“This is NPR.” That tagline has long been used for National Public Radio, but what it is remains remarkably in doubt. NPR remains something of a curiosity. It is a state-subsidized media outlet in a country that rejects state media. It is a site that routinely pitches for its sponsors while insisting that it does not have commercials. That confusion may be on the way to a final resolution after the election. NPR is about to have a reckoning with precisely what it is and what it represents.
While I once appeared regularly on NPR, I grew more critical of the outlet as it became overtly political in its coverage and intolerant of opposing views.
Even after a respected editor, Uri Berliner, wrote a scathing account of the political bias at NPR, the outlet has doubled down on its one-sided coverage and commentary. Indeed, while tacking aggressively to the left and openly supporting narratives (including some false stories) from Democratic sources, NPR has dismissed the criticism. When many of us called on NPR to pick a more politically neutral CEO, it instead picked NPR CEO Katherine Maher, who was previously criticized for her strident political views.
Some have long questioned the federal government’s subsidization of a media organization. NPR itself continues to maintain that “federal funding is essential” to its work. However, this country has long rejected state media models as undermining democratic values.
This funding is likely more important given NPR’s cratering audience and revenue. NPR’s audience has been declining for years. As a result, NPR has been forced to make deep staff cuts.
Ironically, NPR has one of the least diverse audiences. Its audience is overwhelmingly white, liberal, and more affluent than the rest of the country. Yet, while serving fewer and fewer people, it still expects most of the country to subsidize its programming.
Many of us have argued that NPR should compete with other radio companies in the free market. Notably, some Democratic members pushed to get Fox News dropped by cable carriers despite not being subsidized and ranking as the most-watched cable news network. (For full disclosure, I am a legal analyst at Fox.)
NPR and PBS are facing calls to remove the subsidy at long last. However, at the same time, pressure is coming from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). FCC Chair Brendan Carr is inquiring about NPR’s claim that it does not do commercial advertising.
Many of us have noticed that NPR has ramped up its sponsor statements with taglines about the products or firm’s clientele. Carr wrote, “I am concerned that NPR and PBS broadcasts could be violating federal law by airing commercials. In particular, it is possible that NPR and PBS member stations are broadcasting underwriting announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements.”
The support for noncommercial radio and television stations fell under different regulations. It is hard to see the sponsor acknowledgments not as commercial advertising. It is common for for-profit outlets to have hosts read commercial sponsors.
Noncommercial educational broadcast stations-or NCEs are prohibited under Section399B of the Communications Act from airing commercials or other promotional announcements on behalf of for-profit entities.
What is interesting is that NPR stresses that the “NPR way” is actually better to reach consumers:
“Across platforms, NPR sponsor messages are governed by slightly different regulations, but the guiding spirit is the same: guidelines are less about what’s “allowed” and more about the approach that works best for brands to craft sponsor recognition messages that connect with people in ‘the NPR way.'”
It is common for law firms or companies to have hosts herald their work in given areas. It is also common to have product references.
The thrust of NPR’s pitch to advertisers is that this is a different type of pitch to attract more customers. However, the federal government long ignored the obvious commercial advertisement.
There is little discernible difference between NPR and competitors beyond pretense when it comes to bias or promotions. What is striking is how NPR’s shrinking audience righteously opposes any effort to withdraw public subsidies. While dismissing the values or views of half the country, they expect those citizens to support its programming. What would the reaction be if Congress ordered the same subsidy for more popular competitors like Fox Radio?
I would oppose a subsidy for Fox as I do NPR. Each outlet should depend on its viewership for support. Notably, many liberal outlets continue to maintain their biased coverage despite falling ratings and revenues. The Washington Post has had to again lay off employees and has lost roughly half of its readership.
After being called in to right the ship, Washington Post publisher and CEO William Lewis delivered a truth bomb in the middle of the newsroom by telling the staff, “Let’s not sugarcoat it…We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right? I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”
Nevertheless, writers at the LA Times and other outlets continue to argue against balanced coverage. They would rather lose readers and revenue than their bias. So be it. These outlets have every right to offer their own slanted viewpoints or coverage. They do not have a right to a federal subsidy to insulate them from the response of consumers.
