President Trump boldly ends taxpayer funding for NPR and PBS, declaring Americans will no longer pay for “radical, woke propaganda disguised as news” after decades of public subsidies to increasingly partisan media outlets.
Key Takeaways
- President Trump has signed an executive order to cut all federal funding to PBS and NPR through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, citing partisan bias in their reporting.
- The order directs federal agencies to identify and terminate both direct and indirect funding sources to these public broadcasters by June 30, 2025.
- Former NPR editor Uri Berliner’s criticisms of NPR’s political alignment and lacking viewpoint diversity were referenced as evidence of the networks’ partisan shift.
- The White House argues the original 1967 justification for public broadcasting is outdated in today’s diverse media landscape with numerous news sources.
- PBS and NPR receive approximately half a billion dollars annually in public funding that will now be redirected.
Trump Takes Action Against Publicly-Funded Media Bias
President Donald Trump has taken decisive action against what his administration describes as biased media receiving taxpayer dollars. Through a comprehensive executive order, Trump directed the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and other federal agencies to cease funding National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service. The order specifically targets what many conservatives have long criticized as left-leaning bias in publicly funded news programming, addressing a key concern among his base who view these networks as increasingly partisan institutions operating on taxpayer funds.
“For years, American taxpayers have been on the hook for subsidizing National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), which spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news,'” the White House stated in a report accompanying the executive order.
The decision follows years of Republican criticism that these institutions have strayed from their mandate of providing balanced content. The executive order emphasizes that while the CPB is legally required to maintain political neutrality, these networks have increasingly aligned with progressive viewpoints and narratives. Trump’s administration pointed to CPB’s governing statute which explicitly prohibits the organization from contributing to or supporting any political party as justification for the funding cuts.
A Changed Media Landscape Makes Public Funding Unnecessary
At the heart of the executive order is the argument that government-funded media made sense in 1967 when few information sources existed, but is outdated and unnecessary in today’s diverse digital media environment. “Unlike in 1967, when the CPB [Corporation of Public Broadcasting] was established, today the media landscape is filled with abundant, diverse, and innovative news options. Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence,” stated Trump’s executive order.
The order directs the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to terminate approximately half a billion dollars in annual funding to these institutions. It further requires all federal agencies to identify and end any direct or indirect funding mechanisms by June 30, 2025. Beyond merely cutting financial support, the order empowers agencies to review compliance with existing agreements and authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to ensure these networks comply with anti-discrimination laws, suggesting potential further scrutiny.
Insider Criticism Bolsters Trump’s Case
Trump’s executive order gained credibility from former NPR editor Uri Berliner’s public criticisms, which highlighted how the organization abandoned balanced coverage on politically sensitive topics. Berliner specifically noted NPR’s sparse coverage of the Mueller report findings when they failed to establish Trump-Russia collusion and its complete avoidance of the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 election. These editorial decisions from within NPR demonstrated what many conservatives viewed as clear political alignment rather than neutral journalism.
“At the very least, Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage. No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize,” Trump’s executive order stated.
The executive order also cites institutional practices within these organizations that suggest political alignment rather than viewpoint diversity. These include former NPR CEO John Lansing’s internal messaging emphasizing diversity initiatives and acknowledging “white privilege” while making these ideological positions central to NPR’s mission. Such internal directives indicate these publicly funded entities have increasingly embraced progressive positions while receiving substantial taxpayer support.
Media Organizations Push Back
PBS and NPR leadership have predictably pushed back against the funding cuts, with PBS CEO Paula Kerger claiming that the decision would disrupt essential services provided by PBS and its local stations. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has taken more direct action, filing suit against President Trump for recently firing three board members, claiming he exceeded his authority. This legal challenge represents the first of what will likely be multiple attempts to resist the implementation of the executive order.
The White House has indicated it plans to move beyond executive action by asking Congress to rescind funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting as part of a larger budget reduction package. This comprehensive approach demonstrates Trump’s commitment to ending what his administration views as taxpayer-funded bias in media. For conservative voters who have long objected to their tax dollars supporting what they perceive as increasingly progressive media outlets, this represents a meaningful policy victory that aligns with core principles of fiscal responsibility and media accountability.
