Trump plans order to cut funding for NPR and PBS

[b-turner]

radiofan2023 - don't know who you were suggesting to volunteer at the local public station

As for me, too busy. I've been in radio since 1978. I've been on air, in programming, sales and managed a station in Houston for over 25 years. I also spearheaded a LPFM. I sure don't know it all and have much more to learn.

Your suggestion indicates you know the ins and outs. How about sharing your knowledge. Tell me those ins and outs so I have a better understanding.

 

[TheBigA]

If we are going to fund non-commercial stations, why not support many of the LPFMs trying to survive on under $5,000 a year.

When CPB was created, the goal was to fund stations that could survive on their own. The idea of government funding, starting in 1983 under Reagan, wasn't to fund zero audience stations that had little chance of surviving. It was to AUGMENT what they could do on their own. This was also before LPFM existed, but there were 10 watters. They set criteria for funding based on the amount of money you raised, rather than need. It's the same thing you're hearing from repubs now about Medicaid. They don't want people living on a government dole. So that's why LPFMs don't qualify.

How about AM stations that are hurting financially. There are so many AMs carried financially by their FM.

Same thing. The repubs who amended the act in 1983 talked a lot about not wanting to create welfare for radio. That's what you're talking about. But they would also have to be non-profit and have minimum staffing to qualify. That staffing requirement prevents a lot of stations from qualifying.

I really think if people understood the requirements for this funding, they might not be so hostile about it. This was all designed by Reagan conservatives. It was given to the stations who then decided how to spend it. Not to a top-down thing like NPR. Under Reagan, NPR became a service provider, and the local stations were in charge. That's what this administration wants to do with other gov't agencies. It was already done 40 years ago for CPB.

 

[gr8oldies]

When CPB was created, the goal was to fund stations that could survive on their own. The idea of government funding, starting in 1983 under Reagan, wasn't to fund zero audience stations that had little chance of surviving. It was to AUGMENT what they could do on their own. This was also before LPFM existed, but there were 10 watters. They set criteria for funding based on the amount of money you raised, rather than need. It's the same thing you're hearing from repubs now about Medicaid. They don't want people living on a government dole. So that's why LPFMs don't qualify.



Same thing. The repubs who amended the act in 1983 talked a lot about not wanting to create welfare for radio. That's what you're talking about. But they would also have to be non-profit and have minimum staffing to qualify. That staffing requirement prevents a lot of stations from qualifying.

I really think if people understood the requirements for this funding, they might not be so hostile about it. This was all designed by Reagan conservatives. It was given to the stations who then decided how to spend it. Not to a top-down thing like NPR. Under Reagan, NPR became a service provider, and the local stations were in charge. That's what this administration wants to do with other gov't agencies. It was already done 40 years ago for CPB.

The LPFMs just need more bootstraps

 

[Delete My Account]

If we are going to fund non-commercial stations, why not support many of the LPFMs trying to survive on under $5,000 a year.

Great. Can they prove they have an audience, are capably staffed, actually provide local coverage and aren't someone's plaything? Do they cover enough of a population to make it a worthwhile investment? CPB funding is seed money, it's not welfare.

How about AM stations that are hurting financially. There are so many AMs carried financially by their FM. In rural areas where Amazon and big box stores have destroyed revenue for the station serving the county. They're the only source of local news on a daily basis and carry high school sports among other things. Many are desperately looking for a buyer and if that buyer doesn't come, they'll turn in their license once the savings the station has are spent. These stations need help. Can they get some support through a program like their non-commercial station brothers? One could argue these government dollars are for some but not all in need.

If the FM is carrying them financially why should they get funding for a waning technology? A Washington State legislator proposed a bill to assist local media platforms (including the type you're talking about) in funding journalists with a modest tax on big tech ad revenues in their state (that have taken a lot of the revenue from local media.) Even those alleged liberals didn't want to clash with Meta and Musk, and it didn't go anywhere.

 

[TheBigA]

Even those alleged liberals didn't want to clash with Meta and Musk, and it didn't go anywhere.

That's the part people don't understand. Government funding based on need is a liberal idea. Giving poor people healthcare is what liberals do. Free college tuition for poor people is a liberal idea. Lately, if you based government funding on need, you won't get any conservatives. That's why this attack on CPB is completely misplaced. This is their kind of funding. Their people came up with it. Unfortunately it was 40 years ago before some of them were born. It really doesn't matter since they're all distracted by fake talk points.

 

[davideduardo]

That's the part people don't understand. Government funding based on need is a liberal idea. Giving poor people healthcare is what liberals do. Free college tuition for poor people is a liberal idea. Lately, if you based government funding on need, you won't get any conservatives.

That is a vastly generalized statement. Conservatives I know want quality healthcare, good schools with alternatives, assistance for the handicapped, aid for the unemployed, good things from refuse removal to national defense. However, they seem not to want the equivalents of financing a study of non-binary taipers in the Ecuadorian Amazon region and the equivalents of that sort of thing to be found in many areas.

