PeekingDuck said:

---

From NPR (their emphasis):

"Public Radio and Federal Funding

Federal funding is essential to public radio's service to the American public and its continuation is critical for both stations and program producers, including NPR. Public radio stations receive annual grants directly from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) that make up an important part of a diverse revenue mix that includes listener support, corporate sponsorship and grants. Stations, in turn, draw on this mix of public and privately sourced revenue to pay NPR and other public radio producers for their programming. These station programming fees comprise a significant portion of NPR's largest source of revenue. The loss of federal funding would undermine the stations' ability to pay NPR for programming, thereby weakening the institution.
Elimination of federal funding would result in fewer programs, less journalism, especially local journalism and eventually the loss of public radio stations, particularly in rural and economically distressed communities."

---

WHAT?

This CANNOT be true. It would go against the narrative that nai06 is pushing, and that would be WRONG!!!

Ag with kids said:

---

TheMasterplan said:

---

All you had to do was google "NPR twitter" and an article from NPR would've come up.

---

I remember years ago I was listening to NPR and they had a segment on where they addressed the claims that they were biased.

The guest (who was some NPR muckity muck) stated that they had done their own investigation and had determined that they were not biased.

I giggled about that for the rest of the day...

---

So they're just like the FBI/DOJ. Lucky us!

Remember the old PBS motto? "If we didn't show it, who would?"

In 2023? About a thousand different outlets.

Besides....you don't need to fund the majority of an outlet to have influence. You need only fund them into solvency.

yo that's crazy why wasn't it in the OP's article then?

nai06 said:

---

So it stands to reason that publications like Stars and Stripes or Voice of America Radio should also be designated as such right?

---

VOA is the most state affiliated news media outlet of all time. How is this even in discussion?

Yes it should be designated as state affiliated.

Squadron7 said:

---

Remember the old PBS motto? "If we didn't show it, who would?"

In 2023? About a thousand different outlets.

Besides....you don't need to fund the majority of an outlet to have influence. You need only fund them into solvency.

---

Exactly. If a media source is dependent on the government for funding, they're not going to be as eager to hold government to account.

And what type of people believe this? Democrats. So who are they likely to employ? Democrats. And what type of people will stories be run to appeal to? Democrats.

It is also a north east based media source so it's going to lean liberal. They view "corporations" as having power and not the government.

Only boomer liberals support NPR for nostalgia reasons. It's old and outdated.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

nai06 said:

---

So it stands to reason that publications like Stars and Stripes or Voice of America Radio should also be designated as such right?

---

VOA is the most state affiliated news media outlet of all time. How is this even in discussion?

Yes it should be designated as state affiliated.

---

The funny thing is I would say about the majority of non-americans would know VOA is just america propaganda and don't believe it.

PBS does some good stuff. I pay $60 a year for Daniel Tiger and NOVA. The government should get out of the media business entirely, with caveats for national defense where they can directly control all broadcast frequencies after a nuclear bomb, or some thing like that.

Also if Musk is not doing this for BBC and CBC (Canada), this is petty.

Totally: the best way for a news outlet like @NPR to show they're not beholden to the US government and are unbiased is to have the WH Press Secretary rise to her feet in defense of NPR and heap praise on their great reporting:pic.twitter.com/ygTRFPMkiO

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 5, 2023

BNO: NPR says it has decided to stop using Twitter until its "state-affiliated media" label is removed

— The Bias (@thebias_news) April 7, 2023

nai06 said:

---

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

He's not "labeling" them anything, they are literally funded by the State.

---

How are they funded by the state?

---

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/national-public-radio-npr/

Quote:

---

In 2020, National Public Radio earned $275,424,738 in revenue. NPR generates its revenue from a wide variety of sources. In 2017, NPR earned 38% of its revenue from individual contributions; 19% from corporate sponsorship and licensing; 10% from foundation donations; 10% from university licensing and donations; 8% from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting; and 4% from federal, state, and local governments via member stations.

---

In 2020, 12% of NPR funding was from direct or indirect government spending. While someone might argue that isn't a lot, I'd respond with "it's enough".

12% too much

probably

and our government shouldnt fund them

federal funding of journalism is antifreedom

Not necessarily related to this Elon budget but I'd love to see a poll of the political opinions of NPR's primary customer base (the 39% individual donations). As the old saying goes, the customer is always right!

will25u said:

---

BNO: NPR says it has decided to stop using Twitter until its "state-affiliated media" label is removed

— The Bias (@thebias_news) April 7, 2023

---

Offer accepted! You are free to leave, NPR

nai06 said:

---

From just the other day

Yesterday, @elonmusk’s Twitter labeled NPR “state-affiliated media,” even though the company’s own policy stated the organization shouldn’t be labeled as such because it has editorial independence (left).

