Frustration and fear ripple through NPR and PBS affiliates after Congress approves clawbacks
Small, as well as rural, public media stations that heavily rely on federal funding to operate are now bracing for possible staff cuts after Congress approved a package on Thursday that will claw back Corporation for Public Broadcasting funding.
Some stations say they're being punished over a fight between President Donald Trump and the national public broadcasting organizations that have little relationship to the service smaller outlets offer their communities.
'I think [lawmakers'] decisions were not informed,' said Don Dunlap, president and general manager of KEDT-TV/FM, a public radio and TV station in Corpus Christi, Texas. 'We're there to help people. There are 10 public TV stations in Texas, and we're thinking probably six of them will close down within a year.'
In April, Trump asked Congress to roll back funding for NPR and PBS, which he has long accused of bias against him and other Republicans — a claim both outlets have denied. The public media cuts are one aspect of the Trump administration's aggressive campaign against media outlets it deems as partisan. Trump has taken legal action against several news organizations, including CBS, ABC, The Wall Street Journal and other outlets over unfavorable coverage.
Several station heads told POLITICO they've been preparing for potential cuts since the Trump administration first floated the idea earlier this year. But in the wake of the bill's passage, they've had to put those plans into action.
'We're disappointed, but not surprised, and we've been planning for this scenario for a while,' said Judy Diaz, head of Delmarva Public Media, a group of three NPR stations that serve Maryland's Delmarva Peninsula. 'But yeah, it's a hit.'
For hundreds of stations, federal money makes up a significant portion of their total funding. According to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, about 45 percent of all public media stations that received their grants are in rural areas, and nearly half of those rely on CPB for 25 percent or more of their annual budget.
Without federal funding, those stations may be forced into layoffs and programming cuts, if they're able to survive at all.
According to data obtained by POLITICO, 34 public radio and TV stations receive at least 50 percent of their funding from federal grants. Twelve of those stations are in Alaska.
'We can't fundraise our way out of this. We have to make other decisions,' said Mollie Kabler, executive director of CoastAlaska, which oversees six public radio stations in southern Alaska. 'We have to consider 'what services are we going to give up? What people are we going to let go of? And how can we find a way to collaborate and retain service for Alaskans?''
KRZA-FM, a public radio station based in Alamosa, Colorado, that broadcasts across southern Colorado and northern New Mexico, relies on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for 50 percent of its yearly budget. Besides general manager Gerald Rodriguez, the station has one other full-time employee, two part-time workers and a handful of volunteers.
'It's gonna be a huge cut for us,' Rodriguez said. 'It's gonna affect us quite a bit, to the point where it could be, like a one-man show at some point where I'm doing everything by myself.'
Public media stations have received CPB grants through the end of the current fiscal year, which ends in September. Many stations are calculating how long they'll be able to survive once their federal grant funds dry up. For some, it may only be a matter of months.
'The station has built up a war chest that should get us through the next few months,' said Mark Johnson, general manager of KSRQ-FM in Thief River Falls, Minnesota. 'Right now, we are making a push on-air and through social media for listener contributions to help us cover the cost of powering our transmitter through December.'
Public media staffers from local affiliates to the national networks have been lobbying Republicans in Congress for weeks in hopes of staving off the cuts. In the end, only four Republicans in both chambers voted against the final version of the package, which also included cuts to foreign aid: Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Reps. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.).
Representatives for Senate Majority Leader John Thune did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
A House leadership aide deflected blame for impacts to local public media stations, and said in a statement that the NPR and PBS national organizations should "manage funds wisely and root out waste so rural stations can succeed."
An Office of Management and Budget spokesperson refuted claims that local NPR and PBS affiliates had remained nonpartisan, saying in a statement they had 'politicized their own coverage by relying on syndicated programming from their national org.'