In this discussion, I've seen many but not all conservatives who feel that there is no need for the federal government to operate, finance or support any kind of media, whether it be radio, TV, internet or even newspapers or magazines. What we are talking about is whether the nation needs support of any kind for PBS, NPR, VOA and any other kind of broadcast operation.

That's why this attack on CPB is completely misplaced. This is their kind of funding. Their people came up with it. Unfortunately it was 40 years ago before some of them were born. It really doesn't matter since they're all distracted by fake talk points.

I agree that idiots like Kari Lake don't understand the medium or the purpose here. Still, their objective of ending things like the obsolete VOA and the support for potentially polarized broadcast services is seen favorably by a number of people I know, all of whom second my opinion of the people the Trump administration put in those positions.

And many things that were approved and funded four decades or more ago are obsolete or need significant revision. Some nations have requirements for all their government ministries, boards and agencies to be evaluated periodically and closed if they are no longer needed.

 

[TheBigA]

I've seen many but not all conservatives who feel that there is no need for the federal government to operate, finance or support any kind of media, whether it be radio, TV, internet or even newspapers or magazines.

I get all that, but as I said, the legislation wasn't written based on need. It was based on ability of stations to raise money. People keep bringing up need, and that wasn't why public broadcasting got government funding. That's why NPR says directly that their lawsuit isn't about the money. They don't "need" government money. If conservatives were really interested in keeping government money away from NPR, all they have to do is write an amendment to the law that says that. It's really that simple. Instead, they're blowing up CPB, which funds lots of other things that have nothing to do with NPR news. It won't have the intended effect. NPR News will still be there, and the local stations will become even more dependent on it because they won't have the government money for hiring local staff. It's really too bad that they can't get past the talking points that are completely wrong. I'm hoping someone somewhere explains this to congress so they understand what they're doing.

There are some in public broadcasting who are fine with the conservatives blowing up CPB. It takes away that talking point, and that ax they hold over the heads of NPR all the time. Once government funding goes away, NPR can become much stronger, perhaps even create a special endowment for stations in need, hire whoever they want, and nobody will care what conservatives say about NPR anymore.

 

[davideduardo]

There are some in public broadcasting who are fine with the conservatives blowing up CPB. It takes away that talking point, and that ax they hold over the heads of NPR all the time. Once government funding goes away, NPR can become much stronger, perhaps even create a special endowment for stations in need, and nobody will care what conservatives say about NPR anymore.

That sounds reasonable.

I wonder if some who might support that effort do not do so today because they feel that "they get all the money they need from the government".

I recall from decades ago that my mother was on the board of the Cleveland Visiting Nurse Association and they make a point in saying that they were all privately funded. She explained to me that many people who might donate tried to pick among many things they supported financially based on whether the funding of each was totally dependent on the private sector. Of course, that was back in the day when Republicans and Democrats talked to each other and seemed able to reach agreeable solutions together.

 

[TheBigA]

I wonder if some who might support that effort do not do so today because they feel that "they get all the money they need from the government".

If you go to the CPB site, you'll see exactly how much each station gets. Nobody gets enough that they can operate on that money alone. Plus as I said, the government money is based on raising local dollars. So they HAVE to raise local dollars in order to qualify. That's why I say these politicians are simply believing what they're being told, and not looking at the facts. But nobody listens to anybody else anymore. They're all just stuck in their own silo. Too bad because they won't be able to fix this once they blow it up.

 

[davideduardo]

If you go to the CPB site, you'll see exactly how much each station gets.

That's not my point. There are those who will not support any non-profit if they think the entity is helped by the government. Percentages are not looked at, as it is just about being "government supported".

There are plenty who think anything run by the government is like the DMV... where time goes to die.

 

[TheBigA]

There are plenty who think anything run by the government is like the DMV... where time goes to die.

Except it's not "run by the government." It just gets some money. Just like Tesla. For some reason, nobody makes that connection.

But sure, Pacifica refuses to take any government money because the anarchists who work there see it as instant death.

 

[davideduardo]

Except it's not "run by the government." It just gets some money. Just like Tesla. For some reason, nobody makes that connection.

You are not getting my point: this is the perception that some, if not many, donors have about no-profits that have government subsidies.

I gave you the example of my mother's board of directors experience over nearly 40 years for the local Visiting Nurse Association where their "research" revealed that it was very, very important to highlight that the association got no government money or aid. They found plenty of potential donors and actual ones who would not give support if there was any hint of government involvement.

But sure, Pacifica refuses to take any government money because the anarchists who work there see it as instant death.

