Public Television Broadcasting Has Pathetic Fundraising & Donations

     Public Broadcasting offers Americans with a plethora of entertaining and informative television.  

    Vastly important to a well-rounded perspective, it's purely funded by public donations and private foundations.  That's probably why it remains solidly in "good taste", 

... while other offerings on TV fall to "the lowest common denominator", such as "Ren & Stimpy", "South Park", and Adam Sandler's humor:

     Considering the creativity of characters/plots/writing/costumes and settings for PBS shows (many from England's BBC), I've often wondered why their weekly fundraisers don't involve better hosts.  

Unlike spirited Theatre or Art professors or enthusiasts, PBS's money-gathering is encouraged by the most bland "Bob" and "Betty" hosts in the most milquetoast / lackluster ways.  

Look at the faces above.  Do they motivate you to donate money?  Do they embody the network's emphasis on raising capital?

     The people who interrupt our PBS TV shows--to ask for donations--are uninteresting, dispassionate, and inauthentic.  They express the level of enthusiasm similar to the men who stand behind a politician during his public announcement.

     The people who introduce "Masterpiece Mystery" or PBS Nature Specials, like Alan Cummings or Laura Linney, have more panache.  To garner financial support, PBS needs a charismatic "heart on their sleeve" team like amusing crooner Dean Martin, well-spoken chef Jacques Pépin, and sparkling actress Julie Andrews.  The kind of individuals who will capture the hearts/purses of enthralled viewers.  
     After all, the programs on PBS are ingenious, tech-savvy, historically stunning, well-photographed, artistically styled, and gloriously well-executed... even the children's shows set a "good example".  

    PBS should have fundraisers of a higher caliber, to match their programming!  What is wrong with them for condoning such uninspiring hosts during the last 20 years?