'Democratic paper-pushers masquerading as reporters don't deserve taxpayer subsidies, and NPR and PBS will have to learn to survive on their own,' said White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields. 'Unfortunately for them, their only lifeline was taxpayer dollars, and that ended when President Trump was sworn in.'
Scott Smith, general manager of Alleghany Public Radio which broadcasts to three counties on either side of the border of Virginia and West Virginia, said he reached out to Republican lawmakers from both states to try to preserve the 60 percent of his funding that comes from federal grants. Now, he blames Congress for targeting local stations to spite the national NPR and PBS networks.
'They do know that what they were doing was going to hurt us more than it's going to hurt NPR and PBS as a whole. Yet it was still done,' Smith said. 'So what conclusion does that bring you to, without any other data to the contrary, that this is political and personal in nature.'
Kabler, who oversees the stations in Alaska, said she meets with Murkowski 'a couple times per year.' The senator attempted to introduce an amendment to the Senate bill that would protect funding for local public broadcasting while stripping it from NPR's and PBS' national operations, citing employees at KUCB — one of Kabler's stations — who she said earlier that afternoon had coordinated with local public officials to warn the community of an impending tsunami.
The amendment failed.
The public broadcasting audience in Alaska is 'mostly Republicans,' Kabler said. 'But our services are not about partisan politics, and the discussion of what people believe about PBS and NPR on the national level, that's not what we do. We're about local news and information.'
Some public media staffers are hoping to take advantage of the grassroots networks used to rally support against the federal cuts to organize political opposition to Republicans who backed the bill. Kurt Mische, president of the PBS station based in Reno, Nevada, said he hopes the impact of gutting local NPR and PBS stations will be a motivating issue for voters in the 2026 midterms.
'I hope that everyone who believes in and supports the mission and vision and values of public broadcasting will keep this in mind when the next congressional election comes up,' Mische said. 'And we will help them connect the dots.'
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Anxious Generation' Author Jonathan Haidt Shares New Worries About Kids — and Why You Should Be Concerned (Exclusive)
His book has been a bestseller for more than a year and has prompted smartphone bans in schools across the country, but in a conversation with PEOPLE, Haidt says kids are still in danger When Jonathan Haidt's book The Anxious Generation debuted last year, it immediately became a bestseller — and a must-read for many parents navigating an era of pervasive smartphones and social media. Now, more than half of all states have passed laws banning or limiting phone use in schools — 17 states passed legislation just this year — and a new research poll finds that 74% of adults in the U.S. support classroom phone bans. Australia plans to restrict social media to those aged 16 and up starting in December, and several other European countries are also considering age restrictions. In a conversation with PEOPLE, Haidt, 61, a social psychologist and professor at New York University's Stern School of Business, says he's been encouraged by the rapid changes but warns that some changes are better than others. Haidt, who offers resources for parents at and on his Substack, weighs in on criticism of his book, the fears he has for kids, and the looming danger of Artificial Intelligence. PEOPLE: Are you surprised by the success of your book? HAIDT: I knew the book would be successful because whenever I mentioned I was writing it, parents said, "We need this tomorrow, can I see a draft?" But the the speed with which parents are organizing, the speed with which schools are going phone-free. I can't even keep track of it. PEOPLE: As you note, many schools and districts have opted to go phone-free, or ban phones in classrooms in the past year. What's working – and what isn't? HAIDT: The simplest fix, and it costs no money, is phone-free schools. That means when kids come in, they put their phone in a locked pouch, or a locker, and get it back at the end of the day. But many states and schools are doing something that's not very good: They banned phones only during instructional time. They do that because they're afraid of parents who say, 'I have to reach my student all the time.' But when class ends, kids lunge for their phones. And for the first 15 minutes of the next class, they're thinking about the drama going on. Phone bans during class time do nothing to help kids make friends. They do nothing to reduce the mental illness issue. It has to be bell-to-bell. I've never heard of a school that did it all day and regretted it or went back. PEOPLE: Critics of