Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Funding Fear Potential Budget Cuts Concern Public Broadcasting Stations

Jim Kershner Staff Writer

The 15th birthday celebration over at Spokane Public Radio, KPBXFM, is a bit subdued. It’s not that they don’t have plenty to celebrate. In January 1980, a hardy band of volunteers raised money, filled out federal forms, wrangled with the FCC and finally put Spokane’s public broadcasting station on the air. It struggled, and then grew, and then thrived, and finally evolved into a Spokane institution with about 42,000 listeners a week.

However, the people at KPBX-FM aren’t exactly reveling in the past this month. That’s because Congress is right now debating the future of public broadcasting; debating whether to cut back, or cut out, all federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).

“It’s ironic to think that after all we have grown, we are still back to that same scared feeling we had 15 years ago,” said Dick Kunkel, KPBX-FM general manager.

That feeling of apprehension is also in the air at KSPS-Channel 7, the public television station in Spokane, which also gets CPB money. KSPS is right now in the middle of a $4 million expansion project, adding 17,000 square feet to its studios.

“The timing is marvelous, isn’t it?” said Claude Kistler, KSPS general manager.

The expansion money is not in jeopardy, coming as it does from a 1992 school district bond issue and from the Friends of Seven. However, it does bring up the question: Will they still have a station to go with their new studio?

“I try not to shout wolf,” Kistler said. “If we were to take a full (federal funding) cut, we could survive. Other stations couldn’t.”

If the current mood in Congress prevails, public radio and TV would be weaned from federal money and privatized.

Stations like KSPS and KPBX-FM already rely mostly on private funding. Membership pledges and corporate underwriting supply the bulk of their budgets.

For instance, at KSPS, only 12 percent of its $4.2 million annual budget, or about $600,000, is federal money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Membership accounts for about 75 percent of the budget.

The ratio is similar at KPBX-FM. Federal money is only about 16.2 percent of the budget, or $124,000 of the $775,000 annual budget. About half of the budget ($392,000) is from membership and other 20 percent comes from underwriters.

“For every dollar we get from CPB, we raise about six dollars in the local community,” said Kunkel. “These are among the best examples of public-private partnerships going.”

However, loss of federal money would certainly put a dent in the budget of all stations, and over at KSPS, Kistler doesn’t think it would be easy to replace.

“If we had to replace that $600,000 immediately, that would be impossible,” said Kistler. “There’s no way membership could keep up with that kind of loss. Our membership growth has been about 3 percent a year. We’d need it to grow 25 percent.”

Something would have to give. What would it be?

“Local production would be impacted, because it’s expensive,” said Kistler. “It’s more expensive than going out and buying a British series, which might pay for itself in pledges. Local programming spent on community issues does not pay for itself. We’d have to prostitute ourselves a little more, get something a little more commercial.”

Stations in smaller, rural markets are more likely to simply disappear, since federal funding is usually a larger percentage of their budget.

“I think our radio operation would survive, but it would be difficult for me to believe that our TV stations would,” said Dennis Haarsager, general manager of Northwest Public Television and Radio. That’s because federal money is 43 percent of the $1.5 million budget at Northwest Public Television, which consists of KWSU-TV in Pullman and KTNWTV in the Tri-Cities.

Loss of stations means that the cost of national programs might go up, with fewer stations shouldering the cost.

“The more stations that go dark, the more expensive the programming becomes,” said Russ Spain, station manager of Moscow’s KUID and Coeur d’Alene’s KCDT, which are part of Idaho Public Television. Idaho Public Television gets about 25 percent of its budget from the CPB.

Kunkel said he would have to cut back on local community events such as the KPBX-FM Kids Concerts.

Those things may be important, but they don’t bring in pledges. What brings in pledges are the national programs, like “Morning Edition” and “All Things Considered.”

“I’m not dumb,” said Kunkel. “We can have all the wonderful classical music in the world, but we cannot begin to support the effort without the national programming … I will sell my computers, I will sell my dogs, I will sell anything I can find to keep that (national) programming on the air.”

The value, or slant, of those national programs has been at the center of the debate on Capitol Hill in previous years.

