logo
C-SPAN Faces A Funding Crisis Amid Cord Cutting, Even As D.C.'s Drama Makes Its Mission Ever More Important

C-SPAN Faces A Funding Crisis Amid Cord Cutting, Even As D.C.'s Drama Makes Its Mission Ever More Important

Yahoo27-05-2025

Over the past week, C-SPAN has covered the narrow, early morning vote on Donald Trump's 'big beautiful bill.' It carried in full the president's at-times bizarre Oval Office clash with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. It captured the heated exchange between Secretary of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Sen. Patti Murray (D-WA).
At times the source of humor for its offering of comprehensive coverage of extremely wonkish TV in an era of ever-short attention spans, C-SPAN has nevertheless been a go-to destination for the unedited moments in D.C. at an unprecedented era of hyper-partisanship, high anxiety and heavy drama.
More from Deadline
Ken Dilanian To Serve As MSNBC's Justice Correspondent And Erielle Reshef To Join Network As National Correspondent
NPR And Colorado Public Radio Stations Sue Donald Trump Over Executive Order To Cease Federal Funding
Donald Trump Posts All-Caps Memorial Day Message Attacking "USA Hating Judges" And "Scum" Who Are "Trying To Destroy Our Country"
The irony is that the network, launched in 1979, finds itself at a crossroads. Funded by the cable industry, it has seen its revenue fall as consumers cut the cord, while the most popular streaming alternatives have yet to carry the C-SPAN channels to make up for the loss.
Sam Feist, who became the new CEO of C-SPAN last year, said that the result is a 'crisis of funding,' as virtual multichannel distributors like YouTube TV and Hulu have so far declined to add the channels to their lineups.
'That adds up to many millions of dollars of revenue for this non profit,' Feist said. 'We don't get government funding. We're completely dependent on those revenues. So it's a crisis for us, and it's unsustainable over time, and more importantly, as people switch from cable to YouTube TV because it might be a slightly less expensive service, they're no longer able to see their government unfiltered the way only C-SPAN provides it.'
Feist said that the cost to distributors, 7.25 cents per subscriber per month, 'may be tiny and almost insignificant to an individual household, it is what pays to keep the lights on and the cameras covering Washington here at C-SPAN.'
According to its IRS filing, C-SPAN's total revenue declined to $46.3 million in the year ended on March 31, 2024, from $49.4 million a year earlier. That figure reflects a drop in programming fees, its largest revenue stream.
YouTube TV, the largest of the virtual MVPDs with estimates of 8 million to 10 million subscribers, has cited direct and indirect costs to their business, which may be passed on to subscribers.
A YouTube TV spokesperson said, 'Unfortunately, our subscribers have not shown sufficient interest in adding C-SPAN to the YouTube TV lineup to justify the increased cost to subscribers' monthly bills.'
The streamer said that it has proposed access to their prime time channels lineup, where users could directly pay for a subscription, and YouTube TV subscribers then could add the C-SPAN channels for a fee. The spokesperson also noted that a large amount of content was available on YouTube's main platform, and generated advertising revenue for C-SPAN.
Yet that hasn't come close to making up for lost revenue. According to the IRS filing, C-SPAN's advertising returns, including short spots airing before online programming, are a fraction of programming fees, at $334,412 in the 2024 fiscal year. C-SPAN also has been taking donations, but that funding source also is small compared to the carriage fees.
A Hulu spokesperson did not return a request for comment.
Feist said that they have explored a paywall on the C-SPAN website, which does not carry all of the programming of the linear networks, but 'what we think are the most important things.'
'That's certainly not the solution to our funding problem, and our current situation is not sustainable. When 15 to 20 million people that had C-SPAN switched to a different service and no longer do, that is not sustainable,' Feist said.
Founded by Brian Lamb, C-SPAN was started in 1979, with coverage of the House of Representatives. It later expanded to another channel covering the Senate, and later added a third channel covering public affairs programming.
With its funding from the cable industry, C-SPAN also has served as a way for individual operators to show local communities their commitment to public service programming. Through the years, as multichannel viewing expanded to satellite and fiber, services like DirecTV and Fios also carried the networks.
C-SPAN's areas of coverage now extend beyond Capitol Hill to the White House, the campaign trail, and even to live and consequential events like the recent papal conclave. C-SPAN has long sought televised coverage of the Supreme Court, and a breakthrough of sorts was seen during the pandemic, when the justices allowed live audio feeds of oral arguments.
This fall will bring a high-profile addition to its programming lineup, in keeping with the network's mandate to remain neutral in the partisan fray. CeaseFire will feature lawmakers and other politicos of opposite parties seeking areas of agreement, rather than contentious argument.
The show is Feist's idea, having joined C-SPAN after almost 35 years at CNN, including 13 years as senior vice president and Washington bureau chief. He also once oversaw CNN's Crossfire, which helped popularize the panel format but may be the opposite of what CeaseFire is trying to achieve.
Crossfire, Feist said, 'was an important program that really helped you understand where Republicans were coming from, where Democrats were coming from. It was a raucous debate show. People enjoyed it. People watched it. It was frequently the most popular program on CNN in its heyday. But it wasn't a program that really led to common ground or compromise. And in America now, we're living through one of the most polarized periods at least in modern history. There seems to not be a lot of effort to seek common ground, at least in the media, or seek compromise.'
Feist said that he's spoken to more than 100 members of Congress, including the question 'who's your best friend on the other side?'
'In almost every case, the member of Congress I was talking to gave me a name,' Feist said. When told about plans for the show, 'every single one of them said yes.'
'Now whether they'll actually come on or not, that is still to be determined. Maybe someone's staffer will think they'd rather have purity than compromise,' he said. 'But I don't think we'll have trouble finding people.'
That said, Feist made clear that his 'number one mission right now is to help increase our distribution. It's actually to restore our distribution.'
Some of the stars of C-SPAN — members of Congress — have put on the pressure.
Last week, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Sen. Mike Flood (R-NE) wrote recently in Newsweek that C-SPAN's 7.25 cents per month fee is well below those of commercial news channels, including Fox News, at $2.50 per subscriber, and CNN, at $1.30. They wrote that it was even more essential to secure carriage on major streamers as younger audiences abandon linear TV.
They wrote, 'While carrying C-SPAN may not dramatically grow YouTubeTV or Hulu's subscriber numbers, it provides viewers with an essential resource for understanding what their government is doing—letting them see for themselves what is going on in Washington. We recognize that this is a public service, but it's one that's an investment in our people and the future of America.'
C-SPAN also may be one of the few outlets not in the crosshairs of President Donald Trump, who has recently talked of watching the channel, even at 3 a.m. in the morning.
The network also has boosted its social media presence, including promising signs on TikTok, where C-SPAN has 2.6 million followers. According to figures from Tubular Labs and Fabric Media, C-SPAN is beating major news brands in TikTok views per video and in engagement. In the 12 months through April, C-SPAN's posts drew 710 million views, 1,184 uploads and 36.7 million engagements, outpacing The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg Business.
C-SPAN has plans to add three more staffers this month to its social media team, Feist said.
'We're not trying to gain clicks with flamboyant headlines and language that you might normally see on social media,' Feist said. 'We're just putting it out there for the users to find, but we're definitely putting more content out there.'
The core content from C-SPAN, though, will remain live and unfiltered events, something that may be more relevant now more than ever. Feist points to Ipsos polling showing a balance of viewership across political ideology.
'We're in a fascinating political environment,' he said. 'We have a very closely divided Congress. We have a president who is active and encourages the television cameras to come in to witness what he's doing, not just him, but the work of his administration, which then leads to Democrats hosting event after event in response to the president. And we're in a position to bring all of that live to the public.'
Best of Deadline
'Hacks' Season 4 Release Schedule: When Do New Episodes Come Out?
Everything We Know About 'Hacks' Season 4 So Far
'The Last Of Us': Differences Between HBO Series & Video Game Across Seasons 1 And 2