your book say you ignore the possible benefits of screen I recently found a horrifying statistic, which is that 40% of American 2-year-olds have their own iPad. A touchscreen device is not like television. Humans have always raised their children with stories. This is how culture is passed on. A TV screen is a reasonably good way of presenting stories. If your five-year-old watches a 90-minute movie on TV with an older sibling or with you, there's nothing wrong with that. The opposite is iPad time. The kid learns, "Might there be something more interesting if I swipe?" If this starts at age two, your kids lose the ability to pay attention to anything if it's boring for even a moment. By the time kids get to middle school, if they've been swiping and seeing micro stories that aren't really stories, a lot of damage has been done to their ability to pay attention. Us college professors all say the same thing: Kids can't read books anymore. Some of our students say they can't even watch a movie. It's too long. Our attention is being shattered. Let children's frontal cortex develop before you expose them to this. It's damaging an entire generation. And you should never give a child an iPhone as their first phone. You should work your way up. I stand by my rule, no smartphone before high school. PEOPLE: I'd like to talk age bans. Australia recently banned social media for those under Don't call it a ban. We don't say there's an age ban on driving. Just minimum age. There should be a minimum age. PEOPLE: But isn't there validity to the argument that if you keep kids away from social media completely, they're won't develop tools to learn to use it effectively? HAIDT: I hear this argument a lot, but I don't think it's valid psychologically. Our kids are going to be having sex and drinking alcohol, so it is valuable to have classes on that. We should be telling them about dangers. But have you ever heard anyone say, "We need to start them early because they need to know how to do this.' That's ridiculous. These devices, and especially these apps, were designed to hook your child. They were designed with full knowledge of brain development, dopamine circuits, motivation, insecurity. These are predatory programs that prey on children. PEOPLE: One of the biggest criticisms levied against your book is that it doesn't adequately acknowledge the way in which technology has allowed people, and particularly kids who might be isolated or marginalized, to connect and organize. HAIDT: That argument confuses the internet with social media. The internet solved that problem in the '90s. If you're a gay kid in rural Nebraska, life was really hard until the internet came along and suddenly you could get information everywhere. You could find organizations to help. I love the internet. Almost everybody loves the internet. Then in the 2000s, we get one application on the internet, which is a way of linking people together, giving them a newsfeed curated by an algorithm — and the algorithm is giving them whatever it can to keep them hooked. So who do you suppose is most harmed by this? Who do you suppose is most likely to be sextorted ? It's LGBTQ kids. Who do you think is most likely to say "This is harming my mental health?" It's LGBTQ kids. I often hear about the benefits [of social media]. I say, what benefits? Creativity? Have you worked with Gen Z? They can't pay attention. They're making little videos, but not much beyond that. Social media has very few benefits for children. For adults, yes, it's useful for business. I don't have anything to say to people over 18, but children have no need to connect with strangers. Children would be more connected if they put the phone down and got together with their friends. PEOPLE: Speaking of , we're in this moment where it was banned, the ban was rescinded and now we're waiting to hear about a . What are your thoughts about TikTok and what should happen? HAIDT: TikTok is the worst of them all. No one should be on TikTok. It damages your attention and exposes our children to garbage. We did a survey of Gen Z, these were in their late teens, early 20s, 50% of them said they wish TikTok had never been invented. They use it because they have to, but they see their life would be better if it didn't exist. I have very little hope Congress will do anything to protect children. So far, they have a perfect record of never protecting children ever on the Internet. But Australia and the UK are acting, and if their plans move ahead, and if the EU joins them and other countries, platforms are going to have to make it global because they don't want a different Instagram in each country. I'm hoping the rest of the world will fix this problem that America created. PEOPLE: What are your thoughts about how education cuts could affect kids and exacerbate what you're already seeing? HAIDT: Educational ability is declining since 2012, and cuts to funding are not going to help. But the biggest driver of the decline of education is the phones in the pockets