Below is my column in the Hill on the termination of funding for National Public Radio. Now that we have ended government-sponsored media, the question is whether the media will cease acting like a state media. The good news is that the market could force a correction that the media has largely refused to make.
Here is the column:
With the final elimination of public funding for National Public Radio as part of a $9 billion savings package, the era of the American state media will technically come to an end. However, what makes for state media is not state support alone.
So, the state media is dead — long live the state media.
That variation of the traditional mourning cry of the British monarchy will be heard more in whispers than proclamations this week in Washington.
The government subsidy for NPR has long been a subject of controversy. Many opposed NPR for its open bias in reporting news, a record that thrilled the left and outraged many on the right. Just before the final vote, NPR CEO Katherine Maher gave another interview that left many agape. She denied any such bias and asked whether anyone could point to a single story that showed a political or ideological slant.
Ignoring a myriad of such examples, Maher then went from defiant to delusional, insisting that NPR was trying hard to “understand those criticisms.”
It was a bit late for Maher to feign surprise or confusion, particularly as a CEO whose selection to take over the struggling NPR many of us opposed. Her glaring and overt bias did not seem like the antidote to NPR’s shrinking audience and revenue.
In 2024, NPR had a window to actually “understand” the criticism and make adjustments. Instead, it treated the government subsidy as an entitlement, backed by Democratic members in Congress. The board would have done better to select a neutral journalist. Instead, it doubled down, hiring a candidate with a long record of far-left public statements against Republicans, Trump, and others.
This is the same CEO who attacked respected senior editor Uri Berliner when he tried to get NPR to address its bias and restore greater balance on the staff. Berliner noted that NPR’s Washington headquarters has 87 registered Democrats among its editors and zero Republicans.
Maher slammed the award-winning Berliner for his “affront to the individual journalists who work incredibly hard.” She called his criticism “profoundly disrespectful, hurtful, and demeaning.”
Berliner resigned after noting how Maher’s “divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR” that he had been pointing out.
But I have argued that NPR’s well-established bias and publication of baseless conspiracy theories are not the real reasons for taking away its federal funding. The truth is, NPR represented an embrace of a state media model used in other countries that Americans thoroughly reject.
Maher bizarrely tried to rally support for government funding by insisting that we must “keep the government out” of the media. Congress just did precisely that by clawing back NPR’s funding.
The government has occasionally supported the media, but generally to benefit all media outlets. For example, in 1791, Madison declared that Congress had an obligation to improve the “circulation of newspapers through the entire body of the people” and sponsored the Post Office Act of 1791, giving newspapers reduced postage rates.
Notably, those same Democrats in Congress who decried the reduction of funding for NPR would have revolted over funding for more successful radio outlets, such as Fox Radio. Indeed, some of the same members had previously pushed cable carriers to consider dropping Fox News, the most popular cable news channel.
What Congress did with prior funding of a single preferred media outlet was wrong. Liberals and Democrats fought to protect the funding even though NPR’s shrinking audience is now overwhelmingly white, affluent, and liberal.
However, the end of government subsidies will not necessarily mean the end of an effective state media. As I noted in my book “The Indispensable Right,” we have seen how the media can create the same effect as state media by consent rather than coercion.
For years, media outlets have echoed the same party line, including burying negative stories and repeating debunked stories. Actual readers and listeners abandoned the mainstream media in droves. “Let’s Go Brandon” became a national mantra mocking journalists for their inability even to see and hear if the sights and sounds don’t fit their preconceived narratives.
Just as Maher has expressed utter confusion on how anyone could view NPR as biased, these editors and journalists will cling to the same advocacy journalism, rejecting the principles of objectivity and neutrality.
However, there is still one hope for restoring traditional journalism: the market.
Now that NPR is off the public dole, it will have to compete fairly with other radio outlets for audiences and revenue. It is free to alienate most listeners who have center-right viewpoints, but it will have to sustain itself on a smaller share of the market.
Other outlets are facing the same dire choice. Recently, the Post encouraged writers and editors to leave if they were unwilling to get on board with a new direction at the newspaper.
Previously, Washington Post publisher and CEO Will Lewis had told his writers that the newspaper was experiencing massive losses in readers and revenues because “no one is reading your stuff.” It triggered a revolt on the staff, which would have rather run the paper into insolvency than return to objectivity and neutrality.
The same preference was seen with the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s late-night show. What had been David Letterman’s formidable program had become a shrill echo chamber for the far left as Colbert engaged in nightly and mostly unfunny diatribes against Trump and Republicans. As its ratings and revenues fell, Colbert was unmoved. At the same time, Fox’s Greg Gutfeld continued to crush the competition as viewers abandoned CBS and other broadcast networks.
