Latest news with #publicmedia
The Guardian
a day ago
- Business
- The Guardian
NPR lawsuit aims to strike a blow for press freedom against Trump's attacks
In the Trump administration's unprecedented war on the American media, a lawsuit brought by public broadcasters could mark a much-needed strike back for press freedom. The lawsuit, brought by NPR and three Colorado-based public radio stations, challenges an executive order that cut federal funding to what Donald Trump described as 'biased media', with lawyers arguing that the order violated the first amendment right to free speech. The decision by NPR, KSUT, Roaring Fork and Colorado Public Radio to take on Donald Trump comes as the president has targeted multiple news organizations through lawsuits and investigations – and as experts warn some outlets are acquiescing to Trump's war on the media. NPR's lawsuit could be a prominent pushback against that. The lawsuit argues that Trump's executive order, signed on 1 May, violates the first amendment by targeting NPR for news coverage the president considers 'biased'. NPR and its partners are aiming to have the order, which would strip direct and indirect funding from NPR and PBS, permanently blocked and declared unconstitutional. Experts believe NPR has a strong case, and that it could be Trump's attacks on public media that could hand NPR a win. The president and the White House have described NPR and PBS as being 'leftwing propaganda', and has criticized the network for discussing LGBTQ themes. 'Trump's honesty about why he wants to eviscerate federal funding for NPR and PBS could be his legal downfall,' Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School and host of the Passing Judgment podcast, wrote in an op-ed for MSNBC. 'NPR has thus argued that Trump admitted that he's using his power as head of the executive branch of our government to target NPR and PBS because he disagrees with the content of their speech.' Levinson wrote: 'The Trump administration isn't targeting NPR because it covers political news. To the contrary; the administration appears to have explicitly admitted that it's targeting NPR because of what Trump considers to be its bias as it covers political news. NPR's lawsuit argues that, therefore, Trump's executive order is 'textbook retaliation and viewpoint-based discrimination.'' Trump's pursuit of NPR follows a pattern of the president's second term, with Trump keen to target media organizations he believes have reported on him negatively. The Associated Press, one of the world's premier news agencies which is relied upon by thousands of news outlets, was banned from the Oval Office and Air Force One after it refused to use Trump's preferred term of 'Gulf of America' to refer to the Gulf of Mexico. Trump is suing the owner of CBS News for $10bn, alleging the channel selectively edited an interview with Kamala Harris, which the network denies, and the Des Moines Register newspaper, which he accuses of 'election interference' over a poll from before the election that showed Kamala Harris leading Trump in Iowa. NPR has been vocal in its opposition to the lawsuit. 'It is evident from the president's executive order, as well as statements released by the White House and prior statements by the president that we are being punished for our editorial choices,' Katherine Maher, the CEO of NPR, said in an interview with the station this week. Maher added: 'We are not choosing to do this out of politics. We are choosing to do this as a matter of necessity and principle. All of our rights that we enjoy in this democracy flow from the first amendment: freedom of speech, association, freedom of the press. When we see those rights infringed upon, we have an obligation to challenge them.' The funding cut, NPR said, 'would have a devastating impact on American communities across the nation', adding: 'Locally owned public media stations represent a proud American tradition of public-private partnership for our shared common good.' 'The Corporation for Public Broadcasting [which distributes funds NPR and other public media] is creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers' dime,' Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement. 'Therefore, the president is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS. The president was elected with a mandate to ensure efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and he will continue to use his lawful authority to achieve that objective.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
PBS challenges executive overreach
PBS filed a lawsuit this week challenging a Trump-era executive order that stripped the public broadcaster of key federal funding, calling the move 'unconstitutional, retaliatory and a direct threat to public media's independence.' The order, signed early this month, is meant to cut money from public media that Trump believes is "radical, woke propoganda disguised as 'news.'" This isn't the first time they tried this. In the last days of the first Trump era, they tried to cut funding for PBS and NPR. But this time, this cut is from the start of the term. This time, the U.S. Department of Education canceled a $78 million grant to the system for educational programming that makes shows like 'Sesame Street' and 'Reading Rainbow.' PBS now argues the long-term effects have been deeply damaging particularly to rural and underserved communities that rely heavily on public broadcasting. The lawsuit specifically singles out rural Minnesota's PBS station, KAWE, known locally as Lakeland PBS. This station is situated in the north-central region of the state, between reservations, lakes and farms, hours away from the Canadian border or larger cities like Duluth or Grand Forks. A Tampa PBS intern spoke with Salon on how this is affecting her station. "It's saddening to hear about all the threats to their jobs," said college senior Nicole Droeger Stephens. "The local community relies on networks that will provide education, entertainment, and news that bigger networks won't cover. Public television and radio provide access to all communities no matter the size, demographics or incomes." That station immediately started their campaign to remind its viewers and online visitors just how important their station is and how to fight back. In this case, Lakeland PBS is the only source of local news in the area. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, alleges the defunding was in response to PBS's editorial choices and coverage that drew criticism from Trump and his allies. Legal experts suggest the case may test the boundaries of executive power over independent media. Local stations have also kicked off their own campaign of pushing back to the Executive Order. Even larger markets, like Tampa's WEDU, posted heartfelt pleas and information on how its viewers can help keep public broadcasting on the air. The White House has made no statement on this development. This suit continues the debate over the future of public media. Advocates argue that PBS remains one of the last truly non-commercial, trusted media institutions in the U.S. and one that now finds itself fighting to stay independent in an increasingly politicized media landscape.
