Privitization of CPB corporation for public broadcasting - Essay Example

Privatization of CPB Corporation for Public Broadcasting If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it! We are living in the era of focus oriented, short-term mission, celebritization, marketization, and self-glorification. We glorify things of little values. We praise every one’s effort despite its outcome and are expecting reward for every little deed we did. We believe in every marketing and advertising because we are ignorant. We are ignorant because we are addicted to practicality (Tocqueville in Democracy in America), common sense and knowledge abjectivism (Sayer, 1992), and ignore the reality of scientific findings (Tocqueville in Democracy in America).

The value of science is being perverted and skepticism is more attractive to human mind (White, 1999). Feelings and emotions are prioritized and knowledge is considered irrelevant. Under fascism, some people even scholars consider theory is irrelevant but theory informs good practice and sustainable application (Tompkins, 2005). Theory represents foundation of good practices. Everyday, we are being bombarded with news of celebritization and marketization of goods and services. Too often, all the marketing and advertising serve only as an enticement to attract buyers and hence, the companies will earn higher profits as more and more people buy the products.

So is the case of privatization. According to the market, privatization is the solution to public inefficiency but there is no apparent evidence that public sector is inefficient (Rosen, Boothe, Dhalby & Smith, 1999). Indeed, privatization has nothing to do with efficiency.On the contrary, privatization is to transfer public control and ownership of public resources to private sector (Shafritz & Russell, 2000; Guislain, 1997); to change the structure of the economy and the state; to internationalize the economy; to change the role of the state; and to reorganize a new system of a state and economy (Guislain, 1997).

We are living under fascism with elite governance that rules by money, cost saving, and beyond democratic accountability (Shafritz & Russell, 2000). One that preaches anti corruption but foster competition while competition creates radical evil (Grenberg, 2005) and fraud, and kept alive by lies that are magnified by the media such as Thierer (1999) argued, in support to the privatization of Corporation of Public Broadcasting, “the public feel the CPB has performed, its mission is obsolete and redundant today.

There now exists an endless variety of high-quality channels with entertainment, informational, and educational programs that do not rely on public funding to bring quality shows to home viewers and listeners.”Similarly, Robert Poole, in his policy recommendation for the 108th Congress stated that “privatization has dramatically improved the performance of former government enterprises” (p. 299) but he seems to have lost his sense of reality. Privatization thrives on competition, which is according to the market endorses efficiency but it causes corruption and fraud (Shafritz & Russell, 2000), radical evil (Grenberg, 2005) and non-accountability.

Not only competition causes corruption and fraud but also through competition, the proponents of privatization tend to blame, attack their opponent, and cause it to concentrate its efforts to fix the blame (McShane, 1992). Consequently, many have believed that the mission of Corporation of Public Broadcasting is obsolete (Thierer, 1999).The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has been proven successful under public financed. It is not true that public corporation drains public fund as Thierer (1999) put it.

Rather when it comes to public finance, public fund is for public provision and delivery. Things don’t seem to make sense if privatization is to transfer public fund for private provision. In fact, public financing of private provision and delivery does drain public finance because private sector is profit oriented while public sector is mission-driven (Graham, 2007). Private provision is full of inefficiency and inequality (Carson, 1998; Lal, 1999). It is just fair if public fund is intended for public provision and service delivery but legislators and elected officials or Congress are incapable to curve the pressure of privatization because they are the beneficiaries of the schemes.

If they are not the beneficiaries of the schemes, they do not have the capacity to transfer public fund and resources to private enterprise because they have an”IOU” to their financial backers who survive them during their bid for public office. Work CitedGraham, A. (2007). Canadian Public Sector Financial Management. Montreal, Que.: SPS.Grenberg, Jeanine. Kant and the Ethics of Humility. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005.Guislain, Pierre. The Privatization Challenge: A Strategic, Legal, and Institutional Analysis of International Experience.

Washington, DC: World Bank, 1997.Kunr 88.7. Your action counts – Save public broadcasting. http://www.kunr.org/SavePublicBroadcasting.asp McShane, S. Canadian Organizational Behavior. Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin, 1992.Lal, Deepak. The Poverty of Development Economics. London, England: Oxford University Press, 1999.Poole, Robert. Cato Handbook for Congress. Policy Recommendations for the 108th Congress. Washington, DC: Cato Institute. http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb106/hb106-28.pdf Rosen, Harvey S.

; Boothe, Paul; Dhalby, Bev & Smith, Roger S. Canadian Public Finance. First Canadian Edition. Toronto, ON: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1999.Shafritz, Jay M. & Russell, B. William. Introducing Public Administration. New York, NY: Addison Wesley-Longman, 2000.Thierer, Adam D. Time to Let the Corporation for Public Broadcasting Stand on Its Own. The Heritage Foundation – Leadership of America. July 20, 1999. www.heritage.org/Research/InternetandTechnology/EM613.cfmTompkins, Jonathan R. Organization Theory and Public Management.

Australia: Thomson Wadsworth, 2005.Toucqueville, Alexis. Democracy in America. 24 October, 2008 http://www.tocqueville.orgWalker, Jesse. A Rumble on Sesame Street - Three Lessons From The Battle Over Public Broadcasting. May 26, 2005. White, Ellen G. The Ministry of Healing. Altamont, TN: Harvest Book, 1999. http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-richm.html http://www.aim.org/special-report/the-case-for-de-funding-public-broadcasting/