PBS Blesses Old Religious Shows, But Bans the New
By Paul Farhi, Washington Post Staff
Writer
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
"The Public Broadcasting Service agreed yesterday to ban its member stations from airing new religious TV programs, but permitted the handful of stations that already carry "sectarian" shows to continue doing so.
The vote by PBS's board was a compromise from a proposed ban on all religious programming. Such a ban would have forced a few stations around the country to give up their PBS affiliation if they continued to broadcast local church services and religious lectures.
Until now, PBS stations have been required to present programming that is noncommercial, nonpartisan and nonsectarian. But the definition of "nonsectarian" programming was always loosely interpreted, and the rule had never been strictly enforced. PBS began reviewing the definition and application of those rules last year in light of the transition to digital TV and with many stations streaming programs over their Web sites. The definition doesn't cover journalistic programs about religion or discussion programs that don't favor a particular religious point of view.
The vote also means that WHUT, operated by Howard University in the District, won't be required to drop its telecasts of "Mass for Shut-Ins," a weekly Catholic Mass that has aired on the station since 1996 and locally in Washington for more than 50 years.
But, warned by PBS of the upcoming review, WHUT put the program's producer, the Archdiocese of Washington, on notice that it would drop the program if the PBS board voted to ban religious programs. The archdiocese then made alternative arrangements, negotiating a contract with WDCW (Channel 50) to pick up the half-hour program on Sunday mornings."
See the full story at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/16/AR2009061603201.html ____________________________________ I would call your attention to this line in the story: "The vote by PBS's board was a compromise from a proposed ban on all religious programming." This is a classic tactic of the Left, to assuage a bad decision by claiming it was a compromise negating a worse decision. Or as Lenin said: Two steps forward, one step back.
Recent Comments