and the Chromebooks on the desks. We spent billions of dollars putting a Chromebook or iPad on every desk. We thought this was an equity issue. But it turns out anyone with a computer on their desk can't focus. I teach college students, and MBA students at NYU. Three years ago, I had to go to a no-screens policy because even my graduate students cannot pay attention if they have a computer open. They're all multitasking. Adults can't pay attention, so how the hell do we expect 9-year-olds to pay attention when they have an iPad or a Chromebook on their desk? The best thing we can do for education is first, lock the phones away. Second, get devices off the desks. PEOPLE: At our school, kids have laptops with educational games. As a parent, there's a struggle between thinking more screen time isn't great, but games can be good for As soon as we introduce the technology, scores begin to drop. So we should start with the assumption that these things are not healthy, not helping unless they're proven to help. If you gamify math, the kid will be more engaged. So we think, this is good — but it's not. Suppose you gamify a third of your child's school day. What happens? Gamification is specifically targeted at giving kids a pulse of dopamine, which creates motivation to keep going. Okay, you think, that's good, they're motivated. But the brain adjusts, the dopamine circuits adjust and it now takes more dopamine to get up to normal. So the more you give them gamified educational technology, the harder it's going to be to have their attention to anything that's not on a screen. It's the same dilemma of parents who give their kid an iPad to shut them up. Yes, it will work in the short run, but now you always have to do it because they're not capable of sitting at a restaurant while you're eating. To be clear, there may be a role for some educational technology such as Khan Academy, but the one-to-one devices was the colossal mistake. You should try to avoid schools that will put an iPad or Chromebook on your child's desk. PEOPLE: That's most public schools!HAIDT: That's right. We have to change it. PEOPLE: How do you think AI will change the landscape for social media? HAIDT: In a sense, we've already had the first contact with AI, which was the algorithms. The algorithms made social media much more powerful. Early Facebook was not very addictive. It was just, you check out your friends' pages, they check out yours. But the algorithms, driven by AI, were super intelligent at hooking children with content, especially extreme content. We've already encountered AI and we lost. And our kids have been severely damaged by it. Our technology is becoming our master. This is all before the second wave of AI began with ChatGPT in late 2022, and what AI is already doing is showing that technology is going to become 100 times more powerful as our master. Those of us who feel like we're struggling with our phone addictions, it's going to get 10 times worse. Every app is going to get better and better at giving you what keeps you. Every app is going to get better and better at replacing real life. PEOPLE: What's your big fear with AI for kids? HAIDT: The most frightening thing to me is the AI companions. Our children already are socially deprived. They have poor social skills and they're lonely. This makes them even more likely as targets, as marketing targets for AI friends. But the more AI companions enter their lives, the less room and ability there will be for real friendships. PEOPLE: You talk about the value of giving kids independence. But for letting their kids walk to the store. How can parents foster independence in a world that's wary of it? HAIDT: The first thing is to look at the real world versus the virtual world. In the '90s we thought if our kids were on computers, they were safe, but if they went outside, they'd be abducted. It turns out both of those were not true. Crime rates have dropped tremendously since the '90s. Kidnapping is almost unheard of in the U.S. by strangers. The outside world is much safer than we realized. At the same time, if you let your kids on the Internet and social media, they're going to encounter pornography and strangers who want sex or money from them. We have to change our priorities. Our children have to learn to handle risk. They don't learn that online. Talking with a sex predator online doesn't toughen or benefit them. Going outside and getting lost and finding your way back is a powerful way to strengthen kids. We have to stop fearing the real world and be more afraid of the virtual world. You might be scared to send your eight-year-old six blocks to a grocery store, but what if he does it with his best friend? It's going to be a lot more fun. Everyone's going to be more secure. The more you do this with multiple families working together, the easier it is. Our goal isn't to snatch phones and iPads and screens. Our goal is to restore the fun, healthy, human childhood that most of us had. That's been taken from our kids. It is