It is time to establish a bright-line rule against government subsidies for favored media outlets. “This is NPR” but it is not who we should be as a nation.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
This column appeared on Fox.com
The Schadenfruede is delicious. The Orange Moron said this morning that Canada can either get tariffed or become the 51st state. I am shorting many investments in anticipation of an economic collapse in the US. Wish it didn’t have to be that way, but the retards who voted this imbecile into office have it coming to them. $7 gas… here it comes.
The big problem with tariffs is not just that Trump is violating the USMC trade agreement which he so lauded as one of the greatest trade agreements in history when he was president in his first term, he’s opening the door for China to step in and strengthen its trade relationships with Canada, Mexico and Europe. Provoking won’t work. This will not end well.
You failed to mention the violations of the other parties. Was that deliberate?
How did Canada violate the USMC?
I just looked it up. Seems the US is a big violator of the USMCA.
The United States has faced accusations of violating the USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement) in various areas, particularly from Canada and Mexico. Below are some of the key disputes:
1. **Automotive Rules of Origin**
– **Issue:** Canada and Mexico have argued that the U.S. misinterprets the rules regarding the percentage of regional content required for vehicles to qualify for tariff-free trade under the USMCA.
– **Violation Claim:** The U.S. applies stricter calculations, which Canada and Mexico claim undermines the agreement.
– **Status:** A dispute panel in 2023 ruled in favor of Canada and Mexico, stating that the U.S.’s interpretation was inconsistent with the USMCA.
2. **Dairy Market Access**
– **Issue:** Canada has accused the U.S. of breaching the terms concerning dairy exports by demanding greater market access than agreed upon.
– **Violation Claim:** Canada asserts that the U.S.’s interpretation of quotas and tariff preferences exceeds what was negotiated in the agreement.
– **Status:** Ongoing discussions continue over compliance and allocation of dairy quotas.
3. **Energy and Environmental Rules**
– **Issue:** Mexico and Canada have raised concerns about the U.S. potentially subsidizing renewable energy in ways that discriminate against Canadian and Mexican energy exports.
– **Violation Claim:** Critics argue that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) provides incentives for U.S.-made clean energy technologies in a way that may breach USMCA commitments.
4. **Labor and Trade Enforcement**
– **Issue:** Labor provisions under the Rapid Response Labor Mechanism (RRM) have prompted complaints about certain U.S. practices not meeting fair labor standards in cross-border production chains.
5. **Section 232 Tariffs (Steel and Aluminum)**
– **Issue:** While the USMCA removed many tariffs, the U.S. continues to maintain tariffs on Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminum under “national security” grounds.
– **Violation Claim:** Canada and Mexico have challenged the legitimacy of these tariffs, asserting they violate free-trade principles under the agreement.
Chat GPT???
🤣🤣🤣🤣
So, you’re saying you prefer Trump’s constant lying.
Crybaby loser
And this what to do with NPR?
You are a crybaby loser and hold zero stocks lawn boy. You’re also not a Reagan republican or a biologist as you also claimed to be.
NPR is the audio version of the hair shirt.
Drippy G
Our local PBS station started having commercials. That and the fact it is so biased is when I stopped watching it. We need to defund it and let it live or die on its own.
The American Founders and Framers “defunded” it in Article 1, Section 8.
________________________________________________________________________________
” They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please…”
– Thomas Jefferson
Reading Uri’s article, reminds me of a driveway moment I had. I was on my way home, when they advertised for a upcoming article on exercise. Okay, I was interested. Turns out it was like six minutes of how exercise is a gateway to white supremacy. Really. We have a obesity crisis in America, heart disease is still the number one killer and they dont want you to exercise, might turn you into a white supremacists. That is the quality of NPR today.
Paradoxically, claiming “white supremacy” proves its existence.
Watching black football proves physical “black supremacy” on the gridiron.
There is no such thing as DEI or Affirmative Action in the NFL.
Why would DEI and affirmative action be appropriate generally?
It’s merit that matters.
Turns out it was like six minutes of how exercise is a gateway to white supremacy.
Welllllll those athletes in the Greek Olympic Games in 776 B.C. were white….. with an olive skinned Mediterranean / Turkish genotype, and they did have slaves in Greece, thanks to the example of Africans enslaving fellow Africans
But yeah….whine supremacy.