That is a different case. Many "charities" would like government funding, but some find that small funding amounts scare away larger donation amounts.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

Sens. Ernst and Cruz demand details of CPB grant supporting NPR ‘Backstop’ team - Current

In a letter to CPB, the senators allege that the corporation is “reportedly” withholding grant funds until the newsroom fixes its “editorial bias issue.”

current.org

Here is an extension over the drama at CPB.

Sens. Joni Ernst and Ted Cruz requested that CPB share documents related to its $1.9 million grant to NPR for editorial enhancement.

In a letter sent Tuesday to CPB President and CEO Patricia Harrison, the Republican senators claim that the corporation is “reportedly withholding” some grant money until the network improves its “editorial bias issue.”

CPB’s grant, awarded to NPR in October, supported creation of a “Backstop” team of editors who would provide final review of news stories.

 

[TheBigA]

You are not getting my point: this is the perception that some, if not many, donors have about no-profits that have government subsidies.

Maybe. This isn't strictly about government funding. Keep in mind that after they shut down CPB, they will go after NPR's tax-exempt status. That's what Carr is doing with his "investigation." So this isn't business as usual. This is the far right looking to use the power of the government to shut down the media.

 

[gr8oldies]

Maybe. This isn't strictly about government funding. Keep in mind that after they shut down CPB, they will go after NPR's tax-exempt status. That's what Carr is doing with his "investigation." So this isn't business as usual. This is the far right looking to use the power of the government to shut down the media.

See:: Project 2025. It's all of the arts.

 

[CTListener]

I was listening this afternoon Vermont Public's classical network (WNCH Norwich), which is in the midst of its June funding drive. The midday host was reading comments from listeners who had called in to donate, all very concerned about the president's intention to claw back the next two years' funding. He said the impact of such a move would be $4 million in lost money and immediate impact on both the classical and news/talk networks. "We will persist," he assured his listeners, but I wonder if he and the two other full-time hosts heard on the classical network will find themselves unemployed and the station turned into a classical jukebox should the money be pulled back. I also wonder what will become of the overnight programming from American Public Media (Your Classical) that the network uses overnight and when the hosts are out sick or on vacation, since APM will be suffering much larger funding cuts.

Does Trump realize that not all public radio programming has to do with him or his policies, or "wokeness," or the darker-hued bogeymen who he thinks are ravaging our country?

 

[TheBigA]

Does Trump realize that not all public radio programming has to do with him or his policies,

Simple answer is no.

 

[tbolt909]

Does Trump realize that not all public radio programming has to do with him or his policies, or "wokeness," or the darker-hued bogeymen who he thinks are ravaging our country?

No. He doesn't know and doesn't care. In the MAGA World, things like Shakespeare, Theatre, Science, Literature and anything else that requires a brain are evil. His attack on Harvard is another example. College = Bad. All of his grievances have a common thread...

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

I was listening this afternoon Vermont Public's classical network (WNCH Norwich), which is in the midst of its June funding drive. The midday host was reading comments from listeners who had called in to donate, all very concerned about the president's intention to claw back the next two years' funding. He said the impact of such a move would be $4 million in lost money and immediate impact on both the classical and news/talk networks. "We will persist," he assured his listeners, but I wonder if he and the two other full-time hosts heard on the classical network will find themselves unemployed and the station turned into a classical jukebox should the money be pulled back. I also wonder what will become of the overnight programming from American Public Media (Your Classical) that the network uses overnight and when the hosts are out sick or on vacation, since APM will be suffering much larger funding cuts.

Does Trump realize that not all public radio programming has to do with him or his policies, or "wokeness," or the darker-hued bogeymen who he thinks are ravaging our country?

Ernst, Cruz Scrutinize NPR Funding | U.S. Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) are demanding transparency...

www.ernst.senate.gov

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/joni-ernst-ted-cruz-cpb/2025/06/04/id/1213655/

No and his allies in congress don’t care either.
And now Ted Cruz and Joni Ernst questions the funding to CPB. It’s repeat everything that happened back in March when the Doge committee got the CEO’s of PBS and NPR in congress for the same reasons.

 

[gr8oldies]

I was listening this afternoon Vermont Public's classical network (WNCH Norwich), which is in the midst of its June funding drive. The midday host was reading comments from listeners who had called in to donate, all very concerned about the president's intention to claw back the next two years' funding. He said the impact of such a move would be $4 million in lost money and immediate impact on both the classical and news/talk networks. "We will persist," he assured his listeners, but I wonder if he and the two other full-time hosts heard on the classical network will find themselves unemployed and the station turned into a classical jukebox should the money be pulled back. I also wonder what will become of the overnight programming from American Public Media (Your Classical) that the network uses overnight and when the hosts are out sick or on vacation, since APM will be suffering much larger funding cuts.

Does Trump realize that not all public radio programming has to do with him or his policies, or "wokeness," or the darker-hued bogeymen who he thinks are ravaging our country?

I'm seeing folks in this very thread telling us that NPR is all far-left propaganda