
PBS Launching Streaming Service on Amazon Prime - laurex
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/pbs-launching-living-streaming-service-amazons-prime-video-channels-1194054
======
simplezeal
I really hope PBS is working with other service providers (Apple? Google
Play?) to bring the same programming. I don't want to pay Amazon tax
(additional $10 per month prime fees) to be able to use this service.

~~~
hhs
I hope so, too. I wonder if PBS is going strategic with this to build wealth.

I know that they're also putting useful free content on YouTube. They have a
channel called "PBS Space Time", which I've seen HN folks here sharing to
engage in physics discussions (i.e., especially quantum).

~~~
jermaustin1
There are a few good PBS channels on YouTube. I'm a big fan of "Eons".

------
jak92
PBS content should be free _everywhere_

~~~
syntaxing
Seriously, especially since it's funded with tax money. I watched a good
amount of PBS when I was younger since we couldn't afford cable. This should
be available free online through a government maintained portal.

~~~
maverick5
Only ~20% comes from tax money. The rest is provided by CPB and private
sources. If you don't want it to turn into another corporate-captured YouTube,
viewer-subscriber model is the only way to go.

~~~
bbatha
Or you could increase the portion that comes from tax money, a model proven
successfully in dozens of countries.

~~~
hedora
That’s hard. They have a lot of educational programs, and, at least in the US,
that implies a liberal bias.

------
beef234
Does this content differ from what is already available on the PBS app with
the paid "Passport subscription"?

~~~
hedora
I do wonder if this will be revenue positive or negative for them. I’m paying
$5/month for passport (though I think it’s tax deductible...)

~~~
jermaustin1
I am not an accountant, but my accountant yells at me enough to impart a few
pieces of wisdom.

This is a common misconception of "donations." Only the excess of the
"donation" minus the fair market value of the "gift" is tax deductible.

So a $120 donation that gets me a nice $20 tote, will have a tax-deductible
receipt of $100.

So for a video streaming service I'd expect none of it to be deductible,
because if you look at other TV streaming services, you pay $10/mo for the
service, so the fair market value of PBS passport might actually be higher
than the donation amount.

------
systematical
As long as this doesn't effect the free streams of News Hour to youtube or
accessing FrontLine off their website for free.

------
Dowwie
Bob Ross? Mr. Rogers? Charlie Rose?

------
subpixel
Sadly, today, PBS is an infomercial for ancillary products, so it makes
perfect sense that they have been partnering with Amazon.

(You don't get rich by producing a show for PBS, but plenty of people have
gotten rich(er) through the promotional power of parading their own products
on national tv inside a pseudo 'non commercial' bubble.)

~~~
tombert
As a kid watching _Arthur_ and _Dragon Tales_ , they would have ads for
7-eleven afterwards, due to them being a sponsor.

I didn't really realize it as a kid, but it's kind of weird that an ostensibly
public project was promoting a place that sells the least healthy food on the
market.

~~~
Wowfunhappy
Unless your channel was different than mine, yes they had ads but they were
quite benign compared to other channels. In addition to being very short and
infrequent, the ads never attempted to sell a product—they just stated the
company name and how proud they were to support PBS.

I'm sure these types of ads can have _some_ psychological effect, but it's
hard to see them inspiring a child to start begging their parents for a
certain product.

~~~
tombert
You're not wrong; the ads for 7-eleven (if I remember correctly) were some
dude walking around, and then the logo, followed by the line "Oh Thank
Heaven!".

I doubt my habit of eating unhealthy fast food all the time stemmed from those
commercials. I just found it a bit bizarre.

~~~
Wowfunhappy
> I just found it a bit bizarre.

Put another way: lots of government projects are a cooperation of public and
private interests. Highways contain billboards, for instance.

I don't have a problem with these types of projects, provided they don't turn
into pure corporate giveaways of public money. I really think PBS has struck a
good balance.

------
vgoh1
Wait, is Amazon the US government now? Should I send my tax money to Amazon
instead? This is not cool, we should not have to pay Amazon money to watch our
publicly funded television.

I don't buy that PBS doesn't "have the money" to make programs freely
available. Running radio antennas back in the day costed money. At the very
least, PBS could seed torrents, or upload to YouTube. I understand that
neither of these methods are exactly free from any cost, but at least give us
the choice.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
PBS already limited free access to its streaming content. You only had access
to a handful of most recent shows without a paid Passport account. Much of
what PBS has in its catalog is licensed from the BBC. Streaming those programs
for free in perpetuity isn't a realistic option.