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Bitcoin rebounds above $104,700 after initial dip on Trump-Musk fallout
Bitcoin rebounds above $104,700 after initial dip on Trump-Musk fallout

Business Upturn

time19 minutes ago

  • Business Upturn

Bitcoin rebounds above $104,700 after initial dip on Trump-Musk fallout

Bitcoin (BTC) staged a smart recovery on Friday, climbing back above the $104,700 mark after an early dip sparked by jitters in the market following the reported fallout between former US President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk. As per latest data, Bitcoin was trading at $104,731.41, up 2.18% over the past 24 hours. The cryptocurrency saw a volatile session, hitting an intraday low of $102,405.29 before bouncing back sharply to test a high of $105,333.00. The market had initially reacted negatively to reports of strained relations between Trump and Musk, which had raised concerns about potential policy shifts or regulatory overhang on digital assets in the US. The development triggered a broad risk-off sentiment across major cryptocurrencies during early trade. However, BTC's resilience was on display as buyers stepped in at lower levels, fueling a strong rebound. The 24-hour trading volume stood robust at 14,435.76 BTC, with $1.5 billion USDT turnover, indicating healthy participation on the bounce. Crypto market analysts noted that despite short-term headlines, underlying bullish momentum in BTC remains intact amid improving institutional interest and optimism around the next leg of mainstream adoption. Traders will be watching closely for further developments on the Trump-Musk front, along with upcoming macroeconomic cues, which could influence BTC's near-term trajectory. Note: $BTC price at the time of writing this article. News desk at

Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown

Hamilton Spectator

time38 minutes ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown

As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

Trump: Ukraine provoked Russian strikes
Trump: Ukraine provoked Russian strikes

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump: Ukraine provoked Russian strikes

US President Donald Trump has suggested that Ukraine itself provoked the Russian strikes by conducting Operation Spider's Web. Source: Trump speaking to journalists on board Air Force One Details: Responding to a journalist's question about whether Operation Spider's Web had changed his view of what advantages Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy holds, Trump said it had given Russian leader Vladimir Putin a reason to bomb Ukrainian cities. Quote: "They gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night. That's the thing I didn't like about it. When I saw it I said 'Here we go, now it's going to be a strike'." Background: On 1 June 2025, the Security Service of Ukraine carried out a special operation codenamed Pavutyna (Spider's Web) and hit Russian strategic jets at four airfields. Vasyl Maliuk, Head of the Security Service of Ukraine, stated that 34% of strategic carriers of cruise missiles at the main airfields of the Russian Federation had been destroyed. The Security Service of Ukraine officially stated that 41 Russian strategic aircraft had been destroyed by FPV drone strikes, including A-50, Tu-95, Tu-22 M3 and Tu-160 aircraft. The estimated cost of the strategic aircraft destroyed is over US$7 billion. Colonel Ants Kiviselg, Head of the Estonian Defence Forces' Intelligence Centre, reported that the Russian Tu-95 bombers targeted during Operation Spider's Web had been preparing to launch missile strikes on Ukraine. In response to these actions, Russia launched large-scale strikes on Ukraine on the night of 5-6 June, using over 400 drones and 40 cruise and ballistic missiles. The attack resulted in numerous civilian casualties and significant damage to infrastructure. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store