home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31 / NN_1992_31.iso / spool / rec / arts / tv / 24470 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-12-23  |  1.2 KB
  1. Path: sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnewsc!cbfsb!att-out!oucsboss!oucsace!bchurch
  2. From: bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Robert Church)
  3. Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
  4. Subject: Re: obnoxious PUBLIC television
  5. Message-ID: <1992Dec24.005116.27189@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu>
  6. Date: 24 Dec 92 00:51:16 GMT
  7. References: <ByypyG.FHI@ns1.nodak.edu> <1g3cg3INNdbf@roundup.crhc.uiuc.edu <BzqCq5.3r7@encore.com>
  8. Organization: Ohio University School of Art. Athens
  9. Lines: 13
  10.  
  11. In article <BzqCq5.3r7@encore.com> jpenovic@encore.com writes:
  12.  
  13. >   statement, it sounds like you don't contribute.  If I'm
  14. >   mistaken, I'm sorry. If you don't contribute because
  15. >   you don't like the pledge drives, you shouldn't be taking
  16. >   advantage of their programming the rest of the year.
  17.  
  18. This is an incredibly elitist, snobbish and obnoxious statement. Think about
  19. what you're saying. You compare watching Public TV, which was created as
  20. a free tax-supported medium to PAY-PER-VIEW. What's the point of PBS if
  21. only those people who can afford it can watch? The whole idea was to expose
  22. people to programs that no-one would privately subsidize. If PBS is going
  23. to be tied to private support then what makes it any different than HBO?
  24.