What has happened to the woodworking shows? I live in the NE in the
summer and Florida in the winter. Up north I have Direct TV
(satellite) and in FL I have Comcast cable. I get most of the premium
channels including DIY (premium on satellite) and NPR which is not
premium (paid for with tax dollars and you still get the same amount
of ads plus two weeks a year of bugging you to send them yet more
money. New Yankee Workshop and David Marks used to appear regularly.
They were great to watch even in you didn't like Norm's approach or
were annoyed by Marks' insistence on making a template for every
single thing he did. On Comcast I only find This Old House--no NYW
and on DIY they rerun David Marks every week for the umpteenth time.
Stupid channels only copy one another with idiot shows depicting
warehouse battles, creative scrapbooking or how to macrame. Seems to
me that with the number of woodworkers in the country they are missing
a huge market. Talk about a "wasteland." Apart from the movies (most
of which are PPV) there seems to be less quality content than when
there were only 3 or 4.
The idiots deciding what shows to run have a nasty habit of showing the
same 10 shows over and over and over again. While that's great for
someone trying to memorize a show (that's what recording devices are
for), it's terrible for someone watching the show for its entertainment
Wise is the man who attempts to answer his question before asking it.
To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm
David Marks contract with the DIY folks wasn't renewed, so, at least for
the foreseeable future, there will be no more new Woodworks programs.
David came and spoke at our wooddorkers' club, showed some of his really
neat stuff, and said he was of two minds about not doing any more work for
those folks. Some of what he showed got to be repetitive, because you can
only do so much in 18 minutes air time, really.
Norm's new stuff in on PBS here, which I get as part of the locals package
on DirecTV. Whether you like the choices they've made is another
discussion. There are at least 5 PBS stations shown in the SF Bay Area
Florida for the winter has to have at least one downside beyond tourists.
Maybe Comcast cable tv is that downside. ;)
You probably read the answer about Dave Marks. It was decided
some time ago, that he was going to halt. Anyways, I'll give
you my view about NPR. First off, each station in the NPR
network, decides its schedules. If they want to drop NYW or TOH,
it's up to them. Your local stations probably do viewer profiles and
a feeling that these shows don't draw an audience big enough
The NPR stations get money from YOU and the Feds. That's why they
beg. I don't like it,but the other alternative is do what a lot
of other nations do - tax you and they hand out the dough. If you
would contact your local stations, about the shows, (a letter might
work), it would
register better than protesting in a news group. (just my 2 cents).
Now NYW and TOH are owned either jointly or outright by Time Warner
and Marsh Productions. They sell the SHOWs to your local
friendly NPR channel. The local channel has to PAY them. The Gov't
doesn't own the production or pay the "stars", etc. I would
imagine that each show is in the neighborhood of
about $250,000 to produce. That means, writing, scripting,
editing, on air talent, directing, etc. Probably even more.
A lot of money to recover!
I think over time, a lot of these shows are going to be available
on a subscription basis over the Internet. Already, you can
see "Lost" episodes a week after they are broadcasted and
there will be more of this. I would imagine that Marsh and
Time-Warner are trying to figure out how to get their
content (their shows) into the public more and make
more money. Would you pay $1.99 to download an episode
to your computer and watch it? If you would, drop the show's
owners a line.
Bottom line, if you don't like what you see, let your
cable and satellite company know!
On 30 Jan 2007 23:28:46 -0800, " firstname.lastname@example.org"
Uh where do you think the money the feds give them comes from?
As for the "other alternative", the "other alternative" is to pull the
plug on them. With more than a thousand channels available on just
about any cable system, why do we need one more that's government
And all of those channels are paid for and supposedly making a profit
through the advertisers and are popular enough with the viewers to
stay on the air. PBS and similar "public" stations simply are not,
they would fail in a minute if they were left to their own devices.
They shouldn't get a penny of federal funding, period. If enough
people don't want to watch them, then why bother having them around to
begin with? I'm sure channels like DIY would be more than happy to
pick up TOH and NYW first-run.
How much money for "public" stations comes from the government? Not a
whole lot anymore. How much free money do other stations receive? Great
gobs of it depending how you calculate the subsidies, handouts and
Your analysis reminds me of the sort of spin conservative talk radio
progpagates. It isn't reality based but it sure is emotionally
Closer to reality than people who speak of "avoiding taxes" and "not paying
a fair share" and "corporate welfare" as if money were never earned, only
granted by government denying that moneys diverted from the revenue stream
are as much a subsidy as money allocated.
You wouldn't mind then, if this conservative asks you for some facts to
back up your assertions. Also a few definitions should be in order; for
example what the @#$% is a "propaganda payoff"? ... and "free money"? A
little documentation regarding federal subsidies to network television
stations would be in order as well.
