Columns, Media

“This is NPR”: America’s Public Media Faces Reckoning on What it is

“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

157 thoughts on ““This is NPR”: America’s Public Media Faces Reckoning on What it is”

  1. Something everybody seems to miss with the NPR controversy…… The FM band runs from 88 to 108 MHz. There has always been fierce competition for available broadcasting slots, and licensees do indeed hold a valuable “property”. Here’s the catch: 88 to 92 MHz is reserved for “noncommercial” broadcasters. NPR gets a free ride. in my listening area, in the morning I can get the very same program on EIGHT different frequencies! Total waste and total monopoly. FCC should amend its “table of assignments” to commercialize ALL of the 88-108 MHz and make NPR compete for allotted frequency assignments with everybody else.

    1. I have been convinced for a very long time NPR radio station is broadcasting way over the power limits. It floods almost a full frequency band and no matter what the weather it has the loudest widest banded signal that is always present and tunable no matter what, and it is the only station with that characteristic.

      So they obviously break the law and spew their signal way over legal power and bandwidth. If they did not other huge stations from big cities would blast through like NPR does, but they do not, ever.

  2. BREAKING NEWS

    FAA director and former MTV star, Sean Duffy, has identified the major problems at the FAA that undermined safety for air travel, after just a few days on the job.

    Apparently the problem is that the term “cockpit’ was changed to “flight deck’, and the term “Notice to Airmen ” was changed to “Notice to Air Mission”.

    This is obviously the reason for the recent air disasters.
    Why couldn’t the Biden administration realize this and take appropriate action???

    Obviously Biden is directly and personally and completely responsible for the recent disasters.

    Hopefully the DOJ will bring appropriate charges.

    1. “I can imagine what can be, unburdened by what has been.”

      – Kamala “I-Slept-With-Willy-Brown” Harris
      ________________________________________________

      We’re still in the enchanting and hypnotic afterglow of the communist Biden/Harris debacle.

  3. Trump promised lower prices for groceries, uh yea, they’re not.
    Trump promised to end Ukraine war in 24 hours, uh yea, not
    Trump promised us the world would respect us more, uh no, they think trump and his cronies are disgraceful
    Trump promised tariffs, yea he did sending prices soaring. Thank you for a promise kept.

    1. China is moving toward strengthening relationships with Canada, Mexico, Europe and Panama. Trump is driving Panama into the arms of China. WWIII is next.

  4. I have long felt that subsidies to NPR should cease. It’s unfair that the federal government subsidizes a blatantly Democrat radio program. The Democrat Party has enjoyed funding for essentially advertising to Democrat voters.

    I remember watching PBS as a kid, for kids shows and ballet. It, too, has skewed Left.

    It’s time for the American taxpayer to stop giving freebies to the Democrat Party.

  5. 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 ends.

    NPR is not included in “general Welfare” and may not be taxed for or funded.

    The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.

    All Well Proceed, or “general Welfare,” is not welfare for one, some, or a few; it is not individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, charity, or favor.

    General Welfare is security and basic infrastructure—police, fire, roads, water, sewer, post office, electricity, internet, etc.

    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, such as those on NPR, 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.

  6. I agree with Turley, NPR and PBS should not receive a single cent of taxpayer financed subsidy. Just as no other media outlet, print of broadcast (e.g., Voice of America) or, for that matter, any private commercial or not-for-profit business, organization or entity whether media or anything else.

    But that’s a no brainer.

    What I’m more interested in is the first amendment implications of the FCC going after CBS regarding its October 2024 “60 Minutes” interview of Harris. https://apnews.com/article/trump-cbs-60-minutes-harris-interview-ac36372dd700c9d233eee78773473f49

    There’s little doubt the Harris interview was manipulated. But, as I understand it, the press freedoms enumerated (as a matter of natural law) in the 1st Amendment do not prohibit that. It’s curious to me that the Turley, who constantly regales us bout what a champion of free speech he is, has yet to comment on this issue. It seems obvious that CBS would ultimately prevail if this reached SCOTUS so its equally curious to me why CBS has caved to the FCC.

  7. Partisan political broadcaster that taxpayers are forced to fund. Let its followers support it! not all working and retired taxpayers who don’t listen to it and/or find it offensive!

    1. “Let its followers support it!”

      Likewise for the NEA. I enjoy art, our walls are full, some are originals purchased from artists, but I don’t think government subsidies are right.

      1. Amen. That goes for sports stadiums. Teams are businesses. They can buy their own stadiums. That goes for airports. Airlines are businesses they can pay for their own airports. That goes for colleges. If they can’t operate on the revenue they take in from tuition, then they should only build what they can pay for and teach what they can afford. That goes for National Parks. If Yellowstone can’t survive on entry fees, close it down and use the forests for lumber. That goes for medical research. Let big pharma do the research. Shut down every medical research facility that gets public funding. Waste of money. My list goes on and on and on. I don’t go to stadiums to see sports, I don’t fly, I never went to college, I don’t go to National Parks, I don’t take vaccines. If you want to visit Yosemite… buy it and have fun. I shouldn’t have to pay for it.

