PBS Launching Streaming Service on Amazon Prime

[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).

[curun1r]

IIRC, PBS already has their own “Passport” streaming option. This is just a play to expand their potential audience. But if you don’t want to deal with Amazon, you’re free to deal with PBS directly.

[tylerjwilk00]

Check and see if your local PBS station has implemented Passport. Passport is a streaming service specific to PBS and there is no tax aside from the $60 or more annual donation to your local station. Public media needs your help.

[reaperducer]

I don't want to pay Amazon tax (additional $10 per month prime fees) to be able to use this service.

If your kids want to watch new episodes of Sesame Street, you already have to pay an HBO tax (varies by geography).

Since 2016, children whose parents can afford HBO get to watch current Sesame Street. Poor kids have to wait for nine months for sloppy seconds on their local PBS station.

Meanwhile, PBS and Sesame Workshop wonder why there are people who don't like how corporate "public" television has become.

[0815test]

Why does PBS need to be "working with other service providers", which mostly do not pursue the public interest, in order to bring their programming online? If they have content on catalog that's fully paid for and controlled by them (and I do understand that this is not the case for some nominally-"PBS" content), they should just throw it up on the Internet Archive and link to it from their website. The video-publishing monopoly of Google/Apple is not something that we should be encouraging, IMHO.

[pryelluw]

Yes, they are. Two years ago I worked on a project to open up their catalog to streaming services. It was an interesting project. Python 3/Django/Postgres/Redis.

[jak92]

PBS content should be free everywhere

[twblalock]

> PBS content should be free everywhere

Then PBS needs a lot more money. They operate on about $445 million per year in total, and that gets split between PBS and NPR: https://www.cpb.org/aboutcpb/financials/budget

That's not enough, and it's a bit lower than public broadcasters in other countries who manage to make things 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.

[js2]

Agreed that free viewing should be included in our tax dollars, but it's not likely to happen without Fred Rogers to convince our representatives. Especially with a loud minority of our citizens convinced that PBS and NPR are biased.

[beef234]

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

[AdmiralAsshat]

Anecdotally, I've got a PBS Passport account and I don't see Milk Street in my library. But it could well depend on one's geographic location or local station.

[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...)

[duxup]

It's not clear from this article.

I'm going to take a guess and say that it might be the same content, or very similar.

[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.

[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.

[duxup]

Not all PBS money is government money.