National Public Radio, Bill Moyers, even Ken Burns’ “Baseball” have been accused of having a liberal bias (“Baseball” because of too much Mario Cuomo rhapsodizing about the minor leagues).

But this year, the debate has been less about bias and more about fiscal responsibility. The money is certainly what Rep. George Nethercutt, R-Spokane, is most concerned about.

“I happen to be a fan of both public television and public radio,” said Nethercutt. “It’s a question of priorities. Can we afford it? … Is it fair to cut the welfare mom after two years, as has been proposed, or is it fairer to say after 25 years, public broadcasting should have its share cut?”

Both Kunkel and Kistler recognize the justice of that argument.

“Some of the people I respect the most are saying, ‘Look, Dick, you’re going to have to expect that there’s going to be a cut,”’ said Kunkel. “And wouldn’t it be better not to have to mess with all the bureaucratic gobbledygook? If it can happen, that’s wonderful.”

But Kunkel also thinks that the amount spent on public broadcasting is a pittance compared with the amount spent on something like welfare.

“Public radio takes about 29 cents out of everybody’s pocket each year,” said Kunkel. “Come on! 29 cents, to do what public radio does. I don’t think that’s too bad.”

For public television, the figure is about 80 cents per person per year in federal tax money, said Kistler.

So maybe it’s pocket change in the larger federal budget. But isn’t 29 cents still too much for someone who doesn’t listen to public radio? Isn’t 29 cents too much to pay for nothing?

“They’re getting much more than nothing,” said Kunkel. “They’re living in a better country. They’re living in a country with a culture that is alive and well and flourishes.”

And besides, said Kunkel, people who don’t have kids in school, for instance, still pay for schools. These are things we do “to build the society.”

Some critics say that public broadcasting tears down, not builds, the society. They cite programs such as PBS’s “Tales of the City,” which might be described as a gay soap opera. Is public broadcasting against family values? Is it biased toward the left?

“People say to me, ‘I listen to Rush Limbaugh, and I listen to you,”’ said Kunkel. “I say, ‘I do, too. But I listen to G. Gordon Liddy not for the news. I listen to Rush Limbaugh not for the news.’ They are advocates, and they are entertainers, and the first thing they’ll tell you is they are entertainers. Then they listen to us, and we are not pushing the hard right line. We are, in fact, exploring things in huge depth, painstakingly trying to balance things. But it sure sounds left, compared to what they heard on the right. So the left-wing perception continues.”

One perception that makes Kistler bristle is the idea that public TV is “elitist.” He believes it is the opposite. A wealthy opera lover, for instance, can fly to San Francisco or Seattle to see opera. But PBS can bring opera to your living room. You don’t have to be wealthy enough to afford a trip or a ticket.

The actual demographics of the public broadcasting audience might surprise people. Kunkel cited a survey that says that 33 percent of public radio listeners nationwide identify themselves as conservative, 26 percent as liberal and 26 percent as moderate (15 percent declined to classify themselves).

That’s not as surprising as you might think. Most public broadcasting programs could actually be called quaintly oldfashioned by the standards of a commercial TV. Public radio tends toward classical music, and public TV specializes in things like “Great Performances,” “Masterpiece Theatre” and “The Three Tenors.”

A new survey, conducted by the Opinion Research Company, shows that 84 percent of Americans, including 80 percent of Republicans, support maintaining or increasing federal funding for public broadcasting. As Nethercutt points out, it is far from a partisan political issue.

“I don’t see it as a conservativeliberal battle,” said Nethercutt. “I think it’s a priority battle. Can we afford it? Is it something we ought to afford?”

It’s a question being asked of nearly every federal program, and public broadcasting officials admit they shouldn’t be immune from cuts. However, if the very existence of public broadcasting is threatened, they say the public will rally around.

“When we truly panic, the people will come through,” said Kunkel. “If it looks like NPR will go off the air, that would coalesce a huge force.”

Nethercutt, for one, promises that public broadcasters will get a “fair opportunity to make their pitch” to Congress. As for Nethercutt’s own position, he said he is still struggling with the issue.

By the way, Nethercutt’s above remarks came from his guest appearance on the Jan. 13 edition of “Spokane This Week.” That show is a production of - you guessed it - KSPS, Spokane’s public television station.