        1. On and on and on…

          🤣🤣🤣

          Your list is all messed up. I’m sure there’s latin term for polluting a list in that way to prevent discussion of a specific item… ad naseum.

  9. I’ve posted it before, so have many others: if they are so revered and relevant, it shouldn’t be any trouble for them to survive on their own merits and self-initiated funding. Shouldn’t even be an issue. Same goes for modern PBS. Or, alternately, if they are neutral, shouldn’t be an issue for them to do fair reporting and representation. Guess we’ll see. In their modern iterations neither of the aforementioned would be terribly missed, methinks.

  11. The feds are swimming in trillions of $ debt. It is past time to cut ALL gravy train parasite’s umbilical cords, especially if they can’t make it on their own after 50 YEARS.

    1. I couldn’t agree more. After all, more money is needed for important things like bombs to kill more civilians Gaza and to keep the Ukrainian military propped up so the few remaining young men in that country can be slaughtered for the enrichment of Lindsey Graham, et al.

  12. It’s heart breaking to see any News Outlet die. For one, it’s a starting job for many Journalist, (RTF – Radio, Television, Film, Print Media, and Advertising).
    Delivery of Print (News Papers & Magazines ‘Circulation’) is D.O.A., Radio is being replace with Cell Phone Music Apps, Particularly Radio News. With the exception of Sports Radio and very few syndicated Radio News show, it’s all but gone. And Local ‘LIVE’ AM radio is really gone (Westwood-1, Sinclair, iHeart networks) are no longer on the AM dial.
    News used to be a part of our culture, Mail & Paper Boxes, Sidewalk Paper Boxes just cant be seen anymore. There was a time when a Paper had two edition, Morning and Evening to catch the Commuter rush-hours.

    That’s ‘CENSORSHIP’ by Attrition. I know -Guilty as Charged-, Google News takes my morning-perusing away. But to be honest, there is nothing like getting up, grabbing the News Paper off the front door stoop, waddling back to the porcelain throne, cracking open the Paper and reading, while you take your morning constitution. A cultural ritual now forgotten on a new generation. Today it’s: Sh_ t, Shower, and Shave, jump into the Car, grab a Starbucks at the drive through, Swipe the Google News on the cell-phone, while you crawl through the morning traffic, and emerge on the job Bright Eyed and Knowledgeable.

    Government Funding or No Governmental Funding can’t change the habits of the Modern Man. As for Journalism, A.I. portends to be a very dangerous tool, It’s more than a word processor, it’s your Partner in Crime. Who knows, Don’t give up on Journalism. When the Big-One hits and all is lost, remember Plato started off on a street corner with just a pair of sandals a tunic and cloak.

    2. @Anonymous

      Agreed. Your mistake is confusing modern (the ‘modern’ is important) NPR with a ‘news outlet’. They are not a news outlet.

  13. If I have this right, you quit appearing on NPR because it became overtly political and intolerant of opposing views, so you decided to become a contributor for Fox news?

    1. No, you don’t have that right – Jonathan has been on multiple networks for hundreds of hits and panel discussions.

      Leftards refuse to go on fox to present their illegitimate views, so the process is self-selecting.

    2. CPB (Corp for Public Broadcasting) is organized as a NON-PROFIT accepting federal monies in furtherance of its neutral goals to provide quality products to all persons.
      FOX Corporation is a PRIVATE, FOR-profit entity.
      are you that uninformed, Mr. Esq.?

      1. You defeat your own argument when you state “in furtherance of its neutral goals to provide quality products to all persons”. They are not neutral. That is the whole point of this posting.

        1. You misread my comment. I was pointing out the difference in charters, not the actuality. That’s why I pointed out CPB, not NPR, which gets its public funding from CPB.
          “The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 requires the CPB to operate with a “strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature”. https://cpb.org/aboutpb/act

          2. Also, CPB has tried to equate itself with the BBC by emeshing itself with them. PBS engages in some coproductions, I believe, and NPR broadcasts the BBC World Service during their overnights.

      2. “In furtherance of its ‘neutral’ goals” ……… Now THAT’S HILARIOUS !!! It is honorable to “wish” that were the case, however, NPR and PBS are the epitome of “leftist propaganda”, in addition to being subsidized out of confiscated taxes.

    4. @garyesq2k2

      Nope. The Professor, if you’ve been following for any length of time, has always contributed to a very wide variety of sources. Nice try, though. And honestly, ever since Disney bought Fox, that really doesn’t work as any kind of ‘gotcha; or bugaboo anymore. Most of us are over the idea of gotchas or bugaboos, anyway, if we ever cared to begin with (most of us did not).

    5. NPR isn’t even “occasionally” honest or thorough in their propaganda. “Suppression” is one of their leading features.

  14. My favorite thing about NPR is when their announcers speak in that incredibly affected, slow and very soft manner. I feel like curling up with my cat and drinking coffee with both hands from an earthenware mug, while I peruse my Amherst alumni newsletter.

