Should PBS Be Funded? Peggy Noonan Gets It Right

I really don't watch PBS much at all any more, unless unusually interesting programming is offered. Still, I think it can have a justifiable publicly-funded place on the TV spectrum. But not the way PBS is now. Peggy Noonan, I think, gets to the heart of the matter in this Opinion Journal piece. Key excerpt:

PBS exists to do what the commercial networks should and won't. And just one of those things is bringing to Americans who have not and probably will not be exposed to it the great treasury of American art, from the work of Eugene O'Neill (again, ABC won't be producing "Long Day's Journey" anytime soon), outward to Western art (Shakespeare) and outward to world art.

And science. And history. But real history, meaning something that happened in the past as opposed to the recent present, with which PBS, alas, cannot be trusted.

Art and science and history. That's where PBS's programming should be. And Americans would not resent funding it.

I think she's right, but you should read the whole thing and make up your own mind.