urgent that we restore it. Our kids are coming up broken. PEOPLE: The book emphasizes the importance of play, especially outdoor free play for kids mental health and development. What options do parents have if their kids are in public schools where the structure of the day, including play time, is limited? HAIDT: Two things that are easy and cost no money. Go to and download the kit for the Let Grow Experience. It gives kids more independence and fun and growth and it's free. So suppose your school has all the third graders do it. They go home, they decide something they can do by themselves. The best ones are where they go out of the house, to a neighbor's house to borrow a cup of sugar or go to a store. Imagine a town in which all third graders do that. Suddenly no one's afraid because, well, this is homework and the school told us to do it, and everyone else is doing it. Then what happens? Everyone sees eight year olds walking on the sidewalk. Nobody has seen that since 1997. The second program is called Play Club. Many parents are afraid to let their kids out, but they do trust the school playground. So a powerful thing to do is open the playground 30 minutes before class. You need an adult nearby, so that would be a small expense. But kids are desperate for free play and they get so little recess, so if you open the playground at 7:30, a lot of the kids are going to want to come and play soccer, play games, run around. It adds more free play to their day for very little money and it doesn't take away anything else from the school day. And it reduces truancy and lateness —since COVID, a lot of kids just aren't coming to school or they're coming late. PEOPLE: That's one of the things our school does, morning runs for the Wait, what do they do? They go on runs? PEOPLE: It's a track thing. On Monday mornings they can run around the track before Wait, they literally run around? That's it? That's what they do? That's an adult thing. We're so afraid to let go and let them play. They have to have free play. They're desperate for it. It's like if we raised our kids with no vitamin C whatsoever, and they all develop rickets, and then we say, "Well, we'll give you some lotion to put on the scars." No, just give them vitamin C. PEOPLE: Finally, one of your suggestions is connect with other parents with similar mindsets on phones/social media before your kids get to middle school. But you can't always choose who your kid hangs out with. Your phone-free kid may want to hang out with a kid who has a phone. What do you say to parents who feel like they're fighting a losing battle?HAIDT: Encourage your child to bring friends to the house, but there should be a rule that they put phones in a basket by the door. My children experience this. They go to a friend's house and the friend is on the phone all day long. What's the point? But your kid's not going to be damaged by occasionally seeing a smartphone or watching some TikTok videos. Half of American kids are online almost all the basically take themselves out of the game of life. When you give your child a phone, there's a 50% risk that your kid will be in that half. It's not so bad if he spends 10 minutes here and there on his friend's phone, that's not going to destroy his brain. But if he becomes one of the half that is addicted, it will probably cause permanent brain changes. The main thing is to shift from a mindset of threat to a mindset of discovery. Childhood should be about discovery, not fear. When kids are online, it becomes much more about fear. They're anxious. There's constant drama. But if we put them out in the world with other kids, they have fun. And we need to keep our eye on giving our kids fun. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
3 Money Moves the Middle Class Should Make After the Passing of Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
President Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' finally cleared the House and the Senate and was signed by the president on July 4. The bill has several policies that could impact the middle class. Making some money moves and preparing for the new changes can help you save money and grow your portfolio. Read Next: Check Out: Here are some of the top money moves the middle class should make. Also see how much the definition of middle class has changed in every state. Capitalize on Clean Energy Credits Now The bill is cycling out of energy credits, which affect electric vehicles, solar panels and other clean energy sources. Chad Gammon, CFP, owner of Custom Fit Financial, suggested making clean energy purchases before the deadline if you've been holding out. 'If you are considering any upgrades, now would be the time to do it. Some credits, such as electric vehicles, are available until September 30, 2025. Other credits, like the residential clean energy credit, will end on December 31, 2025. This can help if you anticipate higher energy bills in the years to come, and reputable installers can assist with an estimated payback period,' he said. Be Aware: Open a 'Trump Account' A 'Trump account' can give your child a head start with investing money and accumulating wealth. Gammon highlighted the promising opportunity while encouraging people to monitor how it will work before investing additional money. 