Hours later, Twitter removed the reference to NPR in the policy (right). pic.twitter.com/cAXoXYFQ2G

— David Gura (@davidgura) April 5, 2023

Maybe NPR is working on a story Elon doesn't like.

---

Once a propagandist always a propagandist. You need to account for the lies you helped spread that have now been proven lies by the journalists Elon brought in to research the treachery of rhe left and our deep state at Twitter.
You should not post anymore until you come clean.

WHINER UPDATE: @NPR still not tweeting despite change of Twitter code to "Government Funded Media." https://t.co/e5tFhkSvkR

— NewsBusters (@newsbusters) April 10, 2023

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

WHINER UPDATE: @NPR still not tweeting despite change of Twitter code to "Government Funded Media." https://t.co/e5tFhkSvkR

— NewsBusters (@newsbusters) April 10, 2023

---

Well that's good news.

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

WHINER UPDATE: @NPR still not tweeting despite change of Twitter code to "Government Funded Media." https://t.co/e5tFhkSvkR

— NewsBusters (@newsbusters) April 10, 2023

---

Well that's good news.

---

And it just happens to be a positive piece for Dems. What a coincidence. Totally not state run media supporting the party of power.

TacosaurusRex said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

He's not "labeling" them anything, they are literally funded by the State.

---

How are they funded by the state?

---

They receive money from the Corporation For Public Broadcasting = money from our taxes = funded by the state.

---

Isn't na06 a teacher?

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

nai06 said:

---

AgNav93 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

TacosaurusRex said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

He's not "labeling" them anything, they are literally funded by the State.

---

How are they funded by the state?

---

They receive money from the Corporation For Public Broadcasting = money from our taxes = funded by the state.

---

Great! now we are getting somewhere. How much of their funding is from the government? 100%, 90%? Surely it's more that half right?

---

Whatever it is it's too much. Government shouldn't subsidize media for obvious reasons that are probably lost on you.

---

So then you don't know.

---

Either post propaganda about how NPR's laundering operation means they're not influenced by federal funding (Al la Planned Parenthood claiming squealing about abortion funding while claiming they only provide non-abortive services) or go away.

---

Its less than 10% most of their funding is via ads and donations

---

Great - so they won't be hurt by that # dropping to zero, right?

…unless it's just a dishonest script and they really do depend on tax payer's dollars being laundered in many forms and at many levels…

---

In reality it's less than 1%. They're "indirectly" funded by federal, state, and local dollars through syndication and licensing from local stations. It's an impossible argument to make that CPB somehow influences NPR through that other 9% of revenues from fed, state, and local dollars simply because they give to independent, public access stations as well. NPR would probably be perfectly fine without CPB money. The local stations that they syndicate to may or may not. It really depends on the share of local and state dollars they get and how they might make up the shortfall.

NPR undoubtedly has a progressive, liberal slant, but they're by no means government controlled either.

No, it's not.

The cpb is federally funded and must spend ~480 million on public broadcasting.

The feds directly fund npr/PBS but really fund them through the cpb. Npr stations are all technically independent but get a larger part of their funding via the cpb which they in turn use to pay for programming from NPR.

Then, many govt organizations pay for sponsorships in npr.

To say npr is more or less independent is a non starter. If you removed federal/state govt dollars from public broadcasting, they'd be trying to fill closer to 35% of their budgets. That's not insignificant

Yes, we all agree and understand that CPB gives grants to PBS, NPR, and local radio and TV stations. What is in question is whether NPR is influenced by its federal funding through CPB.

When you pull out this 35% number, you're talking about local independent stations getting public funding, not NPR itself. Those are very different things. Just because they're paying NPR for syndicated content or licensing doesn't mean that every dollar going through them to NPR is a) public or b) from CPB and the feds. The percentage of public money in their budgets also does not equate to the same percentage of NPR's through licensing and fees paid because NPR has other revenue sources that ultimately dilute that number.

Yes, NPR gets a lot of what started out as publicly funded dollars (fed, state, or local) through affiliates, but no that does not equate to federal influence on content because a) a lot of that money is state and local and not under the purview of the federal government and b) those stations control the funding they receive and could just as easily break with NPR and either create or find new content without giving up the CPB funding. Ultimately, the public dollars that wind up at NPR are from a multitude of different public sources, so there would have to be some kind of giant cabal operating between federal, state, and local governments to use that money to sway NPR's programming. I find that wholly unbelievable and the idea that they're simply staffed by the same liberal progressives as much of the rest of media far more realistic.

NPR is stepping away from Twitter, and this includes this NPR Politics feed. Please read the thread to find other ways to find our work, including:

NPR Politics Instagram: https://t.co/UJ2HzXYsR0
NPR Politics newsletter: https://t.co/mrWXwUrXrn https://t.co/5kmu5kGogV

— NPR Politics (@nprpolitics) April 12, 2023