But all link and no context might be a bit overwhelming.
but let me say this:
(3rd link from the bottom above - I think it works on that post.)
I don't think this is an example of corruption. The head of PBS is charged w/ making sure the gov't backed station is neutral - and we all know it isn't.
Implementing changes to bring it into compliance with the law would be, in my opinion, CORRECTING a corruption.
"In that letter, the two Democrats said that several recent actions by Tomlinson, a Republican, may have become "a source of political interference into public broadcasting" rather than "a shield" against such interference, as Congress intended in the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967."
So, 2 Dems on Capital Hill seem to be saying: it's ok for PBS to have a political opinion, so long as it's mine. Otherwise, it's a crime.