The year’s second-quarter ratings showed Fox News’s “Gutfeld!” drawing an average of three million viewers. Gutfeld’s more conservative takes on news remain unique among these late-night shows.
In comparison, “The Late Show” with Stephen Colbert came in second last quarter with an average 2.42 million viewers, despite being a far more costly program.
As liberals expressed outrage over the cancellation and alleged that CBS’s owner, Paramount, was seeking to garner favor with the Trump Administration, even CNN admitted that the show under Colbert had become “unfortunately unprofitable.”
Colbert’s show was reportedly losing $40 million a year with a bloated staff and declining audience.
Paramount issued a statement insisting that Colbert’s cancelation was “not related in any way to the show’s performance.” Perhaps, but media companies are hardly in the habit of cancelling profitable, high-performing programming.
Ultimately, the market is correcting what the media would not. Roughly half of this country is center-right, and 77 million people voted for Trump. They are turning to social media and new media rather than remain a captive audience to a biased legacy media committed to advocacy journalism.
As media outlets fail, there may also be more pressure on journalism schools to return to core principles rather than crank out social justice warriors no one wants to read or hear from.
In the meantime, Maher and NPR can continue to stay the course and try to make up in pledge drives what they lost in public subsidies. However, the whole thing will now have to pay for itself without passing along costs to the rest of the non-listening country.
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.”
As the news media allows Trump to lie we become Nazi Germany in 1934 when books were burned. Why aren’t Republicans upset that Trump is destroying ABC, CBS, ABC, CNN and the New York Times. Only a Fool listens to the lies on Fox.
Bigger crisis for Turley to address:
The First Amendment makes it legal, patriotic and proper to write to our representatives in Congress. The Fourth Amendment requires a judicial-warrant based on evidence of a past crime and approved by a judge to search our personal property and effects.
My next door neighbor is supposedly an FBI employee. Sometimes (in real time) while I email my member of Congress, my FBI neighbor loudly slams their car doors – possibly as an intimidation response to my legal, patriotic and proper First Amendment right.
If I were planning to visit to Washington, DC or a major city, my vehicle’s car doors (my own personal property) are loudly slammed shut, in my own driveway, around 3:00AM the night before. Not sure if it’s my FBI neighbor but they are definitely a person-of-interest.
There are federal criminal statutes that outlaw this form of government intimidation. Not calling for my FBI neighbor to be criminally indicted nor serve prison time, but there are no checks & balances on these type of disloyal acts by constitutionally oath sworn federal officials.
Justice Roberts please correct this subversive activity by federal officials! Thank you!
Anonymous, a bigger crises in your estimation consists of car doors being slammed rather than tax dollars being used by a left wing propaganda outlet. Oh my God the crises! The crises! Just when one thinks you can’t get more silly there you go. To the women who lives in fear everything rustles.
I thought Anonymous’ comments were said tongue-in-cheek or to be funny–I was waiting for the punch line–until I realized this person is serious! Car doors slamming! Now THAT is a crisis that must be addressed by Justice Roberts! Poor dear.
Impertinent impudence.
BAN FOR LIFE!
OT, in Cali the Dems’ feel-good legislation raising fast-food minimum wages from $16/hour to $20/hour has now put 18,000 people out of work, while fast food employment in the rest of the nation has gone up.
https://reason.com/2025/07/16/californias-minimum-wage-hike-cost-18000-fast-food-jobs-as-employment-ticked-up-in-other-states/
But that’s okay with the ruling single-party Dems in Cali, they get to pat each other on the back at cocktail parties about what benevolent people they are, so all is well. California is about as happily situated as it is possible to be, with enormous natural resources and the best weather in the hemisphere. But it is now an unaffordable dystopia due to bad government, which is choking the life out of it.
Leftists aren’t very good with the concept of higher-order effects. It’s probably because most of them just aren’t that bright, as witnessed by the various trolls here.
OldManFromKS,
In-N-Out Burger announced they will be moving their CA HQ to TN. They do not plan on leaving the state, but will expand into the Southeast. Knowing the failed state of CA tendencies for bad policies, would not be surprised if they left the state in the future.
UF: You beat me to it by 1 min.
“. . . choking the life out of it.”
Choke on this, CA statists:
“In-N-Out’s billionaire owner, Lynsi Snyder, said challenges running a business in California prompted her to relocate to Tennessee,” where she plans to open 35 new locations. “Raising a family is not easy here [in CA].”
Now that NPR is off the public dole, it will have to compete fairly with other radio outlets for audiences and revenue.
About time. Their bias made me sick. I wrote several etters to them begging them to offer conservatives the chance to present their points of view. What a joke.
Compete fairly? What does that mean?
You actually wrote them to complain, meaning you wanted equal air time? Why would anyone give you airtime?
Maybe because he is (was) … paying for it?
