The politics of PBS and NPR or the politics of the US federal budget proposals are really not topics related to FGRV or camping and both are political in nature. So both of those need to be avoided here.
The
HC1 being in a show is certainly a topic suitable for FGRV discussion! Awesome to see one of our own getting good publicity.
PBS sponsors content that may not be commercially viable and in some cases that content serves the public good. Sesame Street is the classic example. Documentaries are another area of content that may not have commercial value but does help inform the public.
There is and has always been a tendency for the more commercial companies to cherry pick the successful ventures piloted by PBS or even NPR. No surprise that this would be one, I'm sure as an "official" interview based infomercial it would be lucrative offering for a channel wishing to have sponsored content. Infortainment is big highly profitable segment of content.
I'm glad that the
HC1 was featured in a show that focuses on exciting start up companies. I think that sort of programming has value, I think that value would probably be diminished if the financial backing was tied to commercial, for profit enterprise. Only a matter of time before "sponsored" products would get all the air time.
Happened in the field and stream type publications. Over time your product was covered if the writers got free ones to "examine" or "review" or a sweetheart deal on buying one was provided.
Content creation is somewhat different than the delivery options such as broadcast, cable, internet, satellite. The two are only "related" in that sometimes the same company does both, but often entities such as cable or internet are simply re-broadcasting content created by others. Changing over time but still for the most part this industry is about content that will be profitable, and profits depend on who advertises.