Defective minds
NPR and PBS were once good outlets with great programs and different looks that you would not see on commercial stations. The Car Guys were hysterical and at the same time delivered a lot of information to people for who drove cars but otherwise thought of them as a black box (like me). There were others and there was humor. That seems to be gone. My wife listens frequently but she is more liberal than me and I probably have not listened to anything on NPR in 20 yrs. PBS has some good programs yet like This Old House which I like but the narratives and history are more and more of a progressive slant. So I rarely watch PBS except for This Old House.
Radio-well it will just keep on being Radio Margaritaville for me.
End the Subsidies and kick ‘em out of the nest. Time for them to fly or crash.
Having re-read Uri Berliner’s article, the downfall of NPR is reflective of MSM. They have doubled or tripled down on progressive wokeism and it shows in their declining ratings and levels of trust the American public has in them. They are pandering to the small woke group, alienating moderates and even traditional liberals.
Just read at the DNC chair candidate forum, every candidate agreed Harris lost the election due to “racism and misogyny.” One of these people will be leading the DNC. Guess they did not learn anything after the last election.
“Guess they didn’t learn anything”? WE, meaning MOST Americans, had reinforced what we already knew—that Trump is a pathological liar who is scared sh!tless of going to prison for the crimes he committed, so he lied about bringing down the cost of groceries, playing on the fears of people concerned about the cost of food. WE already knew that he has no honor, that his mental illness requires him to get power no matter what it takes, and that he cynically will take advantage of gullible people.
Trump’s lying barely got him the smallest margin of victory in the past 55 elections— a margin of 1.48%— and the lies are what put him over. He started out with less than a 50% approval rating that has just kept going down. It is the lowest approval rating in the history of presidential polling for an incoming president.
So, stop pretending that the American people strongly support the pig and that they reject Democrats. That’s more MAGA media propaganda.
We did reject Democrats. Trump won the popular vote, all seven swing states and the electoral college. Republicans have the house and the senate. As long as Democrats keep doing what they have been doing for the past eight or more years, the American people will continue to reject them. Sane and normal Democrats do not want you on their side or in their party. They think you are stupid and crazy. Life long Democrat Bill Maher, James Carville, have said exactly that. Other traditional Democrats call you toxic to the party.
Upstate: you MAGAs do not represent “WE”–the majority of Americans. Trump received LESS THAN 50% of all votes cast. Even he admits that his lie about groceries is what got him the power his craven and sick soul requires. Americans are now waking up to the reality that Trump lied to get power and is abusing it, the he is demanding appointment of people even dumber and less qualified than he is–whose sole qualification is unquestioning loyalty to him. Kamala Harris ran a clean campaign, and she received more votes in 2024 that the pig did in 2016–so stop pretending that MAGA represents most Americans–that’s more of the MAGA propaganda.
why do you keep vomiting that slop, gigi-pig? Trump got 2 and a half MILLION more votes than Harris. So just swallow it and stop burping up your nonsens.
Gigi-Bill Clinton never won 50% of the popular vote. Just thought you ought to know.
Bill was close but No Cigar…
You remind me of that guy walking the street with the sandwich board sign claiming the end is near based on nothing more than his own delusions. Facts would greatly improve your life and the ability to not sound like an indoctrinated sock puppet for the progs. Your type keep hoping that adult common sense will prove disastrous for the world when, in fact, it only proves the insanity of the prog/left – time after time. Show us a REAL SUCCESS for any of the progressive/ communist/ woke ideology that have been proposed since the beginning of time. You won’t because you can’t find any success – just trails of chaos and death.
whimsical: confront me with some facts that prove what I said was wrong–you can’t, and you know it–so you do what MAGA media has taught you to do–accuse someone who confronts you with inconvenient facts of being delusional, of lying, and you throw around wastebasket terms like “woke” and “progressive”. Trump lied to get into office and obtained the smallest margin in the past 55 years-less than 1.5%. He had the lowest starting approval rating in the history of polling for new presidents, and that approval rating keeps going down while he pardons the January 6 insurrectionists who beat up cops, as he is hunting down and firing prosecutors who prosecuted the loser trash that invaded our Capitol at his command and beat up police officers, and he has sent Muskrat and his minions to take over our government computer systems, including the Treasury, and when career professionals tried to stop him because some of the information is classified and Muskrat doesn’t have clearance–they had US Marshals remove them. Why do you think the orange one only slapped China with a 10% tariff—? It’s because Muskrat imports so much merch from China and he didn’t want to pay the increased cost. So, Trump is now bullying our strongest allies–Canada and Mexico, and they are retaliating. If you can’t perceive all of this as the unbridled power of a mentally ill malignant narcissist, you are the one who is living in a world of your own delusions. Now, even the pig admits that prices of things will go up because of his tarriffs, but MAGA media will explain it away, and you will believe.
talk about pigs, trying an anonmous moniker instead of using gigi moniker is like putting lipstick on a pig.
