NPR, PBS members see record donations after Congress cuts funding

[TheBigA]

Since donors are stepping up to provide funding for the actual stations, the middleman function that CPB provided is not needed.

It depends on the station. The support that CPB provided was there because the stations applied for and met the qualifications. Not because of need.

Government support for the needy is called welfare. CPB funding wasn't welfare. It was based on meeting goals and qualifications.

 

[Cold Coffee]

A Pacifica station near here got money from CPB for DEI training in 2024. That's not coming anymore. I suspect the public will donate to save the NPR station owned by the university and the community stations will take a big bite.

 

[TheBigA]

A Pacifica station near here got money from CPB for DEI training in 2024.

Are you sure about that? Pacifica is very public that it doesn't take government or corporate money for any reason.

 

[Cold Coffee]

Are you sure about that? Pacifica is very public that it doesn't take government or corporate money for any reason.

They air Democracy Now but they are locally owned.

 

[Larry]

If this defunding of CPB had happened under a different administration I’d expect to see the FCC loosen underwriting restrictions and allow more spots closer to commercials. But I am sure that won’t happen under the current FCC.

 

[TheBigA]

They air Democracy Now but they are locally owned.

Then they're not a Pacifica station. Pacifica owns five stations in NY, LA, SF, DC, and Houston. They don't accept govt money, and Democracy Now has the same policy.

 

[Cold Coffee]

If this defunding of CPB had happened under a different administration I’d expect to see the FCC loosen underwriting restrictions and allow more spots closer to commercials. But I am sure that won’t happen under the current FCC.

Those in the community radio movement are very opposed to commercials. The only ones who would be for loosening the NCE rules are some LPFM operators who really wanted a commercial station in the first place.

 

[Cold Coffee]

Then they're not a Pacifica station. Pacifica owns five stations in NY, LA, SF, DC, and Houston. They don't accept govt money, and Democracy Now has the same policy.

I'm not saying Pacifica own them just like CBS does not own the TV station that is their affiliate here. But we still call that TV station a CBS station.

 

[TheBigA]

If this defunding of CPB had happened under a different administration I’d expect to see the FCC loosen underwriting restrictions and allow more spots closer to commercials. But I am sure that won’t happen under the current FCC.

Advertising for all radio is dropping. That's why commercial stations are laying off staff. So adding commercials isn't a good solution.

Even before this funding cut, public stations were laying off staff. The reason was because of a drop in sponsorships.

People want radio for free. No commercials, no subscriptions, no pledge drives, no government funding, nothing. That's impossible.

 

[vchimpanzee]

Opinion: Cuts to NPR will hurt communities relying on local public radio in emergencies

Cuts to National Public Radio usually results from lack of understanding on how much tax dollars are actually spent on public radio.

www.citizen-times.com

 

[umfan]

It depends on the station. The support that CPB provided was there because the stations applied for and met the qualifications. Not because of need.

Government support for the needy is called welfare. CPB funding wasn't welfare. It was based on meeting goals and qualifications.

Those 'goals and qualifications' have been determined by a majority of Congress to no longer to be something that will be funded.

When organizations no longer are deemed to serve a need they sometimes get dissolved. That's all that happened here.

 

[TheBigA]

When organizations no longer are deemed to serve a need they sometimes get dissolved. That's all that happened here.

Had that been the intent of congress they should have tried to repeal the public broadcasting act. That's not what they did. None of the organizations created by the act have been dissolved.

The president appears to see value in retaining CPB. Otherwise he wouldn't have the DOJ push through his firing of 3 members of the board. My suspicion is his goal is to replace them with puppets who would use newly appropriated funds for media projects that promote this administrations agenda. Such a thing would be counter to the "unbiased" requirement you noted in the public broadcasting act. But who would stop him?

 

[umfan]

Had that been the intent of congress they should have tried to repeal the public broadcasting act. That's not what they did. None of the organizations created by the act have been dissolved.

The president appears to see value in retaining CPB. Otherwise he wouldn't have the DOJ push through his firing of 3 members of the board. My suspicion is his goal is to replace them with puppets who would use newly appropriated funds for media projects that promote this administrations agenda. Such a thing would be counter to the "unbiased" requirement you noted in the public broadcasting act. But who would stop him?

I don't agree he sees value. I think he went about moving on from CPB using multiple methods. Removing funding and then not funding CPB anymore accomplishes that intent efficiently. The majority of Americans have had little to no interaction with CPB funded entities in years.

 

[TheBigA]

I don't agree he sees value. I think he went about moving on from CPB using multiple methods. Removing funding and then not funding CPB anymore accomplishes that intent efficiently.

Then why bother forcing the removal of board members to an agency he already defunded? Seems like a waste of time and taxpayer money.

Justice Dept. Seeks Removal Of Three CPB Board Members After Trump Firing.

The Justice Department is asking a federal court to remove three Corporation for Public Broadcasting board members, including Laura Ross, Thomas Rothman and Diane Kaplan, whom President Trump fired in

www.insideradio.com

The majority of Americans have had little to no interaction with CPB funded entities in years.

New Poll Finds Bipartisan Support for Federal Public Radio Funding.

A new Harris Poll conducted for NPR reveals strong bipartisan support for public radio, with two-thirds of Americans backing federal funding and viewing it as a good value. The survey

www.insideradio.com

More people listen to public radio than use AmTrak:

Who Rides Passenger Trains in the U.S. These Days?

In 2015, the U.S. population numbered 320 million, but less than 10 percent of those people rode the rails. So who does?

science.howstuffworks.com

Nobody is pushing to defund AmTrak. It receives over $5 billion in federal money.

 

[umfan]

Then why bother forcing the removal of board members to an agency he already defunded? Seems like a waste of time and taxpayer money.

It's already in process. This began well before the rescission process.

Nobody is pushing to defund AmTrak. It receives over $5 billion in federal money.

There are no commercial passenger railroads. There are LOADS of commercial radio stations.

 

[TheBigA]

It's already in process. This began well before the rescission process.

However, this specific filing took place AFTER the house passed the rescission. And it hasn't been withdrawn.

When it was first filed, the judge declined to block their removal because they didn't demonstrate they would suffer "irreparable harm." Now, with the agency defunded, the harm they warned about has been demonstrated.

There are no commercial passenger railroads. There are LOADS of commercial radio stations.

Even then, a majority of people supported federal funding, as the article I linked noted.

 

[wadio]

If this defunding of CPB had happened under a different administration I’d expect to see the FCC loosen underwriting restrictions and allow more spots closer to commercials. But I am sure that won’t happen under the current FCC.

I honestly don't think the current administration cares if stations are left-leaning ... they just don't want taxpayers to pay for it.

If CPB asked for relaxed underwriting standards it might well be granted.

The establishment of CPB was a big "left turn" (pun intended) from the free press that had existed since the founding of the US. Did taxpayers ever fund print, radio or TV content before?

@BigA is correct that advertising is not likely to be the financial solution, but some combination of fewer restrictions and more support from members, even in less wealthy areas, might keep many NPR stations operating.

Sometimes "compromise" is the best option.

 

[Delete My Account]

If the current administration didn't care about the leanings of stations receiving CPB funding, why was it basically all they talked about in relation to NPR and CPB?

 

[TheBigA]

I honestly don't think the current administration cares if stations are left-leaning ... they just don't want taxpayers to pay for it.

If you read the letter the president sent to congress, the main point is about "biased" NPR news. At no time did they demonstrate that any federal dollars actually go to NPR News. CPB wasn't asked to testify in their defense.

If CPB asked for relaxed underwriting standards it might well be granted.

Right now, this FCC is conducting an investigation into station underwriting. The FCC chairman has said specifically that he doesn't believe non-profit stations should take sponsorship from profit making companies. So no, very doubtful that this FCC will loosen underwriting standards. They will likely get tougher. Once again, because this administration doesn't like the news coverage.

The establishment of CPB was a big "left turn" (pun intended) from the free press that had existed since the founding of the US. Did taxpayers ever fund print, radio or TV content before?

The original reason congress voted for it was because there needed to be an alternative to commercial broadcasting, which had become too oriented around profits. That situation hasn't changed, and in fact, has become worse. The current problem is that people want news for free and don't want to pay for it. Somebody has to pay.

Sometimes "compromise" is the best option.

A compromise was offered by Sen Murkowski, and it was rejected. The president threatened congress, so they relented.

 

[wadio]

If the current administration didn't care about the leanings of stations receiving CPB funding, why was it basically all they talked about in relation to NPR and CPB?

You answered your own question. Because TAXPAYERS are paying for it! It's just one of the DOGE cuts they're making.

Pointing out bias was a good way to get it done. And it worked.