Wall Street Journal
3 days ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
PBS Sues Trump Administration Over Plan to Pull Funding
PBS filed a lawsuit Friday challenging President Trump's executive order to end funding of public media, saying the order stands to 'upend public television.' The filing comes just days after National Public Radio took similar action. PBS's suit said the Constitution and laws prevent Trump 'from serving as the arbiter of the content of PBS's programming, including by attempting to defund PBS.'
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
The flimsy arguments Trump used to attack public media that serves Kansas
Public broadcasting in Kansas and across the United States faces threats from the Trump administration. (Eric Thomas illustration for Kansas Reflector) In one way, this is the easiest column I've written. It's simple to celebrate public media in Kansas: public radio, educational television, veteran journalists, original reporting, local focus, innovative podcasts and more. For all that, I'm a long-time sustaining member of my local public radio station. And I have written many glowing columns about NPR journalism. Public media in Kansas is awesome. In another way, this column is tricky. Defending anyone, let alone an institution, from fraudulent attacks is challenging. It's proving a negative, when the negative is certifiably bonkers. And coming from the White House. Here goes. On Tuesday, National Public Radio and three public radio stations sued the Trump administration in response to the May 1 executive order that sought to strip public media of its funding in the United States. The NPR lawsuit, filed in the District of Columbia, asserts that Trump's executive order 'violates the expressed will of Congress and the First Amendment's bedrock guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association, and also threatens the existence of a public radio system that millions of Americans across the country rely on for vital news and information.' The 43-page filing pokes holes in Trump's executive order: a brazen attempt to extinguish public media throughout the country — and harm its audience in Kansas — based on a partisan grudge. Under even brief inspection, Trump's May 1 executive order and the press statements that accompanied it look inept. They read like the half-baked political flailing of the first Trump administration when the rationale for his decisions was foolish and risible. Just like many of the actions of the first Trump administration, there is a more principled and legal argument to be made here: Persuade Congress to defund public broadcasting because taxpayer money simply doesn't belong in the media. The executive order only fleetingly expresses that viewpoint: 'Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence.' More often, the White House falsely accuses public radio. It dishes out fake news about the real news. If not opposed by a lawsuit like the one filed Tuesday, Trump's executive order would wreck two valuable American institutions for petty and deceptive reasons: hot-button word choices, political innuendo and pet peeves. What's Trump's best response for NPR's regret at labeling someone as 'illegal' in their reporting? Defund NPR. What's Trump's best response to PBS's documentary about a transgender teen? Defund PBS. Forever a predatory real estate developer, Trump wants to tear down public media rather than putting money into improvements. This week's NPR lawsuit points us to documents that reveal Trump's pettiness toward public media. First, consider 'President Trump Finally Ends the Madness of NPR, PBS,' a press release published by the White House in conjunction with the executive order. We find 24 bullet point examples of 'trash that has passed for 'news' at NPR and PBS.' Many of the bullet points, stripped of context, completely misrepresent each instance of public media reporting. One bullet point links to an NPR audio chat from 2022, headlined: 'Which skin color emoji should you use? The answer can be more complex than you think.' During the discussion, the NPR host says, 'These are not particularly easy questions for people to wrestle with.' The guest replies, 'I completely agree with you that there is no clear-cut answer.' How did the White House boil down this nuanced discussion of race? The press release says, 'NPR assigned three reporters to investigate how the thumbs-up emoji is racist.' NPR never used the word racist. Summarizing the coverage in that way isn't a political distortion. It's a lie. Here's another White House claim from the same press release: 'NPR routinely promotes the chemical and surgical mutilation of children as so-called 'gender-affirming care' without mentioning the irreversible damage caused by these procedures.' This bullet point links to a 2023 story from Florida by Melissa Block. It's a mind-bending stretch to see NPR as 'promoting' medical care for trans kids in this journalism. The writer quotes experts — medical groups, plus an endocrinologist and a psychologist — as they each endorse the medical care. Dear White House media critics, covering an issue is not to promote one side. When the administration isn't misrepresenting the work of public media, it nitpicks political language. In the press release's final bullet point, the White House writes about the 'PBS show Sesame Street partnered with CNN on a one-sided narrative to 'address racism' amid the Black Lives Matter riots.' One-sided narrative? I wondered. Clicking the link takes you to a cheerful image of Sesame Street characters with the title, 'Coming Together: Standing Up to Racism.' What is the other side of racism that the White House wants represented here? Pro-racism? The White House should be pressured to explain the 'other side' of the debate that it is imagining, not Big Bird and PBS. (The most likely true objection to this program? Sesame Street partnered with CNN, a network Trump would defund if he could.) Taken as a whole, the list reads like a vendetta seeking a motive: Let's destroy public media, but first we need a reason. Given the White House's complaints about news coverage in their press release, it seems that the executive order is in fact retaliation. Or, consider how the NPR lawyers metaphorically put it: 'It is not always obvious when the government has acted with a retaliatory purpose in violation of the First Amendment. 