Won’t work. goo goo
GooGoo
With all due respect and I think I truly speak for the majority of people on this site… Please STFU you malignant ignoramus.
57% of Americans have an “unfavorable” view of the Democrat party. Even Trumps unfavorable isnt that fvcking high.
Suck it, Gigenius
Before the election, polls routinely showed that 75 to 80 percent of Americans felt the country was headed in the WRONG DIRECTION.
YOU LOST because YOU SUCK.
Clearly people would prefer a lying, convicted, fat pig than YOU and your kind.
How does that make you feel? Like a pathetic loser?
Your constant whining confirms that you are.
I think that NPR should be funded by the government. Perhaps the better answer is, to make it about the music. Drop the whole NPR news function. It is not possible to propaganda-proof a news organization through any systemic solution.
There is plenty enough music to play, 24 hours per day. Classical, jazz, big band, blues, folk music.
I do not think that relying on commercial driven stations will safely preserve these. Pandora is pretty good, but its $5 a month. And, you need the Internet.
“I think that NPR should be funded by the government.
I’m sorry, but exactly where in the limited powers vested in the Federal government by the Constitution do you see the provision of entertainment? Hmmm. On further thought, maybe we could largely solve the national debt & deficit crisis by axing huge chucks of the rest of Fedgov on that basis 🙂
These continuing references to and discussions of NPR are moot and a complete waste of time.
Congress has no power to tax for or fund NPR, per Article 1, Section 8, which allows taxation for only debt, defense, and general welfare, the best example of which is roads; if one can visualize how roads facilitate “All Well Proceed,” one can fully understand general welfare, where it begins and where it stops.
Anyone who broaches this subject should provide a citation of the Constitution for any form or fashion of legal basis for NPR.
They cannot.
Communists in America enjoy the freedom of speech and press and are allowed to establish publications and broadcast outlets for communist propaganda to their hearts’ content in the free markets of the private sector—if they are not appropriately found to be engaged in treason and insurrection.
I note that the general welfare clause in the Constitution has been interpreted much more broadly than roads — see Helvering v Davis (1937) as an example. I also note that Professor Turley did not raise a constitutional concern with NPR funding in this blog post.
All, or the Whole, Well Proceed – General Welfare – includes things like roads, water, sewer, police, fire, electricity, post office, internet, or basic infrastructure that all people use.
Individual welfare, specific welfare, particular welfare, charity, and favor were deliberately excluded from Article 1, Section 8, by the Founders and Framers.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” was deliberately included in the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I note that the corrupt Supreme Court of 1869 “decided” that because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited.
I note that the partial and corrupt Supreme Court of 1973 “decided” that abortion was a constitutional right and that the impartial and constitutional Supreme Court of 2022 “decided” that, not the Justices but the Constitution places abortion in the purview of states.
The Constitution was written to be read by free Americans in order that they might enjoy their rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities, not modified, amended, or “interpreted” by mystics in black robes.
“All, or the Whole, Well Proceed – General Welfare – includes things like roads, water, sewer, police, fire, electricity, post office, internet, or basic infrastructure that all people use. ”
Even that is far too expansive. Madison thought it limited to the application of the enumerated powers for the welfare of the people, and I subscribe to that view. There is damned little that could not be rationalized as legitimate Federal power under your definition (which was shared by Hamilton, I must reluctantly admit). I find it difficult to believe that those who drafted the Constitution went to as much trouble as they did to restrict, even hobble, the power of the Federal government, only to insert a clause that could trivially undo all of those restraints.
What the —- are you talking about? CC brought up his inability to grasp the clear meaning of GENERAL and WELFARE. These are commodities and services that all people require to proceed well that are not otherwise available and are most effectively provided through governmental tax collection and funding, and are appropriate to the federal level as opposed to those of state and local. Intuitively, general Welfare would include food and clothes but no one eats or wears the same things and all people choose different types, forms, and styles. Perhaps the most succinct phrase to define “general Welfare” is “security and basic infrastructure.”