'If you have a child in 2025, I'd look into opening a 'Trump account.' The federal government will give $1,000 as a starter contribution. There are options to contribute further. I'd wait for more details on that, but would set it up for the initial $1,000,' he said. Children who are born between 2025 and 2028 are eligible for a $1,000 deposit, per CNBC. The money in the account will be invested in a fund that tracks the U.S. stock market, the outlet reported. Plan Your Taxes The bill can reduce your tax burden, especially if you use the standard deduction. Gammon explained how the new bill can add more money to your wallet. 'I would also look at your estimated 2025 taxes and adjust withholdings, if needed. The standard deductions moved for [couples who are married and filing jointly] from $30,000 to $31,500, or if you are single, it went from $15,000 to $15,750. This could lower your tax liability, where you can adjust your withholdings on your W-4 and free up extra monthly cash,' he said. Seniors can also get a boosted tax deduction thanks to the bill. Seniors who are 65 or older can get an additional $6,000 tax deduction if their modified adjusted gross income is below $75,000. Married couples filing jointly can capitalize on the additional tax deduction if their combined modified adjusted gross income is below $150,000. This additional tax deduction for seniors currently applies for the tax years 2025 to 2028. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates 3 Luxury SUVs That Will Have Massive Price Drops in Summer 2025 These Cars May Seem Expensive, but They Rarely Need Repairs 7 Things You'll Be Happy You Downsized in Retirement This article originally appeared on 3 Money Moves the Middle Class Should Make After the Passing of Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump protesters urged to stay within the law during his trip to Scotland
A senior police officer has urged those who wish to protest during Donald Trump's trip to Scotland to stay within the law, as she said the priority will be for the US president to have a 'peaceful and safe' visit. Assistant Chief Constable Emma Bond said the operation to police the five-day visit will involve 'significant' resources, requiring Police Scotland to draw on mutual aid agreements with other forces. Known as Operation Roll, the exact numbers of police involved have not been revealed but it is expected to require Police Scotland's entire cadre of police liaison officers. The White House confirmed Mr Trump will visit his golf courses in Aberdeenshire and Ayrshire between July 25 and 29. He will meet Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and First Minister John Swinney during his private trip. The visit is likely to result in widespread protests, following similar demonstrations during his last visit to Scotland. Speaking to journalists on Tuesday, Ms Bond encouraged protest groups to discuss their plans with police ahead of the visit. She said: 'As you can imagine, it is a large-scale, complex operation, but actually that's something that Police Scotland is immensely experienced at doing.' The policing plan involves local, national and specialist officer from Police Scotland as well as other forces. She added: 'The key very much is to make sure the President of the United States can come, enjoy a peaceful and safe visit to Scotland and ensure Police Scotland is able to maintain delivery of services to the rest of the community within Scotland over the period of his visit.' Police are working on the assumption there will be protests in Ayrshire, Aberdeen, Glasgow and Edinburgh, she said. Ms Bond said Police Scotland will take a 'proportionate' approach to ensure people can protest safely, with the force offering to engage with demonstrators ahead of time on a 'no surprises' basis. However she said there is nothing at this stage to give her 'specific concern' about violence. Speaking to the PA news agency, she also said that concerns raised by the Scottish Police Federation are 'being resolved'. The organisation, which represents rank and file officers, said workforce agreements around health and safety may be breached. Asked for her message to those considering disruptive protest, she said 'Police Scotland fully recognises people's right to peaceful protest… 'We would wish to make sure we can balance those rights against against the impact on communities, on public safety. 'I would appeal to people obviously to stay within the bounds of peaceful protest. 'I'd be really clear however that abusive, threatening behaviour, any activity that's intended to disrupt events or in any way that poses a risk to public safety is not legitimate protest and will potentially require an intervention by policing.'