The journalism schools are not serious, otherwise they would be willing to begin dissecting the news selection process.
That black hole is the major tool of media bias — events not judged “helpful to the cause” are judged “not newsworthy”.
I defy anyone to find ONE journalism course on the news selection process, or any attempt to make it explicit and open to critical analysis.
You defy? You clown.
We should demand a free press (media). No press that takes government money is free. I don’t care if it is left, right, or center. The Media should not be in bed with the goverment, any government.
But they are and always will be. You think one day it will all disappear? Then you’re dumber than you are.
The point is NPR and outlets of their ilk have abandoned any pretense of actual journalism. Advocacy journalism is an oxygen moron. Mostly moron.
Jake
They’re controlled by the corporations that are owned by the oligarchy elite. They are not controlled by government, they are following their orders from the agenda set by the same masters. War and disruption, non sustainable growth and development. Self identity erased, cultures destroyed, borders erased, a semblance of fast wealth to all for the fuel of their consumption machine, it’s depletion then deletion.
“…any means necessary.”
Three words, used by Democrats, that they now regret, but will never admit. Tempi cambi.
It is unfortunate this is all fake news even if Americans voted for this
Ya, he really wasn’t interested in preserving the Constitution.
God does make mistakes. ( His feelings aren’t hurt if you say
that. )
I don’t think the Constitution can survive , PT. NPR was once fine but now it’s Yamiche Alcindor’s hate America fest. The US can’t survive multiculturalism it seems.
*. To some degree as criminals are released , there should be evacuations of Americans to sanctuary States from States like Colorado. The handicapped, elderly , poor can’t just leave areas of chaos. It’s a shame. There should be some effort in that direction , also.
Multiculturalism was tried, failed, and is on the way out. You aren’t paying attention to the cultural currents.
Nor can America survive the saturation invasion of the third world the recently voted out Admin gleefully allowed and funded.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
___________________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
_____________________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
_____________________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
____________________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
________________
“I had a discussion with the case team and we believe there to be predication to include former President of the United States Donald J. Trump as a predicated subject.”
– Timothy Thibault to John Crabb, U.S. Attorney’s Office, D.C.
___________________________________________________________________
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:
Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,
James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,
James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,
Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,
Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,
Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,
Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,
Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,
Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,
Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney, Lisa O. Monaco, Fani Willis, Alvin Bragg,
Matthew Colangelo, Merrick Garland, Juan Merchan, Timothy Thibault et al.
Could you say what each one did wrong? We need to move away from demonization of the entire individual, and focus on wrongdoing. Otherwise, we’ll end up like the French Revolution, where you primarily denounced the person, leading to all disproportionate, reflex punishments.
I’m ok with that, especially if the alternative is for nothing to happen to them at all. If we allow them to get away with this, they’ll just do it again, and probably in a worse fashion. Someone has to be held to account.
Just what the Doctor ordered, a disproportionate punishment response to their disproportionate treason in accordance to the Constitution and court, punishable by death I believe. Anyone remember Rep. Clyburn (D) pushing a bill trying to remove the death penalty for treason when Barry Sotero was installed?
OVAL OFFICE MEETING, BARACK OBAMA, JAMES COMEY, SALLY YATES
“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book’. The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.”
– Susan Rice, January 5, 2017
And yet he was dissatisfied with an intel report that said there was no Trump-Russia collusion, and required a report that said there was one. The “book” in question appears to be the book of treason, conspiracy, and dirty tricks.
The note from Rice is a CYA lying piece of trash.
Because susab rice said so ?
Yep, Susan Rice also said that the Libyan embassy attack in Benghazi was due to an anti-Muslim movie on National news. The poor producer of that film was arrested and jailed by the Obama regime knowing this to be false. Several of the brave souls at their duty stations were killed, an ambassador was also killed. Who sent the stand down order?
These people need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
For anyone over there at National Propaganda Radio who still thinks Kamala should have won, I would ask: wtf is the matter with you?
Anyone with two brain cells could see how out of her depth Kamala Harris was, intellectually, totally lacking in economic sophistication, foreign policy, all of it…
It blows my mind that so-called intelligent people still think she should be president…or was even remotely capable of doing the job. And then with the frenetic freak Tampon Tim as her backup? The two of them would have rammed LGBTQIA+ issues down our throats. The country would be lost, destroyed, gone forever.
Every time I saw Harris or Walz during campaign, first thought was always: This is a joke, right?
It had to be.
Carmella was the lowest-IQ candidate on a presidential ticket in US history, and the phoniest since John Edwards in 2004. Tampon Tim Walz was almost as dumb, not quite, but he was about as likeable as congestive heart failure.
Josh Shapiro outshone both in terms of intelligence and charisma. However, he is Jewish which evidently would not fly with their antisemitic base. So instead the brain trusts of the Dem Party in charge of anointing the next King and Queen came up with a ticket consisting of word-salad Carmella and Tampon Tim. Hahaha!