    1. …while I’m trolling conservative blogs, and posting lunatic rants about the “fat orange man”.

    2. The NPR affectation that amuses me the most is the pseudo-intellectual stutter/hesitation, designed to make the listener think that the speaker is thinking REALLY, REALLY HARD. Scott Simon is the master of this. 40 years ago I used to listen to Morning Sedition, but I got tired of hearing Red (as in Communist) Barber talk about breaking the color line in baseball. He couldn’t do a show without mentioning it. Bob Edwards would toss him a softball suggestion, and Red would blast it out of the park.

      1. The NPR affectation that amuses me the most is the pseudo-intellectual stutter/hesitation, designed to make the listener think that the speaker is thinking REALLY, REALLY HARD.

        🎯

        NPR is staffed by people with defective brains. Ive called them National Peoples Radio since high school

        Elon Musk should do to their Federal funding sources much like he and DOGE did to OPM: lock them out of their computers. Why should they object? What are they hiding?

        Elon Musk’s DOGE locks federal human resources workers out of computer systems at Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

        “We have no visibility into what they are doing with the computer and data systems,” one official said. “That is creating great concern. There is no oversight. It creates real cybersecurity and hacking implications,” the official claimed. “It feels like a hostile takeover,” one employee lamented.

        https://www.clintonfoundationtimeline.com/february-1-2025-elon-musks-doge-locks-federal-human-resources-workers-out-of-computer-systems-at-office-of-personnel-management-opm/

        Glorious!

        1. The amount of direct subsidy is pretty small. But the CPB gives small stations (think college towns) funds they use to pay NPR to run their programs. That is the largest govt subsidy.

          But the worst is not NPR, but WBUR’s Here and Now. The biggest slant, the most inaccuracies.

          1. The amount of direct subsidy is pretty small.

            Beautiful! Then they will not miss it.
            Or Media Matters can kick in the difference, am idea which would be supported by their trolls who spam this forum

            Win, win!

    3. I just cuddle with my Nina Tottenberg Tote Bag, filled with bottles of liberal tears

    1. Why are we “forced to give our monies” to Social Security and Medicare when retirement plans and healthcare binders are available at financial firms and insurance companies in the free markets of the private sector in every city and town in all 50 states?

      ANSWER: Because America is communist and is forced to comply with Karl Marx’s motto, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” by Karl Marx’s “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

      Were Americans allowed to enjoy the entire spectrum of the rights and freedoms bestowed by their Founders and Framers, there would be no Social Security, Medicare, public assistance, social services, minimum wage, rent control, entitlements, benefits, affirmative action, quotas, forced busing, and various and sundry other forms of “free stuff” and “free status” at all. Not to mention no Departments of Education, Labor, Energy, Agriculture, HUD, EPA, etc.

    2. * why? For the same reason you’ll soon be forced to give your money to the Roman catholic church or another religious public school.

      Oklahoma has given the go to it. Interesting the commenter object so strongly when public money goes to NPR or PBS but has nothing to say against the recent article professor Turley posted about education.

      Hypocrits

  16. NPR and PBS are so embedded in their fictive viewpoints, there is no escape for them to any semblance of reality. They contribute nothing to the American political scene other than mis- and disinformation. Even their children’s programming has become politically distorted. They must be dissembled, disbanded and then discarded.

    1. You can disband the organization, but the radically indoctrinated will remain and just as they fled X for the safety net of bluesky these radicals will just fly to some other safe enterprise and continue to spew their delusion-driven agenda. As long as I am not paying for it and they can be identified as the propagandists for the left that they are – let them flourish in their putrid bubble of lies.

  18. * What it is is one big commercial, advertisement for democrats and just like MSM and programs like The View should be charged as DNC campaign contributions. The campaign is insidiously entwined with entertainment.

    As journalism it doesn’t qualify. As manipulation of the population it does classify. Manipulative speech and press is called advertisements. They sell snake oil for profit. It marginally classifies as Persuasive speech with harmful effects but proving malice is in the bigness of it.

      1. * Anyone see a similarity between public money for religious schools and public money for the press and speech? Both 1A.

        As long as it’s my religion and my press I can spend public money. Ok

  19. If NPR’s audience is indeed “overwhelmingly white, liberal, and more affluent than the rest of the country”, it should have more than enough private financial support to keep its propaganda flowing in the ideological echo chamber it and its audience share. Stand on your own two feet, NPR. It’s high time.

    1. “overwhelmingly white, liberal,” may be true but most of their “true believers” have, most likely, received degrees in feminist studies or black dance etc. and are working as burger flippers or ATCs because they filled in a quota in some way and are not that affluent. The truly well off patronize NPR/PBS for the look of it but do not listen, that pap is strictly for the indoctrinated.

  20. Eliminate all federal funding for NPR and PBS. The cultural offerings (music, travelogues, etc.) would be nice if they were not accompanied by hard-left political bias in their “news” and “commentary” offerings. My tax dollars should not fund hard-left propaganda.

Comments are closed.