Why not privatize PBS?

Every few years, like clockwork, someone on the right says something about PBS. And every few years, a lot of people on the left react as if PBS were a sacred cow. This time, there are cries of illegality around a plan to diversify the viewpoints on PBS, which is long viewed as liberal by conservatives and mainstream by liberals.

The simple fact of the matter is that much of what PBS used to provide exclusively has been replaced by cable programming. But not all of it.

If you want documentaries, you have A&E, Discovery, and a host of others. But while A&E used to be about arts and entertainment, it isn't any more. Its once-unique programming doesn't stand out, at least not to me. The Learning Channel (TLC) may have once been about learning, but now it seems more about trying to squeeze the last ounce of juice out of the once-dominant "Trading Spaces" concept.

In other words, as competition has heated up along the cable/satelite spectrum, a certain boring homogeneity has descended. The sameness is threatening to make cable TV the same vast wasteland the broadcast TV used to be. How different are "Fear Factor" and "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"?

This represents a vast opportunity for the good folks at PBS. There are certain things they do better than anyone else. And as the satelite networks become variations on each other, those things will stand out more and more. Into this opening, PBS can charge boldly, or it can stay tethered to its current moorings.

Why not start by rolling out a commercial variant of PBS? Use the same programming, but sell ads. There are approximately 7000 channels on my DirecTV service that are devoted to things like ads for DirecTV or message indicating that the channel isn't being used. A commercial variant would make it possible to test market PBS in a commercial context, to see if it can work without pledge weeks and government funding.

If it works in a test, it can work for real. The niche that PBS can fill is that it could be the only network on TV that doesn't air a reality series or some kind of poker show. If the advocates of PBS are correct, there is a giant need for this kind of programming. If there is, and if the management of the new PBS can stick to their vision, then it should be possible to gradually move PBS to a less dependent state.

And if they are successful, and if they still seek out corporate partnerships, they could still offer some sense of the same programming in a commercial-free context. After all, it isn't Bob and Betty's hundred dollar gift that keeps PBS afloat.

In a world that features "The Real Gilligan's Island," something a little more substantial ought to be able to carve out a niche. Then we need not argue about it any more.