Greater Focus on Public TV Sought : Television: A think-tank report calls for more funding with all federal money earmarked solely for programming.

A think-tank report on the future of public television says the non-commercial network will be more important than ever in the coming 500-channel universe and calls for increased funding from the federal government and other sources.

Noting the continued fragmentation and commercialization of television, the report said, “The broad national values, the linkages among educational experiences, the in-depth coverage of public issues, and the common cultural experiences that the best of public television can offer seem of greater value than ever. . . . Without public television, there would be no alternative to programs driven fundamentally by the need to sell products.”

The report from the nonpartisan Twentieth Century Fund, to be released at a news conference in Washington today, calls for Congress to impose fees on users of the public airwaves to help pay for non-commercial programming. It also recommends that all federal funds for public television--$253 million this year--be spent on programming, rather than continuing the present system of giving two-thirds of it to stations to use as they see fit.

The report was undertaken by Twentieth Century Fund last year, the 25th anniversary of the creation of the present public-TV system. A 21-member task force included Vartan Gregorian, president of Brown University (who served as chairman), former PBS President Lawrence K. Grossman, journalist Lesley Stahl, former Sen. Timothy Wirth (D-Colo.) and financier Henry R. Kravis. Its executive director was Chloe W. Aaron, a former PBS programming chief and station manager.

The initial reaction among public television executives was mixed--welcoming the call for greater funding but skeptical of the proposal to earmark all federal money for programming.

The report argues that “there are 351 public-television stations in the country, many of them with overlapping and duplicative schedules,” while “programming is under-funded.” It recommends requiring most stations to look elsewhere for their operating and local production funds.

“The idea is that federal funds ought to go to producing national programming,” said former PBS president Grossman. “The federal government should not be responsible for financing local stations.”

Executives at the Public Broadcasting Service and the Assn. of America’s Public Television Stations said some stations would go under without the money they receive from the federal government in what are called community service grants.

“The proposal to eliminate federal funding to stations goes against the whole concept of localism in public television,” said David Brugger, president of the station association. “And besides that, stations already are using a large portion of their community service grants--65%, on average--to buy national PBS programming for airing on their local station.”

“There is definitely a need for an increase in federal funding for public television, particularly so that we can increase our contribution in the area of (instructional) and educational programming,” PBS President Bruce Christiansen said. “I haven’t seen the report yet, but it sounds as if they have looked at one part of the elephant--national programming--and said ‘Let’s make the trunk longer’--without looking at the whole elephant. Stations already are spending more money to buy programming than they receive from the federal government in community service grants. If you eliminate community service grants, they’re going to have to make that money up somewhere else.”

The report did not specify how much more money the task force felt should be given to public television. Gregorian said the document was primarily intended to stimulate discussion about the medium’s future.