Seems that, as someone pointed out earlier the $300+ million going to
public television is not exactly chump change coming from the federal
government. My guess is that number does not include money funneled
through various colleges that support production of various programming for
Well, most conservative talk radio seems to deal with more facts than the
wild assertions you are making above. Although I can certainly see your
point, given how incredibly successful the conservative candidates were
this past election cycle, one would expect huge propaganda payments to be
flowing into those other stations.
If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough
On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 20:02:08 -0700, Mark & Juanita
It's something he made up. What do you expect from liberals?
The simple fact is that public television cannot compete in a free
marketplace. If it was left to it's own devices and required to have
advertising to support it, it would be off the air in 3 months. There
simply aren't enough people watching it to make it a viable commercial
entity. You know something? Maybe this relic of the 50s should go
the way of the dinosaurs. If it cannot compete in the free market, it
shouldn't exist at all.
Again, what do you expect from liberals? They're always long on
emotion and short on facts.
For one thing, believe it ot not, not everyone has cable or satellite.
Of those 1000 channels, how many have locally oriented programming that
really means anything to your community? In my city, the local commercial
channels have news shows a couple times a day where they pretty much
repeat headlines from the local paper. They do a credible job with
the weather but as far as any depth of reporting on local news &
events, forget it. OTOH, the public TV station & NPR radio station
have real and detailed local content for a signifcant part of their
programming day and the national programming they carry is often of
a type that is simply no longer played on commercial stations. They do
have some ads but in length, quality, and content, they are nothing
like the obnoxious advertising on the commercial channels.
If you examine the FCC policies and regulations it is apparent ALL
broadcasters & spectrum users are subsidized, perhaps some less directly
than others, but on the whole the system is very much geared towards
providing benefits to business rather than the consumers. I don't believe
that the small amount of federal funding public radio and TV receives
is misspent. Public broadcasting provides a valuable service, at least
in my area. If these stations had the plug pulled, it is highly
unlikely that commercial broadcasters would step up to replace that.
Contentment makes poor men rich. Discontent makes rich men poor.
So, the conservatives have AM radio (with the exception of the failing
Air America--failing even with George Soros and his megabuck
contributions) and the liberals have Corporation for Public
Broadcasting paid for with your tax dollars + Hollywood and its
mindless Jane Fonda types. Wonder who's getting the long end of that
stick? Hmm. Let me see if I can figure it out.
I thought NPR was National Public Radio. I didn't know
they also broadcast television shows.
Or did you mean to refer to PBS, the Public
Broadcasting System which does provide telecasts of
Norm Abrams' New Yankee Workshop and a woodturning
show. I just found the woodturning show and it is
different from the woodturning show on DIY.
I thought the David Marks' woodworking show was a DIY
network series. Did his show ever appear on PBS or
It appears it will be a dry season for woodworking
< email@example.com> wrote in message
J. Clarke wrote:
> NPR and PBS are both supported by CPB.
The 2007 US Federal budget is about $983B (that is billion with a B).
The CPB budget is about $347M (million with a M).
The math works out to about 0.036% of the total budget. That is a
In the era of $250M Alaskan bridges to nowhere there are far more
appropriate targets for your energy and anger other than the CPB.
Try taking a look here for some more egregious targets for your zeal.
Try not to obfuscate. The government also supports by lost taxes on
donations, and many states give a direct tax credit. Then there are the
sponsors who supply production money - for a write-off ... goes on and on.
Not sure what the point is. First off, the tax deductions are
by individuals, not by government. In that, you chose to send
money to whoever you want to - religious or
other charity organizations. So to claim that
these groups GET support from the government because you get
a deduction on your taxes, is odd. Tho, in a way, I could see it
as making sure that SOME of YOUR money is diverted from the federal
budget to your local charity. If that's what you mean, I agree.
But where I disagree is that in some way means that there is
support from the federal government because of tax deductions is
a bit hard for me to follow.
The product placement is the "price of admission" for Delta or other
corporations to contribute to the PRODUCTION (I bet) of the show.
might be SOME money coming to the local stations, but I would think
it would be in the reduced cost of buying the series. If your local
PBS station got NYW for $200g for the season WITHOUT
Delta's ads or for $100g WITH the ads, guess which one they
On 31 Jan 2007 18:02:29 -0800, " firstname.lastname@example.org"
What you're missing is that the government decides what is and is not
a charity eligible for deductible donations. By deciding that PBS or
NPR stations are eligible they are willingly foregoing tax revenue.
I understand that, but were you making the point that federal
tax dollars in some indirect way (thru tax deductions) were
flowing to PBS stations? If so, I disagree. Listing as
a tax deductable non-profit org. is a listing on the
federal tax register. No money goes to my favorite
charity or non-profit unless I MAKE it so. The
government is neutral. It doesn''t care less if I give
to a religious or save-the-whales org. There's no
direct support other than how YOU decide.
The bottom line, the PBS station in your area needs your
money more than it needs the feds money. Most stations,
I believe have bigger payrolls, rents, insurance then
what the fed provides.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.