What a stupid comment.
You would wrong.
As usual
You should see her infantile attempt to equate tax credits and tax deductions, down the page. It’s utterly hilarious.
“FROM NO ONE ACCORDING TO HIS FREEDOM, TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS EFFORT AND MERIT IN THE FREE MARKETS OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
When do NPR, PBS, and all the other countless beneficiaries of communist redistribution of wealth under the “dictatorship of the proletariat (hired help)” pay reparations to once-free American taxpayers?
All these leeches and parasites owe untold trillions of dollars in long overdue recompense.
The DOJ will NEVER get a fair trial against Obama until “venue corruption” is eliminated and excised.
A trial approaching “fair” for the DOJ against Obama might occur in Coeur d’Alene.
Baloney. The jury system can be trusted to sort out fiction from fact, and deliver justice, It’s the elitist judges and activist lawyers who are trying to get you to distrust the jury. It is one of our best remaining institutions.
Great! Public Broadcasting is gone!
Now get rid of the rest of the unconstitutional laws, policies, agencies, departments, etc., that are precluded and denied by Article 1, Section 8, the absolute 5th Amendment right to private property, and other fundamental law starting with wholly unconstitutional:
Admissions affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, CRT, DEI, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Agriculture, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
“Now get rid of the rest of the unconstitutional laws, policies, agencies, departments, etc., that are precluded and denied by Article 1, Section 8, the absolute 5th Amendment right to private property, and other fundamental law”
Agreed. I could probably come up with more, but that would be a damned good start. Not an icicle’s chance in the Vesuvius caldera of that happening without a successful revolution, unfortunatly.
This seems like an add-on to yesterday’s column based on no new developments, just speculation about what some people might do in the future. IMHO, it would be more interesting to read the good professor’s analysis of the blockbuster news out of Washington, DC, namely, what DNI Gabbard has uncovered about the extreme corruption of Obama and his cabal, all on the public dime, during the waning days of the Obama administration.
What is the greatest crime ever committed against the American people? It’s tied between Obama’s manufacture of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax to subvert the results of the 2016 election, and the four years of open borders by the “Joe Biden” administration in which around 10 million unvetted illegal immigrants were invited and arrived in our nation to wreak havoc in so many ways, many of them yet to be seen as Chinese and Iranian sleeper cells ultimately get activated.
Gabbard is only trying to help Trump. The Epstein files scandal is getting too much attention. Nobody cares about Obama or Hllary anymore. Trump is desperate to get away from the self inflicted Epstein scandal and MAGA is not letting him off the hook that easy.
What Epstein scandal? The one that exists only in your diseased head? Remember, Occam’s Razor, if Trump were mentioned in whatever files the government had, there’s no way that it would have NOT leaked already. They were willing to fabricate a conspiracy to steal an election with Russia, fabricate whatever scandal supposedly happened with Ukraine (but ignore the actual Biden scandal), willing to raid a president’s house just to cover their tracks, willing to put him on trial MULTIPLE times over the flimsiest of cases, but somehow, no, that Epstein stuff was just too much for the Obama/Biden junta. Sure, Georgina.
excellent post – but left wing nuts like George are incapable of critical thinking.
Anyone who did not know from day one that Putin did NOT want Trump as president is not capable of more than the shallowest first order thinking.
Flight logs show Bill Clinton flew on sex offender’s jet much more than previously known
https://www.foxnews.com/us/flight-logs-show-bill-clinton-flew-on-sex-offenders-jet-much-more-than-previously-known
26 Trips!!!
I did not have sex with that young woman.
Correction – “I did not have sex with that child”
Advocacy journalism!!!!!
Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
An oxymoronic contradiction in terms.
What you’re looking for is antithetical, anti-American, anti-Constitutional, and viciously inimical polemics, propaganda, and indoctrination.
People care deeply about CIA veering illegally into domestic politics. Agents who receive training at Langley and Quantico in PsyOps (manipulation of public opinion through clever deception) are supposed to NEVER use this training to dupe Americans for political effect. Yet, this is exactly what retired CIA officers got together to do in Oct 2020 when the Hunter Biden laptop surfaced.
Now, Gabbard and Ratcliffe have documents proving that Obama’s kitchen cabinet told FBI and CIA to bury the truth that there was no Trump-Russia collaboration to defeat Hillary, so that a deceptive infowarfare campaign could be continued to destroy Trump’s Presidency. If true, which appears likely, then it amounts to an attemped coup (treasonous conspiracy) at the same level of repugnance as Trump’s coup attempt to block Biden’s inauguration in late 2020.
