. S. I am surprised that C-SPAN is not lumped in there with the "liberal media." Because, after all, you can sit there in front of the television set and actually watch the sausage being made!