<p>Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is American public television&rsquo;s most prominent programming provider.</p>
<p>PBS is a non-profit organization that receives about 15% of its funding from the government.</p>
<p>Everyone understands that National Public Radio (NPR) &ndash; which also receives some federal funding &ndash; is operated by and for the Left. But according to PBS&rsquo;s official statement on &ldquo;Editorial Standards and Policies,&rdquo; PBS&#8217;s content depends on the &ldquo;intention to inform, not to propagandize.&rdquo; All journalists are supposedly held to fairness, accuracy, and objectivity. ;</p>
<p>This claim ironic in light of the news that PBS Vice President Toby Chaudhuri has joined forces with &#8220;Lawyers for Good Government&#8221; &ndash; group of 120,000 law professionals preparing to &ldquo;challenge and resist the Trump Administration&rsquo;s anticipated abuses of power and attacks on human rights&#8221; (quote from Traci Feit Love, the group&#8217;s founder).  ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;It is obvious&hellip;that this conference is a partisan gathering intended to organize political resistance to Donald Trump and Republican legislators,&rdquo; reports <em>National Review. ;</em></p>
<p>The truth is also obvious when you look at the group&rsquo;s upcoming session, entitled &ldquo;The Reality of 2018 and the Hope for 2020,&rdquo; which features one Democratic speaker and no Republican counterpart. ;</p>
<p>PBS&rsquo;s Toby Chaudhuri is the featured speaker in another upcoming session on &ldquo;Communications Strategy in the Era of Fake News.&rdquo; During his talk, Chaudhuri will advise a purely liberal audience about how to &ldquo;organize their communications strategy to benefit their side of the political aisle,&rdquo; reports <em>National Review. ;</em></p>
<p>This does not mesh with PBS&rsquo;s standards (mentioned above). Chaudhuri&rsquo;s involvement with &#8220;Lawyers for Good Government&#8221; raises serious questions about the accuracy, objectivity, fairness, and partisanship of PBS. ;</p>
<p>When Congress discusses funding for PBS in its next budget, members should consider whether Americans &ndash; especially those who voted red &ndash; should be forced to subsidize PBS (or Chaudhuri&rsquo;s salary).  ;</p>
<p><strong>PBS&#8217;s Biased Study on Election Results ;</strong></p>
<p>As I reported shortly after the presidential election, biased polling played a huge role in Hillary Clinton&rsquo;s defeat. The world was certain she would win, and she didn&rsquo;t.</p>
<p>PBS published a study with a similar claim &ndash; that election coverage was skewed by &ldquo;journalistic bias.&rdquo; In the article linked below, <em>Frontline</em> reporter Sarah Childress argues that &ldquo;journalistic bias,&#8221; evinced by the over-coverage of Trump and the Hillary v Trump contest, contributed to Trump&#8217;s victory. ;</p>
<p>The report found that &ldquo;Trump dominated media coverage&rdquo; even &ldquo;before the primaries began.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p>&ldquo;Trump might have won the Republican nomination in any case,&rdquo; says the report,&rdquo; but one of his assets, certainly, was his press advantage.&rdquo; ;</p>
<p>The report argues that Sanders and Clinton were &ldquo;overshadowed&rdquo; by the dramatic GOP race. Sanders may have been overshadowed, but as far as I can tell Hillary was in the spotlight during the months leading up to the election. ;</p>
<p>Childress argues that Trump continued to dominate the headlines even after his nomination. &ldquo;Although Trump no longer had active opposition, he received more news coverage in the last month than did either Clinton or Sanders, a development that has no possible explanation other than journalistic bias.&rdquo;</p>
<p>This report is interesting (and I would say, biased) in that it blames the media&#8217;s supposed &#8220;over-coverage&#8221; of Trump for Trump&#8217;s victory, whereas other sources have blamed the liberal media&#8217;s skewed polling and over confidence in Hillary for the same result. ;</p>
<p><strong>Editor&#8217;s note:</strong> Anyone who watches PBS know is it slightly to the left of Karl Marx. With this kind of bias, the Federal government should not be paying for what is essentially a commercial for the Democratic Party.</p>