News/Commentary

Time to derail NPR’s gravy train — Turley puts a point on what Americans have been thinking for years

February 3, 2025 | | Print Article

National Public Radio has long been criticized by Americans who feel their taxes should not be funding the biased news organization.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley couldn’t agree more and, in an opinion piece on Sunday, he called for an end to the funding, warning that the public broadcasting organization “is about to have a reckoning with precisely what it is and what it represents.”

NPR “is a state-subsidized media outlet in a country that rejects state media. It is a site that routinely pitches for its sponsors while insisting that it does not have commercials,” Turley wrote, explaining that he made fewer appearances as the Washington, D.C.-based company became “overtly political” and “intolerant of opposing views.”

The Fox News legal analyst noted how the outlet “doubled down on its one-sided coverage and commentary” despite being called out as it continued “tacking aggressively to the left” and carrying water for Democrats.

Turley weighed in on editor Uri Berliner’s blistering report on NPR last year:

(Video Credit: Fox News)

“NPR itself continues to maintain that ‘federal funding is essential’ to its work. However, this country has long rejected state media models as undermining democratic values,” Turley wrote in his op-ed, noting the outlet’s “cratering audience and revenue” as it has been forced to make substantial cuts.

“Ironically, NPR has one of the least diverse audiences in media. Its listeners are is overwhelmingly white, liberal, and more affluent than the rest of the country. Yet, while serving fewer and fewer people, it still expects most of the country to subsidize its programming,” the law professor continued.

The renewed scrutiny over NPR funding comes as Brendan Carr, the chair of the Federal Communications Commission, has questioned the organization’s claims about commercial advertising:

“I am concerned that NPR and PBS broadcasts could be violating federal law by airing commercials. In particular, it is possible that NPR and PBS member stations are broadcasting underwriting announcements that cross the line into prohibited commercial advertisements.”

Turley found it “striking” how “NPR’s shrinking audience righteously opposes any effort to cut off public subsidies.”

“While dismissing the values or views of half the country, they expect those citizens to support its programming. What would the reaction be if Congress ordered the same subsidy for more popular competitors like Fox Radio?” he asked, calling out liberal outlets that “continue to maintain their biased coverage despite falling ratings and revenues.”

These partisan media outlets “would rather lose readers and revenue than their bias,” Turley noted.

“So be it. These outlets have every right to offer their own slanted viewpoints or coverage. They do not have a right to a federal subsidy to insulate them from the response of consumers,” he wrote.

“It is time to establish a bright-line rule against government subsidies for favored media outlets. ‘This is NPR’ but it is not who we should be as a nation,” he concluded.

Social media users resoundingly agreed.

Frieda Powers
Latest posts by Frieda Powers (see all)

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles