Kari Lake previews her plans for Voice of America in the next Administration.

[davideduardo]

More from Dr. Ed Cohen about NPR and PBS.

What Survey Results About Future of NPR and PBS Should Mean for Federal Support of Public Media

If public broadcasting loses federal funding, results like these will explain a great deal.

barrettmedia.com

The support for NPR is limited, and may be enhanced by its association with PBS in this study.

A sample of his summation is:

· Fifty years on and over 40% of the US population doesn’t know what NPR is.

· Whether or not you think NPR is valuable, there is a huge negative perception when only 19% of those on the right believe federal support is warranted.

· NPR has a trust issue as a news source. PBS won on “trust versus distrust” for news by a margin of 41 to 15. For NPR, the margin was 29 to 14. Another 14% weren’t sure if they trusted or distrusted NPR and again, 42% didn’t know what NPR was.

· Among Republicans or those who lean Republican, NPR news lost on trust by 26 to 12, while for PBS, the margin was just 26 to 23 in favor of “distrust”. Democrats and lean Democrat trusted NPR news by a margin of 47 to 3.

 

[TheBigA]

Among Republicans or those who lean Republican, NPR news lost on trust by 26 to 12, while for PBS, the margin was just 26 to 23 in favor of “distrust”. Democrats and lean Democrat trusted NPR news by a margin of 47 to 3.

It doesn't matter. The people need to have a media that doesn't just agree with its government. That's what Pravda does, and we see how well it works in Russia. If you ask the people there how much trust they have, they'll say the same thing. There used to be a free press in Hong Kong. Not any more. Ask the people there how they feel about it. See if you're allowed to ask them.

The first amendment doesn't have an exception based on trust. It doesn't have an exception based on ratings. It doesn't have an exception based on party. It applies to all. Government SHALL NOT abridge freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Period. Shall not means what it says.

 

[Mediafrog+]

· Fifty years on and over 40% of the US population doesn’t know what NPR is.

That number doesn’t surprise me. There are many media outlets that a large number of people are unfamiliar with. If you never watch or listen, there’s a strong possibility you don’t know about them.

In a broad survey, how many people would know what K-Love and Air1 are?

As an example: If you don’t watch sports, do the names of the players mean anything to you? There may be familiarity with a few top athletes due to the general publicity they receive, but most of them will be a mystery.

· NPR has a trust issue as a news source.

So does Fox News, NewsMaxx, OANN and numerous other extreme right wing news organizations. People want validation of their worldview, and if they don’t get it, they scream “bias”.

 

[davideduardo]

It doesn't matter. The people need to have a media that doesn't just agree with its government. That's what Pravda does, and we see how well it works in Russia.

Pravda is a news service provided to radio, TV, print and internet services. NPR is a program service. Apples and Oranges.

 

[davideduardo]

That number doesn’t surprise me. There are many media outlets that a large number of people are unfamiliar with. If you never watch or listen, there’s a strong possibility you don’t know about them.

In a broad survey, how many people would know what K-Love and Air1 are?

But those two are private. NPR is a government service. Hard to compare.

 

[TheBigA]

Pravda is a news service provided to radio, TV, print and internet services. NPR is a program service. Apples and Oranges.

Yet the president wants to defund all of NPR because of the news service.

 

[TheBigA]

But those two are private. NPR is a government service. Hard to compare.

NPR is NOT a government service. It just receives government funding. Just like Elon Musk.

 

[davideduardo]

NPR is NOT a government service. It just receives government funding. Just like Elon Musk.

OK, "government affiliated service". I think everyone understands its close association with the government.
That does raise a question: if Federal Government funding is eliminating, would NPR survive?

 

[TheBigA]

OK, "government affiliated service". I think everyone understands its close association with the government.

It's not even affiliated with the government. It doesn't have a close association. It's CEO is chosen by its stations, not the president.

CPB is more affiliated with the government. It's CEO was nominated by Trump.

VOA is government affiliated. But there was a firewall that was supposed to shield its news people from what ultimately happened.

That does raise a question: if Federal Government funding is eliminating, would NPR survive?

The purpose of the EO and the republican campaign is to eliminate any funding that at any time came from the government. So stations couldn't buy NPR programming using CPB money. If that isn't allowed, then they would not survive because NPR by-laws says it can't fundraise from the public.

The goal is to eliminate dissent. It doesn't stop with NPR or VOA. It continues to CBS and the New York Times.

What really should be happening is the public radio system should be meeting to propose new legislation that would ensure its continued existence without federal funding. That was what happened in 1983 under Reagan. That led to the system that exists now.

 

[MadMan]

I just got back from Sam's Town Las Vegas and my 22 year old Housekeeper was from Cuba. I told her I had worked at Radio Marti in Miami. She had no idea what Radio & TV Marti was, even after reading the Wikipedia page? Different than what I had experienced in earlier days

 

[RadioFan2J3]

I just got back from Sam's Town Las Vegas and my 22 year old Housekeeper was from Cuba. I told her I had worked at Radio Marti in Miami. She had no idea what Radio & TV Marti was, even after reading the Wikipedia page? Different than what I had experienced in earlier days

A few weeks ago, I was in a department store in Oklahoma City and had a brief conversation with one of the sales ladies. I asked about her accent - Russian. I asked if she had ever listened to Voice of America. She said she didn't know what it was.

Not sure if the negative response was truthful or a denial based on not knowing anything about me and why I asked. Sometimes habits might be hard to break.

By the same token, in the early 1980s or so, I attended a presentation at East Carolina University and one of the speakers was an immigrant from the then Social Union. I asked the same question and his response was essentially absolutely. VOA was his window to the world.

These two responses may very well support David's position on is VOA valid in today's world - it served a purpose 40 years ago. Does it still have a purpose today?

And even that can be divided into at least two questions - is there still a valid mission for the radio broadcast side of VOA and other USAGM language services? Is there still a valid mission for the television and streaming of USAGM language services, including VOA?

 

[Mediafrog+]

A few weeks ago, I was in a department store in Oklahoma City and had a brief conversation with one of the sales ladies. I asked about her accent - Russian. I asked if she had ever listened to Voice of America. She said she didn't know what it was.

How old was this woman? If she was on the younger side, it would be no surprise she wouldn’t know about VOA. After the collapse of the USSR and the subsequent opening up of Russian society, shortwave likely became much less relevant.

By the same token, in the early 1980s or so, I attended a presentation at East Carolina University and one of the speakers was an immigrant from the then Social Union. I asked the same question and his response was essentially absolutely. VOA was his window to the world.

That is a very common response among people of that era.

These two responses may very well support David's position on is VOA valid in today's world - it served a purpose 40 years ago. Does it still have a purpose today?

Most of the USAGM shortwave output was well past its shelf life, though there are some very specific target areas where SW would still have some relevance. Afghanistan, Somalia and Sudan come to mind. Note that the only remaining SW output of Germany’s Deutsche Welle is a daily hour of Amharic beamed to Ethiopia (civil unrest in the country) and a weekly pair of broadcasts in Arabic beamed to Sudan (ditto). Somalia gets a lot of attention from the BBC.

And even that can be divided into at least two questions - is there still a valid mission for the radio broadcast side of VOA and other USAGM language services? Is there still a valid mission for the television and streaming of USAGM language services, including VOA?

I vote for an online presence. Ever looked at the BBC News international website? When in rolling live news coverage, the number of those accessing the site is given. Often very impressive.

 

[Mediafrog+]

And it appears VOA may become VOANN: https://www.npr.org/2025/05/07/nx-s...far-right-coverage-will-fuel-voice-of-america

Worst fears being realized.

 

[gr8oldies]

And it appears VOA may become VOANN: https://www.npr.org/2025/05/07/nx-s...far-right-coverage-will-fuel-voice-of-america

Worst fears being realized.