The CIA and FBI must be studied critcally to make sure covert political warfare is always ferreted out, exposed and punished. And this gets to Epstein. We need to know if there was a CIA and/or Mossad handler paying Epstein to run a compromat op on U.S. VIPs and decisionmakers. Alex Acosta let it slip out in defending his Non-Prosecute Agreement that he was told that “Epstein was intelligence” (meaning not to dig any deeper).
We still are waiting for confirmation that the 1960s CIA was acting through the Chicago mobster Sam Giancana to do its “dirty work”, and that Chuckie Nicolletti, Johnny Roselli, and James E. Files (all 3 professional hitmen loyal to Sam) were armed and present in Dealey Square Nov. 22nd 1963. Files has admitted to firing the coup de grace from behind the grassy knoll fence.
It’s not about Obama and Clinton specifically. It’s about the future, and whether our intelligence agencies will be kept out of domestic politics.
The Epstein files scandal is getting too much attention.
*******************
Only to you george. If you fools had any proof. Biden would have given it o the MSN.
OldManFromKS,
Yes! Great comment!
Although, I am enjoying watching National Pravda Radio, now have to compete in a open and free market. Will they double down on the go woke, go broke paradigm? Will their ever smaller audience of white, educated and wealthy actually donate to keep NPR afloat? Or will NPR get real, cut the woke crap out, start real objective reporting?
They always double down. Until they go broke. They couldn’t go broke before, with the backstop of federal monies, but now they can, and it will be glorious to watch.
I ask only because it’s giving a benefit to one class.
Matthew – there was no Equal Protection Clause at that time. The Fourteenth Amendment was drafted post-Civil War and ratified in 1868. Is there another aspect of the Constitution you believe it might have violated, one that existed in 1791?
If secession cannot be cited in the Constitution, and it cannot, the whole of Lincoln and his successors is moot, null, and void.
George – you are moot, null, and void. Move into the 21st century and join the rest of us.
I’ll move into the 21st century after recovering the constitutional freedom that Lincoln arbitrarily and illicitly terminated.
We’ll start by enforcing the duly legislated immigration law that was in full force and effect on January 1, 1863, which will, in turn, abolish any need for Karl Marx’s “Reconstruction Amendments.”
Are you still arguing for the freedom to own other people as chattal slaves? That’s a monumental contradiction. Freedom and enslavement cannot be reconciled as compatible. Why do you think slave importation was banned with a 20 year transition in the 1788 Constitution?
I’m arguing for the law. Lincoln had no power to deny fully constitutional secession, to start a war with a sovereign foreign nation, or to suspend habeas corpus. Slavery was legal and must have been legally abrogated by Congress. Only “free white persons” could be admitted to become citizens per existing immigration law. Slavery was reprehensible and absolutely unthinkable, and long-suffering freed slaves must have been provided the cost of compassionate repatriation on January 1, 1863, when the Naturalization Act of 1802 was in full force and effect. The Constitution should not have been amended in favor of people who must have been compassionately repatriated by law. Freed slaves were owed compassionate repatriation and a chance to start anew in their homeland, the thing abductees desire most.
That’s not the fundamental issue. You also misunderstand the term “class” here.
Taxpayers fund libraries.
Not private libraries, which do exist and many of which are open to the public. Most colleges and universities, even private ones, allow free access to their libraries provided that you don’t try to check out material. You are simply wrong with your fealty to big government.
Should all state sponsors of literacy be stopped?
Your attempt at a point falls flat in our federal system. Since you don’t have our system of government over there in Lahore or Beijing or wherever, I’ll explain. What you’re describing is not a federal issue in the United States, and as such, it is not the responsibility of our federal government. State and local governments are free to fund all sorts of things that the federal government cannot, and in this instance, I fully encourage them to do so.
“Should all state sponsors of literacy be stopped?”
You’re claiming that NPR is a purveyor of literacy?!
Please cite mandates for education in the Constitution. All education is local; talk to your neighbors and your mayor. Teachers unions are illegal criminal organizations who cannot legally enter contracts and whose sole bargaining chip is comprised of breach of contract, failure to perform, AWOL, trespass, threats, intimidation, property damage, bodily injury, psychological manipulation and abuse of the student body, etc.
Yes.
Education is NOT a task that can only be performed by government.
Anything that can be done without govenrment can ALWAYS be done BETTER without government
Yes, taxpayers fund libraries. What does that have to do with anything? Taxpayers fund lots of things. Does that mean they have to fund everything? Spell out what you are trying to say because a simple statement like “taxpayers fund libraries” is pretty meaningless sitting by itself.
Taxpayers should not be on the hook for libraries.
One of the problems with the left is that they beleive that if Government does not do something it wont get done
While the truth is if it is worthwhile – it will get done better and cheaper.
