Trump Can Hurt PBS and NPR, But He Can’t Kill Them

by

To put it simply, Mitt Romney, the ex-Republican presidential nominee and senator from Utah who occasionally feigned opposition to Donald Trump’s political ideology known as MAGA conservatism, may have genuinely disliked Trump personally. However, on crucial political matters, they share similar views. As such, Romney should be raising a glass to his supposed adversary for almost achieving what he (and many other Republicans) have been striving for years: the elimination of federal funding for public broadcasting.

This morning, the Senate endorsed Trump’s budget-recession bill, set to retrieve approximately $535 million from funding previously allocated for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting over the next few days. The majority of their budget is used to provide grants to local PBS and NPR stations. Since the funding had been approved for the next two years, the total reduction will surpass $1 billion. Notably, Romney advocated for defunding public broadcasting during his 2012 presidential campaign, labeling it as a waste of resources: “I believe it’s unethical for us to keep spending money we don’t have and passing on our debts to future generations,” he stated. He argued that the private sector could take over PBS functions, saying, “We won’t eliminate Sesame Street’s Big Bird, but Big Bird will start showing ads.” Despite Romney’s loss in the election, Congress has continued to allocate (modest) funds for public broadcasting.

This week, Trump, who’s always drawn to new and shiny ideas, is pushing his political allies in Congress to expedite a bill that terminates the small subsidy for the CPB (as well as billions in foreign aid and other worthy causes). There’s a slim possibility that the House might not be able to pass this bill before a Friday deadline, but even if they don’t, it seems probable that Trump will eventually find a means to withhold funding so he can boast about accomplishing something that “lame” Republicans like Romney never managed.

In my opinion as a movie reviewer, let me share some reassuring insights about the future of PBS and NPR. Contrary to certain political rhetoric from figures like Romney and Trump, these institutions will continue their operations, unaffected by government funding cuts.

Unlike broadcasting corporations such as the BBC or CBC, which heavily depend on government subsidies, PBS and NPR have always thrived on private grants and audience support. This independence, ironically, is something that these political figures often advocate for. Yet, their attacks on these institutions are nothing short of repugnant and hypocritical.

Despite not being as expansive or influential in programming as other national broadcasters, the public-private partnership model has provided PBS and NPR with a degree of immunity against a potential autocrat like Trump. He may not be able to shut them down or take control for his own purposes, much like what we’re witnessing with Voice of America under the current White House administration.

In essence, while these institutions might not be as essential or prolific as others, their unique funding model has served as a safeguard against potential government interference and manipulation.

Nonetheless, halting funding to CPB is anticipated to bring about severe consequences at the local level for numerous public radio and TV stations. Grants from CPB sustain a significant number of smaller stations, including many in rural America that have strong support for Trump. Without this financial aid, these broadcasting entities may be compelled to make drastic cuts to their programming, decrease staff numbers, or even cease operation entirely if the direst predictions come true. This could leave numerous small towns and cities without essential sources of information and unbiased journalism – a situation that arises due to Republicans like Romney and Trump perceiving NPR and PBS as unnecessary expenditures and biased against conservatives.

If the House approves cuts to public broadcasting, supporters can take action in several ways. They can arrange for regular donations to their nearby PBS or NPR stations, or boost their existing contributions if they already do so. For instance, NPR provides NPR+, starting at $8 a month, which offers ad-free podcasts and extra benefits. On the other hand, PBS offers PBS Passport, a subscription that benefits your local stations while providing you with an extensive collection of PBS dramas, educational, and cultural programs – including favorites like “All Creatures Great and Small”. Unlike commercial streaming platforms such as Peacock, there’s no fixed price for Passport. However, a minimum donation of $5 per month is required. Alternatively, you can make a yearly contribution of $100 or a monthly contribution of $15 – whatever suits your budget to help compensate for the reduction in federal funding. Notably, the subscription fee for PBS Passport primarily serves as a direct donation to your local PBS station, much like NPR+ memberships.

If you’re displeased with how the party of Romney and Trump is affecting public broadcasting, you possess some power to counteract their actions, albeit not completely. At this moment, it might be the most effective tool that PBS and NPR have in their struggle to endure this recent attack on their survival.

Read More

2025-07-17 22:54