Federal Funding Responses to Questions

WPM and all stations receive questions from the public about defunding public broadcasting.  These emanate from various areas including bills and acts in Congress, congressional responses to listeners/viewers, NPR/PBS leadership interviews, comments from the Administration, articles in other news media, among other sources.  Here are some key points and responses that may be helpful.

This page will be updated as questions/issues come in.

In 1976 Congress authorized the CPB to use tax dollars to subsidize public television and public radio stations in America.  With the emergence of other media sources, this is no longer necessary.

One of the intents of the Public Broadcasting Act was to provide free access to high-quality television and radio broadcasts to all Americans. A majority of current media sources are available through paid cable or satellite fees and user IT and broadband service paid plans. A sizable number of print publications are available on a subscription basis. Online print media is readily available, but increasingly restricted by a paywall. Public radio and television content remains free of charge.
A second core intent of the Public Broadcasting Act was to provide educational material to the nation and particularly to consumers who couldn’t afford to get it elsewhere. Public broadcasting content is created to educate through a variety of programs for radio, television, and now through digital productions. This content intends to educate and inform, and not necessarily follow the commercial model of generating eyeballs and ears for ratings which translate into advertising revenue. In the educational area, public television’s decades-long programming history in the area of children’s programming leads the way.
A third core intent of the Public Broadcasting Act was to address Americans living in rural areas who had no other access to media. Many parts of the nation do not have a strong business justification for commercial service providers to invest in the areas. Public broadcasting, through its subsidies from Congress, is able to create a model that works and reaches listeners/viewers in America’s “media deserts.”

Why should all Americans pay for services that are used by only a part of the population?

Public radio and television is accessed by close to 180 million Americans combined via traditional TV and radio sets alone. Each month, 16 million individuals view content on PBS apps and 53 million users through YouTube. NPR’s digital platforms alone reach an average of 37 million users per month.

Public radio and television are akin to public utilities and services which are operated by local, state, and federal governments. Not everyone uses the highway system, railroads, the electrical grid, FAA control systems for air travel, public schools, etc. yet tax dollars from all Americans are pooled to pay for these “common use” services. The Public Broadcasting Act deemed public broadcasting as a tool to provide education to all Americans regardless of location or circumstance. Not all are required to use it, but it's there for all to access.

NPR’s CEO made far-left statements about President Trump, Americans, and non-binary individuals that make her unfit to lead a publicly funded media entity.

Dating back to 2018, Katherine Maher, NPR CEO, made statements to this effect on her private Twitter account and in presentations that were perceived as hyper-progressive by some. In her congressional testimony on March 26, 2025, she stated that she regretted these statements.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXbSeJ3avEg

Retraction of statements or positions is not unusual among public figures. Similar statements were made and later regretted or retracted by others in government-related functions. Retractions are not an impediment to employment or appointment.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/nu8yn6TwGgw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JEUGjyROw4

In 2023, NPR senior editor, Uri Berliner penned an article critical of NPR, stating that the NPR audience described itself as predominantly liberal, with only 31 percent citing themselves to be conservative or conservative-leaning.  This demographic description has been interpreted to mean that NPR is biased.

NPR does not perform a litmus test on audience political persuasions and doesn’t control programming decisions by political segmentation. Media attracts the audiences that want to consume its content. This audience is made up of a variety of political persuasions.

Note: WPM agreed with some Berliner positions, disagreed with others, but questioned the method by which personnel issues were aired publicly instead of through management channels.

Mr. Berliner also noted that by his count, there were no Republicans working in editorial positions at NPR.

As per employment guidelines, NPR does not track voter registrations of employees. The methodology of Mr. Berliner’s information could benefit from further clarification.
Note: WPM does not ask for political affiliation in its employment process.

NPR did not want to cover the story about Hunter Biden’s laptop citing its truthfulness for the decision.

NPR refrained from full coverage of the story pending deeper verification.
In subsequent reporting, NPR came to the conclusion that it was a mistake to not have covered the story immediately and more fully. A public retraction was made.
Note: WPM was of the opinion that the story should have been followed up and expressed its concerns to NPR.

NPR lacks diversity of viewpoints in its newsroom.

This is an “in the eye of the beholder" issue that can't always be adjudicated. One listener’s perceived bias is another’s accurate statement.
Note: NPR addressed this issue in an internal review and made substantive changes to its reporting format and style. Listeners are encouraged to listen to their public radio station and made an assessment of what they hear.

There have been upheavals in media overall, and also at NPR.

This is correct. Recent years have brought sharp turnarounds in media. Social movements, including the #MeToo as well as the George Floyd killing in 2020 created tumult in newsrooms, witnessed by the departure of top editors in The New York Times, the Washington Post, among others. This was also fueled by a generational change in the ranks, with the infusion of young journalists with different core values of news coverage compared with their “Cronkite generation” counterparts.
NPR recognized these factors, as well as other factors brought up by the Berliner article, and made course corrections.
Note: WPM agreed with the new changes made by NPR.  They more closely aligned with WPM editorial practices.  Temp text.