*”The government has occasionally supported the media, but generally to benefit all media outlets. For example, in 1791, Madison declared that Congress had an obligation to improve the “circulation of newspapers through the entire body of the people” and sponsored the Post Office Act of 1791, giving newspapers reduced postage rates.”*
Was that constitutional?
Charging less for postage on printed media is not the same as directly funding the dissemination of that media. Your argument would be that every time a municipality gives a company a tax break in order to relocate, that is equivalent of that government directly giving funds to that company.
In 1791, the Post Office would have clearly been “general Welfare,” or ALL WELL PROCEED, as security and basic infrastructure required by all and could have been licitly taxed for and funded.
Showing favor in rates would have been illogical and innately unconstitutional.
The freedom upheld by freedom of the press is its own reward.
Madison was wrong and would not have been able to provide a constitutional citation for arbitrary and baseless favor.
no
Nor is the post office a legitimate government function.
ALL WELL PROCEED
George Soros and son are in the midst of acquiring a chain of radio station to buy out talk radio piece by piece. No doubt the programming will change to a Democrat version of I-Heart radio which has very successful talk stations with a primarily conservative perspective. The Soros’ will probably fire any conservative talk hosts and replace them with the dregs of NPR. Let’s see who listens to what when that happens. Many folks who can’t make it in the competitive world hide out in places like NPR and faun over the Soros entities like the Tides Foundation, et al.
Sorros is free to buy up whatever he wants.
Government is not.
I am not worried about Sorros – either he delivers to consumers what they want or they go elsewhere to someone who will.
Are we oblivious of the fact that most of the MSM has fallen off the left edge of the world and is failing.
Now that Congress has done away with the annual support of NPR and PBS, it’s time to evaluate the assets. Just a quick scan of the internet there are numerous FM stations for sale: two million population coverage for $950,000 in Missouri, a two-station offering in Las Vegas for two million or Wichita Falls, TX $375,000. I didn’t try to value the kilowatt power or dial placement (spectrum) or get anywhere near the TV assets connected to PBS; I wouldn’t even offer a guess.
As an aside:
In an admission that inflation was greater than the Fed’s said: January 7, 2025, the FCC released an Order adjusting the Schedule of Application Fees, Congress requires the FCC to make adjustments every two years to reflect inflation, and the FCC adjusted charges increased 17.41%.
George W
Do you think your aside above is one of the reasons Powell is reluctant to reduce interest rates?
I understand his reluctance.
Meyer
The question in my mind about inflation (?) how long does it take to filter 7 trillion dollars, with an additional question has all that 7 trillion been released in the economy? There those that say interest rates do not impact inflation but that money supply is the main culprit. I’m not sure about Powell but there have been rumblings from other Fed officials it’s time, and looking at the EU and England they are going lower already. I think they will have to lower the rates 3 or 4 points considering all the proposed (projects) investments coming within a short period of time otherwise I do question the visibility of many of them. Since Powell’s arrival I’ve thought him, a true partisan carrying Yellen’s nonsense, especially compared to Greenspan, which could be the cause of his reluctance to lower the rates in defiance of stabilized inflation.
George W
Knowing that inflation was 35%, 7 Trillion is worth about one-third less. We agree that inflation is a money supply problem phenomenon, and we probably have not absorbed it all. I remember Robert Rubin (Clinton), and I think there are similarities. Therefore, this is one of the rare times I disagree with Trump and prefer a little more watchful waiting before reducing interest rates. I would love a lot of opinions on this subject.
I beleive the last data had a tiny uptick in inflation to 2.7%
That is not painful, but it is still too high.
Still too much money chasing too few goods.
Inflation – while far lower than it was is STILL too high.
As much as it pains me – it i not yet time to drop rates.
We need to cut spending further.
While I would personally eliminate the FED entirely, and I understand why Trump is pissed at Powell,
in return for
Inflation is Still not where it should be. That means we need to cut spending – not Fire Powell.
I am not a Powell fan, I am not a Fed Fan. They make more problems than they fix.
And I REALLY want to see interest rates drop – it is effecting my business.
Still Inflation is not where it needs to be. A little short term pain in return for sustained decades of growth and low interest is a worthwhile trade.
OT; I thought Turley was big on scandals. The Epstein scandal should be front and center in Turley’s view because Trump promised to release the files and now he’s doing the covering up and trying to brush off a potential new idea that Trump may be a pedophile like Epstein. He sure seems nervous and agitated that MAGA is upset about not honoring his promise. Turns out he may be implicated in the thousands of Epstein files Pam had on her desk and allegedly was well aware of the crimes his good friend Epstein was committing. Trump who is already a convicted felon should be worried about a potential new set of charges
How much crediblity can a felon have?
Go away and get your own blog, loser.
This after four years of Joke Biden ignoring Epstein.