“Madison thought it limited to the application of the enumerated powers for the welfare of the people” – unintelligible and incoherent. You may want to provide the quote.
What is the federal government’s rationale for ever subsidizing any of this? This is just another anthropologically failed experiment, like The Great Soxiety, affirmative action and DEI. It’s time to send all of these faculty lounge mind games to the ashbin of history as major societal mistakes.
Well it did provide comic relief for SNL skits!
If “federal funding is essential to its work…,” then its “work” (some might be tempted to label it propaganda) die. Let the merit of the work (if any) sustain the effort. Otherwise, NPR should go the way of the dinosaurs.
As a person who started as a journalist and retired as radio station group owner I could not agree more with your assessment of NPR.
I wish to take Enigmainblack’s side on this question. The audience is mostly white. Why should Enigma pay taxes that goes to a group providing service to only white people?-S-
There’s no reason for the United States tax dollars to be funding anything, anyone and especially any other nation. Lets start paying off debt and projects to benefit the American people.
Hear Hear!
1000%
* PBS, NPR, are commercials or the thing itself. It isn’t persuasive programming. It’s commercial because it manipulates with negative intent. Because it says it’s activism doesn’t make it good. Activist journalism is manipulation. It’s without justification because of harm. It’s actually parasitic journalism. IMHO
Another reason to be pleased with a new Trump administration. Had Harris won, NPR would be subsidized even more, and so would the hundreds of failing media across the nation. So in effect an alternative history would show the government media growing by the hundreds.
I used to listen to news on NPR every morning. Stopped years ago as their reporting became more and more slanted. Clear to me that NPR as it exists today does not warrant federal funding. That said, we have two local affiliates that broadcast high quality and objective local news programs. So I hope they will survive.
The answer is not complicated. Cease all taxpayer funding for NPR and PBS. Their blatant bias, hypocrisy and social and political advocacy is appalling. The fact that it’s being done while they are financially viable only with non-voluntary funding is beyond comprehension by those of us who vehemently oppose their obvious agenda. Support for NPR and PBS through taxation should be stopped today.
The Pope is another sociopath. Manipulative
Let them compete in the marketplace. If they can’t adapt then they fade away
I’d wish for the opposite. A funded but as non partisan as possible news source. Most Americans hardly follow the news at all, and those that do tend to be less informed than those who don’t. A news source that can be trusted is lacking in the US media. Even the wire services, AP, Reuters, etc, seem to use emotive words giving a slant to stories. Most journalists now come from the same upper middle class liberal background. Heck, I too am a liberal from an upper middle class background, but I don’t want my news sources to be so.
We badly need a source that doesn’t depend on donations from huge partisan non profit orgs or corporate sponsorship. A place to turn on the car radio, get the top of the hour stories with unbiased coverage.
NPR is non-partisan. The only reason Republicans don’t like it is that NPR refuses to indulge their lying and hate.
Wrong. As the good professor points out, twenty five years at NPR, editor Uri Berliner called NPR out for bias. He now works for The Free Press.
I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust.
https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-npr-lost-americas-trust
I used to listen to NPR from sun up till dinner time. It had its left wing slant but you could ignore it and still get the news and some interesting articles. Then 2016 happened and they went all in, panel-O-pundits, CNN style, advocacy journalism. It was nauseating. Like most of America, I switched them off. Rather listen to Taylor Swift, Lady Ga Ga, Kelly Clarkson than NPR. Occasionally in the truck I will tune in to see if they changed. They have not. For that matter, it has gotten even worse as now nearly all so-called news is on race or gender. Matt Taibbi even wrote an article on it. Last year I was taking my parents to the airport and we listened. In the entire hour of Morning Edition, there was not one article I would call news. Even my father agreed.
The professor is correct, the local NPR station advertises for a few local businesses. And they even brag about how they advertise. They should not receive federal funding.
Hahahaha! “non-partisan”? Hahahahahahaha!
So you believe that the right doesn’t like NPR because they’re coverage is too fair and balanced for them to handle? Even a dog knows the difference between being kicked and being tripped over.
And just where would you find unbiased, honest, and trustworthy personnel to man such an organization when we do not trust any of our legacy government at this time. Your idea sounds ideal but totally unworkable. Basically because of human nature.
Long overdue.