I don't think PBS or NPR have historically been governmnet puppets and I think it would be really tough to show that. The thing about the development guys is that they are all salesmen. They sell sunshine and everything is positive always. You don't get people to donate and give large gifts by saying... "We're doomed. It's hopeless. Without the government we'll die!" Frankly, I wouldn't trust a fundraiser.
From what I know, NPR could easily survive without government support, but that doesn't mean it isn't a worthy and good thing for the government to continue supporting. Then again, I believe in arts funding, education, and a healthy and robust media. The thing that scares me going forward is not only are newspapers closing and going extinct, but newsrooms are shrinking at a local and national level. That means fewer feet on the street and far less investigative, real journalism. That's why you get so much analysis versus reporting on TV/Cable these days. Analysis is cheaper than paying for a crew and sending them out and digging out a story that may take days or weeks. It's so much cheaper to bring in an expert, pay him to speculate and riff based on his philosophy and pay him an hour. It's cheaper and often sexier because the analyst/commentator knows its his job to stir it up and create controversy.
The problem with the news these days is there's so little news. I still get a Washington Post, but it's about a third the size it used to be. We are losing the ability to be informed and we are settling for the worst, opinion based conjecture too much of the time. That is another reason why NPR and PBS should be supported because they are one of the few news organizations that still actually cover the news and not just talk about it.
 }})