Why didn’t “Oh, Susie Q Rice” write a note telling us why Obongo didn’t do an Epstein dump, which might have been slightly more apropos?
Trump can release the files now but he won’t. Why is he suddenly doing the same thing Obama and Biden did? The only explanation is Trump is seriously implicated in the Epstein scandal.
This after four years of Joke Biden ignoring Epstein.
Why didn’t “Oh, Susie Q Rice” write a note telling us why Obongo didn’t do an Epstein dump, which might have been slightly more apropos?
No Trump can not easily release the Epstein information.
Government can not defame people – DOJ speaks through indictments and prosecutions.
When government investigates and it does not prosecute it can not realease the fruit of the investigation.
https://wendymcelroy.com/images/newspost_images/tw2gahy.jpg
Goofy George’s “contributions” are nonaccretive, regressive, and inane with reference to the Turley Blog.
BAN FOR LIFE!
More declassified docs show Comey swayed by mysterious intel reports to end Clinton email inquiry
“Bombshell declassified docs show how Comey FBI mishandled its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illicit private email server and buried key evidence.”
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/declassified-appendix-shows-comey-swayed-mysterious-intel-reports-end
A real Obama, Clinton, scandal.
How many times did Bill Clinton take rides on Epstine’s Lolito Express without SS agents?
There are many people upset that more epstein information is not being released.
But only delusional left wing nuts think that is because Trump will be implicated.
“ But I have argued that NPR’s well-established bias and publication of baseless conspiracy theories are not the real reasons for taking away its federal funding. The truth is, NPR represented an embrace of a state media model used in other countries that Americans thoroughly reject.”
That’s strange, because that’s exactly what Fox News has been for years. We all know Turley would never bad mouth or criticize Fox News for it’s own biased reporting and serious lack of objective news. Fox News is precisely following the state media model and Turley is part of it. Fox News has helped push Trump’s agenda and has been found to be intentionally lying about the Dominion voting machine claims. Clearly Turley is forbidded from criticizng Fox News or casting doubt about the organization’s “fair and balanced” views.
We should be thanking Fox News for starting the trend that media is currently on these days. Full of opinion “news” and pundit “forums” offering their opinons as fact or news.
Since Turley cannot criticize Fox due to contractual obligations he’s clealry not under a contract by other conservative organizations like NewsMax. It’s fair to point out Turley’s own inconsistent “coverage” and his own advocacy journalism thru his colums. As usual Turley is a hypocrite.
@George
Thanks for enlightening us, George. 🙄
James, you don’t agree that Fox News is biased or engages in advocacy journalism? Turley seems to keep ignoring it, but I understand he is contractually obligated to not say anything deregatory about Fox News. That would make him part of the problem he keeps talking about.
George, you are a pinhead. You don’t know the difference between news and opinion. That is why you cannot find an example of advocacy journalism on Fox NEWS.
S. Meyer! how you doin? I see you haven’t figured out what the difference between opinion and fact is. Why do you project your own flaws onto others so much? Is it an insecurity thing or what?
There are plenty of examples, I’m sure you can find one on your own, but I doubt you will becacuse you are too invested in not wanting to challenge your self-awareness.
Go away and get your own blog, loser.
“There are plenty of examples,”
Despite there being plenty of examples, you can find one despite the number of years you have been saying this. That is good proof that Fox separates opinion from news.
So you know there are plenty of examples. Glad you can acknowledge that.
Fox news doesn’t separate opinion from fact. It’s literally their bread and butter. That’s how they got in trouble with Dominion and were forced to settle with them for $787 million. They were gonna lose in court and be exposed for lying.
Which show are you talking about? You don’t know. What was said? You don’t know, despite being given years to provide an answer. You are ignorant.
“Dominion and were forced to settle”
Fox chose to settle. Nothing was proven, and I explained why the settlement didn’t mean guilt. Once again, you prove you don’t know what the world news means. The settlement was news, but being forced to settle is your opinion. Learn the difference.
“ Which show are you talking about? You don’t know. What was said? You don’t know, despite being given years to provide an answer. You are ignorant.”
Years? What are you babbling about? I’m talking about Fox News, their programs in general.
Are you struggling to put together a cogent response? I think you are having trouble with following the discussion.
Fox News was forced to settle. They did not want to go to trial because they knew they were not going to win that case. Rather than have explicit details about how they lied to the public out was far worse so they chose to settle.
Damn, the things that Georgina “knows” is enough to fill, well not exactly a library, but maybe a pamphlet. One side of it, anyway.
We are talking about news vs opinion and perhaps ill-defined advocacy journalism. All of a sudden, you change the subject. ” I’m talking about Fox News, their programs in general.” The majority of Fox News is opinion, and their news sections are well-defined. You miss that point, ignorantly conflating news with opinion.
