Q&A: For and Against Closing the Public Broadcasting Corporation
For and Against Closing the Public Broadcasting Corporation
Question
On the one hand, there’s the libertarian argument (which is actually pretty inconsistent), of “why should I have to fund this?” On the other hand, this is a body that has produced a lot of excellent content (The Jews Are Coming, Valley of Tears, Checkout, high-level investigative reporting by Zman Emet). And in addition, the fact that out of everything that could be cut, they’re cutting דווקא this, suggests that maybe the goals aren’t economic but more political. What do you think—should it be shut down or not?
Answer
I don’t have a firm position. Personally, I tend toward keeping it for the public benefit. Good things are being done there (I actually wouldn’t list what you mention, certainly not only that). But it could be privatized, and there’s no absolute obligation. It’s not a very important issue in my view.
Discussion on Answer
Obviously it’s an attempt to silence. Someone who’s bothered by budget waste doesn’t go and open the Ministry of Toasters and all sorts of other nonsense. But this is what we’ve got, and with this we shall prevail?!
It has nothing to do with the question of motives. The question was whether the step itself is legitimate. These are two independent questions.
Don’t you think this is an attempt to silence criticism? Like, there are talented people there who probably bother a lot of people in the government (Shaul Amsterdamski).