Community Discussions
Explore the latest discussions and community conversations related to this domain.
Senate votes to kill entire public broadcasting budget in blow to NPR and PBS | Senate votes to rescind $1.1 billion from Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Main Post: Senate votes to kill entire public broadcasting budget in blow to NPR and PBS | Senate votes to rescind $1.1 billion from Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Top Comment: What a completely normal and healthy democracy. Gut public media so people can get all their news from Sinclair, Facebook memes, and Elon’s rotting algorithm.
End of public media as we know it
Main Post:
I work at a local station. I don’t think folks understand - if local stations everywhere lose huge chunks of their revenue, they can no longer afford to pay for NPR (& PBS) programs, and that is an important piece of how NPR makes money. If member stations can no longer pay to air Wait Wait, Throughline, etc., some of these programs may indeed be shut down. Maybe not the most popular ones, but there will be cuts. It’s going to be a very bumpy road. Yes, many rural and financially wobbly stations across the country are going to close, but NPR is losing FAR more than 1% of its budget.
In the senate hearing a while back - remember when they asked Maher if the funding to stations is fungible and ends up at NPR? She agreed.
What can you do? It is in all likelihood too late to call your senators. Now is the time to donate to your local station, especially in areas that have also lost state funding (FL, IN). Show them your support before they start laying off staff. It’s too late to do pretty much anything else.
~a jaded station employee
Top Comment: And as a former newspaper guy covering local politics who has seen a half dozen of his newsrooms shutter forever--when they kill your local news and when they shutter independent media, that's it--it's gone. It doesn't come back. Yes, a station could re-emerge but after a year or so of not covering one thing or another, new enterprises aren't going to see the value of covering this little thing or that little commission or whatever because they've gone so long without and what little grasp of local service you had, what little transparency you had into local governance is gone. It's really no wonder why groups like Facebook and Twitter supported Trump--this is a big win for tech. This is great news for them.
Anyone else getting really frustrated with Up First?
Main Post:
I've been a regular listener to Up First for years, but lately, I feel like they've been doing a pretty poor job of keeping me informed. Listening to Up First is part of morning commute, however recently I'm just yelling in my car, getting frustrated at the lack of answers, clarity, fact checking, etc.
Almost everyday this week, they have repeated a lie or a very dubious claim without any push back, fact checking, clarity, etc.
Examples from this week:
This morning, regarding Trump's continued claim that tariffs will be good for the U.S. economy:
"The argument Trump is making is that tariffs will be good for the U.S. long term and that will be worth any shorter term pain. But most people don't really want to experience any pain, even if it does turn out to be short term..."
So, will tariffs be good for the U.S. long term? I've read and heard economic experts say for months that they will not. But NPR just repeats Trump's claim as if it is fact, that tariffs will be good for the economy and the only problem is the "short term pain", and doesn't provide any context about whether or not the initial claim is true.
Tuesday morning, regarding the Trump admin deporting people to an El Salvador prison:
"The question at hand is not whether or not these people are dangerous and should be in the country, but the process of their removal."
This is just not true at all. So far, the DOJ had provided zero evidence that the people deported are actually dangerous and there's been a lot of reporting that several of the people allegedly taken have no gang connections or criminal records at all. Monday's show even mentions this reporting but by Tuesday, it's no longer a question. Even if they are trying to say that this question is not part of these court proceedings, that's also not true. The judge asked the DOJ for the identities of the individuals and the DOJ refused. We don't know who these people are at all! The DOJ won't even tell the court WHY they won't say who these people are.
Monday morning, regarding the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil:
"...there have been other protests, including many around the nation this weekend, in support of the Columbia student, Mahmoud Khalil. He was taken into custody by officials who say his campus protest activities basically amount to a national security threat because they "align with Hamas", which a US designated terrorist group."
So, do his activities "align with Hamas"? I'm not getting any clarity from NPR. Instead, they are again just framing the story as if the Trump administration's version is the truth and his activities really did align with Hamas.
Is anyone else feeling this?
Top Comment: Yeah, agreed. I dislike the kneejerk critiques of NPR reporting in this sub, but I've also noticed Up First more frequently taking factual inaccuracies from Trump as mere counterarguments.
NPR Politics Podcast
Main Post:
NPR Politics Podcast is so endlessly frustrating, especially lately, with their emphasis on balance during this dangerous contemporary political landscape. It feels disingenuous, and in many ways is outright harmful to the discourse in how much it downplays how far we have ventured from political norms.
I know that's their mandate, to be a politically neutral source of the big news coming out of Washington, but I think I'm done... there's so many podcasts nowadays that offer great political commentary. The way they normalized Hegseth, RFK Jr., Gabbard, and Patel during the discussion of the confirmation hearings was just upsetting, not insightful.
Talk me out of it folks. Any reason I shouldn't unsubscribe? I've been listening to it for years, but it's just so endlessly frustrating now.
Top Comment: Ok, hear me out... imagine if they hired just one panelist with a comparative politics degree; someone who could provide historical context for what we’re experiencing. Give us a real basis of comparison to past political movements instead of treating everything as if it’s unfolding in a vacuum. And for the love of journalism, “Can’t Let It Go” shouldn’t be about Taylor Swift’s new song or your favorite TV show. How about sharing a behind-the-scenes moment or a piece of White House decorum that didn’t make headlines? Just tell us what you see!
Does anyone in this sub like NPR?
Main Post:
Every post I see in this sub just seems to be a hatred of NPR. There are constant claims that it is right wing and MAGA, because it doesn't explicitly say "Trump is bad" every time he is mentioned. From someone who is not left wing, you can be assured, NPR is incredibly left! It doesn't speak to conservatives at all, and the only reason I listen to it is to hear a (sometimes) intelligent left-wing coverage of issues.
If you think it's too right wing, I beg you, listen to some actually right wing podcasts. If you can't believe that anyone to the right of you has anything worth saying, then I respectfully suggest that right wing intolerance may not be the biggest issue.
Top Comment: I think NPR is significantly more trustworthy than CNN, MSNBC, etc.
I may be late to the party, but what happened to NPR?
Main Post:
Genuine question. I may be really late to the party here, but what is going on with NPR coverage as a whole? Is this as simple as new management? Why does it feel like their attempt to be objective is just humoring the very fringe crackpots they should be reporting on?
Top Comment: They're trying to cover 21st century fascism with 20th century hyper-objective, both-sides, take-no-positions journalistic techniques, and it's not working.