I have no problems following the discussion, but I do have problems figuring out how you graduated.
“Fox News was forced to settle. They did not want to go to trial because they knew they were not going to win that case. “ Again, you have to be reminded that you are giving an opinion, an incomplete and ignorant opinion.
And all the other “news” media is fair and unbiased?
Get real. All news media is foul in one way or another. Don’t call the police about the dog in my fenced yard when you’ve got a feral pack making off with your sheep.
-Rabble
“ And all the other “news” media is fair and unbiased?”
No. didn’t that. All news media is biased, do you agree?
The problem is Turley complaining about left media being biased and griping about the lack of objectivity in news organizations while being completely biased himself when he intentionally leaves out right-wing news like Fox News, and Newsmax. Do you concede the fact that Fox News is also biased and engages in advocacy journalism?
“ engages in advocacy journalism?”
What you are calling advocacy journalism is opinion, not journalism. Ignorance is your companion on this blog. You have stated this same thing for years, and yet cannot find a single example. Fox News does not practice advocacy journalism to any great extent, if it does at all.
S. Meyer, Fox News has opinion shows that they pass off as news programs. It is advocacy journalism. Even by Turley’s definition makes Fox News programming advocacy journalism. They started the trend and that is why every media organization does it now. Thanks to Fox News for being the pioneers of advocacy journalism.
You just posted earlier that there were plenty of examples of advocacy journalism from Fox News. It’s their bread and butter. That’s what they are famous for and Turley can’t criticize it because he has a contract with them.
Your continued trashing doesn’t change the fact that you decisively lost this attempt at obfuscation. You’re just not that bright, it would seem.
You’re clearly confused. You don’t seem to know what the word “obfuscate” means.
Keep tap dancing Georgina, we’re still waiting for all these online “sources” that you claim exist.
” Fox News programming advocacy journalism. They started the trend ”
Wrong! Advocacy journalism predates Fox News’ existence by a century or more.
“and that is why every media organization does it now. Thanks to Fox News for being the pioneers of advocacy journalism.“
Wrong! Fox News is not the cause.
“You just posted earlier that there were plenty of examples of advocacy journalism from Fox News”
Wrong! I never posted any such thing. You are a liar and stupid. Quote where I said that. If you are not a liar, then you are more stupid than I thought.
Three strikes and you are out. Your problem is that you never were in.
S. Meyer,
I dont watch Fox News but the few times I have read a piece from Fox or an affiliate they were a lot better than NPR is reporting news and not reporting opinion as news.
Go away and get your own blog, loser.
I repeat myself, now @George:
‘I restate my case about many liberals not paying attention to anything whatsoever outside of their personal living box they call a reality for decades at a time: Fox was bought by Disney. Not a secret. Given your frothy-mouthed support of NPR or PBS, I would think Disney would be near the top of your list, too. They said the news outlet wouldn’t be affected, but if you are still touting ‘Rupert Murdoch’, or, ‘The Koch Brothers (one of whom is dead)’, or even Ann Coulter: 1995 called, and they want their crusty conservatives and people’s opinions of them back. And do you honestly think Disney hasn’t stuck their fingers in the pie? Pfft.
Really, step into the next century in your thinking, because at this point you just sound like an out of touch geezer. Nothing I have said is outside of the public eye, and it goes back years at this point. Wake up, Rumpelstiltskin.’
“Fox was bought by Disney.”
Just the entertainment assets. Not the news divisions.
As a political scientist student in the 1960’s living and studying in the national capital extended region in W.V.’s eastern panhandle, the “news,” national and state, always seemed biased in a Democratic left direction. That was recognized as a potential embarrassment by the mainstream media at the time, so they tried to present a facade of impartiality. There was hardly any push back then, so it all seemed civil. With the rise of the conservative movement starting with Bill Buckley, the mask started coming off. Buckley was the unwelcome guest at the garden party, so for a while his viewpoint could be treated as inconsequential and even entertaining. By the time of NPR everything had changed. It could not believably pose as the spokespersons for the national consensus, although it keeps trying. I have still not heard any of its personnel admit the fact that it is not a fact-based platform. Instead, there are the suggestions of conspiratorial opposition, the treat of rising autocracy, and the claim that the rural poor will suffer most. I have yet to hear any NPR folk say, “This might be the best thing that ever happened to us. Either we should remain apologists for the left and find sponsors who will fund us (“where’s George S.?”) or we should get a balanced staff and become a truly fact-based platform.” Either way, NPR will become a better source of real news and opinion. Maybe I will not have to send a donation with the note: “A contribution in your name has been made to the DNC.”
Fox doesn’t get public money to broadcast. There, seven words.
The government is not paying for Fox.
Fox is answerable to shareholders and consumers.
PBS is insulated by government money from REAL public oversight – the markets.