"Glorious Leader Trump reports he won the next three Presidential elections". OAN of course, only broadcasts in English.

 

[TheBigA]

Kari Lake has announced a new content provider for VOA.

Kari Lake announces partnership between OAN and Voice of America to push MAGA message

‘Kari Lake providing One America News Network to our global audiences makes a mockery of the agency's history of independent non-partisan journalism,’ former USAGM Chief Financial Officer Grant Turner said in response

www.independent.co.uk

It wasn't completely unexpected. As I've been saying, this decision wasn't about ratings or outdated technology. It was specifically about content.

Kind of like replacing the live & local talent with national syndication from someplace else.

 

[TheBigA]

I always love to hear politicians change their story when it suits their purposes. For example, two months ago, Kari Lake canceled the VOA contract with the AP & Reuters. At the time, she said this:

“We should not be paying outside news organizations to tell us what the news is,” said Lake, who ran unsuccessfully for Arizona governor. “With a nearly billion-dollar budget, we should be producing news ourselves. And if that’s not possible, the American taxpayer should demand to know why.”

So now, two months later, she has no problem carrying news from an outside organization like OAN, because she likes the spin they give. VOA still has the budget, they're still paying all the staff, but none of them are actually working.

Where does OAN get their news? According to their website, they subscribe to the very news organizations that Kari Lake canceled two months ago.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

We should also add

"Kari added that she can ensure “our outlets have reliable and credible options as they work to craft their reporting and news programs,” and that OANN “is one of the few family-owned American media networks left in the United States.”

This is an attack on free/fair journalism and the truth. As a member of the media as a journalist/program director, this is a big concern for me.

But this doesnt mean the VOA has to use it.. if it doesnt pass the smell check their journalists are rewquired to give the news, then they dont use it

 

[TheBigA]

We should also add

"Kari added that she can ensure “our outlets have reliable and credible options as they work to craft their reporting and news programs,”

It's so "reliable and credible" that Dominion and Smartmatic sued them for defamation.

 

[ted chittenden]

I always love to hear politicians change their story when it suits their purposes. For example, two months ago, Kari Lake canceled the VOA contract with the AP & Reuters. At the time, she said this:



So now, two months later, she has no problem carrying news from an outside organization like OAN, because she likes the spin they give. VOA still has the budget, they're still paying all the staff, but none of them are actually working.

Where does OAN get their news? According to their website, they subscribe to the very news organizations that Kari Lake canceled two months ago.

If memory serves, OAN is an offshoot of the American Family Association (AFA) which also has ties to American Family Radio (AFR), a purported religious network founded by Donald Wildmon and now run by his son Tim. I say "purported" because it spends more time hawking far-right conservative politics than it does promoting anything Jesus Christ ever said. The problem is, I can ditto the last half of my previous sentence to just about all of the current U.S. religious networks.

One more thing (and it ties into what is happening with NPR.) This administration would love to force, if it could, all of the U.S. citizenry to use Fox, OAN, and Newsmax as their primary news sources.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

If memory serves, OAN is an offshoot of the American Family Association (AFA) which also has ties to American Family Radio (AFR), a purported religious network founded by Donald Wildmon and now run by his son Tim. I say "purported" because it spends more time hawking far-right conservative politics than it does promoting anything Jesus Christ ever said. The problem is, I can ditto the last half of my previous sentence to just about all of the current U.S. religious networks.

One more thing (and it ties into what is happening with NPR.) This administration would love to force, if it could, all of the U.S. citizenry to use Fox, OAN, and Newsmax as their primary news sources.

IT would appear OANN is a business founded by a man named Robert Herring, in a quick search i didn't find any associaiton with AFA, but i did find this

OAN Founder Robert Herring Sr. Has Alzheimer's Disease, Fights Deposition

Legal counsel for the 83-year-old CEO of Herring Networks seek to block his deposition in Dominion Voting's multibillion-dollar defamation suit.

timesofsandiego.com

Herring has also been sued for previous businesses he owned that operated illegally