'But this wolf comes as a wolf.' … The Order targets NPR and PBS expressly because, in the President's view, their news and other content is not 'fair, accurate, or unbiased.' ' And yet, there's more. Multiplying the unfairness of the lawsuit and executive order is the fundamental fairness of NPR's news coverage. As a journalism instructor at the University of Kansas, I use NPR resources in my classroom precisely because they are among the most trustworthy and unbiased. It's not just me who sees it this way. Say what you will of the charts that organize media organizations in terms of bias; NPR is one of the most centrist sources, regardless of which media critics you trust. 'Our people report straight down the line,' said NPR CEO Katherine Maher during an appearance on CBS. 'I think that not only do they do that, they do that with a mission that very few other broadcast organizations have, which is a requirement to serve the entire public. That is the point of public broadcasting. We bring people together in those conversations.' During the past few weeks, as public media has defended itself against these garbage attacks, Trump's order has been characterized as a disproportionate attack on people who live in rural areas, including large swaths of Kansas. The faces of this defense have been the CEOs of NPR and the Public Broadcasting System. Each has stressed how rural audiences will suffer. On Tuesday, Maher released a statement that repeatedly stressed the NPR's nationwide virtue of 'serving all 50 states and territories' as a source for 'tens of millions of Americans.' 'Without public dollars, NPR's investment in rural reporting initiatives, collaborative regional newsrooms, and award-winning international coverage would all be at risk,' Maher wrote. Lisa Rodriguez, interim director of content for KCUR, an affiliate station in Kansas City, appeared on the station's 'Up To Date' show to explain how small rural member stations rely on NPR. 'For KCUR, you depend on it for what you hear every day,' Rodriguez said. 'But also at these smaller stations, you don't have as rich a local journalism ecosystem. It is sometimes the only news that is reaching small communities.' To call the White House's arguments weak should not minimize their gravity. The consequences of the executive order would be catastrophic, especially to Kansans, if they hold up in court. Through the rhetoric of this executive order and its press release, Trump relishes in playing the schoolyard bully once again. This time he is not so much name calling or picking on the vulnerable. With public media, he threatens to take his ball, go home and leave Kansans stranded. Why? The bully doesn't like the way the game is being played. However, as the lawsuit makes clear, it is not his ball. And he has no right to take it. NPR and its fellow plaintiffs seek their continuing independence in their lawsuit. They quote a legal precedent that interpreted NPR's founding legislation as creating an 'elaborate structure … to insulate (broadcasters) from government interference.' Later, the suit continues, that while 'Congress is not obligated to support independent public radio with federal funds,' the government cannot remove funding in a way that unconstitutionally infringes on free speech. Unfortunately, our current Congress does not appear willing to reassert itself against Trump's hallucinatory rhetoric and orders. This week's lawsuit and its path through the courts may be the only remedy to save public broadcasting in Kansas. Eric Thomas teaches visual journalism and photojournalism at the William Allen White School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Kansas in Lawrence. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.
CNN
6 days ago
- General
- CNN
NPR sues Trump over executive order to cut funding
National Public Radio filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the Trump administration on Tuesday, alleging that President Trump's attempt to defund NPR is a 'clear violation of the Constitution.' Several NPR member stations from Colorado joined the national network in filing the suit, highlighting the local impacts of taxpayer-funded media. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, DC, says Trump's maneuvers against NPR violate both 'the expressed will of Congress and the First Amendment's bedrock guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of association.' Moreover, it 'threatens the existence of a public radio system that millions of Americans across the country rely on for vital news and information,' the lawsuit states. Trump targeted both NPR and its television counterpart, PBS, in an executive order on May 1. The president accused the public media outfits of bias and said the Corporation for Public Broadcasting must stop funding them. But the funds for public radio and TV have been allocated by Congress for decades — most recently in a bill that Trump signed into law earlier this spring. Furthermore, the corporation, CPB for short, is a private nonprofit corporation that is set up to be free of presidential interference. CPB has filed its own lawsuit against the president's attempt to fire three of its board members. PBS has also been preparing to take legal action but has not yet filed suit. This is a developing story and will be updated.
