PBS and NPR executives pledge to push back 'very hard' against White House efforts to end taxpayer support

PBS’s Paula Kerger

PBS and NPR leaders say they are exploring legal options to protect their services from President Trump's executive order barring them from receiving taxpayer dollars through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

PBS’s chief executive, Paula Kerger, "told CBS News’s Face the Nation that Republican-led threats to withdraw federal funding from public broadcasters had been around for decades but are 'different this time,' reports Edward Helmore of The Guardian. NPR’s CEO Katherine Maher agreed and said that both services will be "'pushing back very hard, because what’s at risk are our stations, our public television, our public radio stations across the country.'"

The White House maintains that taxpayer dollars should not support biased broadcasting. Helmore writes, "The order added: 'Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens.'"

NPR’s Katherine Maher

As the battle ensues, services to many rural Americans would be the first affected. Helmore reports, "Maher said in an April interview with NPR that rural stations would see the biggest impact. 'You could see some of those stations really having to cut back services or potentially going away altogether.'" NPR radio has historically been one place rural Americans turned to for emergency alerts and safety directions.

PBS stations in rural areas could also face shortfalls and possible cuts. Helmore adds, "A fact sheet from PBS says on average federal funds make up 15% of their revenue, but a funding cut would be especially acute for smaller and rural stations."

It's uncertain how Trump's executive order will be implemented. "The CPB’s budget is already approved by Congress through 2027, and in a statement to The New York Times, CPB’s president, Patricia Harrison, said the agency was not subject to the president’s authority," Helmore reports. “'Congress directly authorized and funded CPB to be a private non-profit corporation wholly independent of the federal government,' she said."

On the whole, the CPB spends "more money on less populated states," reports Alex Curley of Current. "We can also say that, despite a few blue-leaning outliers like the District of Columbia and Vermont, public media stations in states that voted Republican in the last Presidential election tended to get more Community Service Grants, or CSG money, per person than in states that voted Democrat."

The CPB awards money through its Community Service Grants, or CSGs.
(Graphic by Alex Curley, Current, from CPB data)

Some Republican legislators push for NPR and PBS cuts over alleged bias. Rural stations depend on public funds.

PBS stations in rural areas are more dependent on
tax payer money. (PBS graphic)

During recent hearings with heads of PBS and NPR, Republican legislators zeroed in on alleged reporting bias to justify "dismantling and defunding the nation’s public broadcasting system," reports David Bauder of The Associated Press. "The nation’s public broadcasting system is facing perhaps the biggest threat to its existence since it was established in 1967. . . . The broadcasters get roughly half a billion dollars in public money through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting."

While some Republicans have routinely "grumbled that PBS and NPR news programming leans left, their efforts to cut or eliminate funding usually fade because legislators want to protect their local stations — 336 of them for PBS alone, with those in rural areas most heavily dependent on taxpayer money," Bauder explains. The fact that President Donald Trump said he would 'love to' see both services cut off from federal dollars may keep GOP defunding efforts alive.

The hearings allowed "a succession of GOP lawmakers to complain bitterly about alleged bias, particularly from NPR stations, making clear it was not an issue that was going away quietly," Bauder writes. "Democrats characterized the hearing as a distraction from more important issues, like this week’s revelation that a journalist from the Atlantic was included in a text chain of Trump administration officials detailing a U.S. military strike in Yemen."

Broadcasting leaders acknowledged some past errors in judgment. "NPR President Katherine Maher said the radio network was wrong to dismiss what was on Hunter Biden’s laptop as a non-story," Bauder adds. "Although saying she is not responsible for editorial content, Maher detailed efforts by NPR to ensure a variety of political viewpoints are represented."

PBS chief executive Paula Kerger "emphasized the service that PBS provides to local communities, particularly with its educational programming for children, and said she is worried for the future of its smaller stations," Bauder reports. Kerger told the committee, “This is an existential moment for them.”

Opinion: The strongest argument for openness in government: Facts quell rumors

Jim Pumarlo

As youths we all likely tried to hide bad behavior from our parents. The truth inevitably surfaced, and we bore the brunt of punishment. Lesson: Be up front with circumstances and repercussions typically are minimized.

Newspapers should communicate the same lesson to public officials who try to keep secret what they deem sensitive or unwelcome news: Be forthright. Make it standard procedure to volunteer the news and minimize rumors.

Newsrooms work tirelessly to deliver on the “public’s right to know,” and for good reason. In the words of David Bordewyk, executive director of the South Dakota NewsMedia Association: Open government is essential to good government.

The public’s right to know was the thrust behind the SDNA’s support for a bill that passed this year’s Legislature to require all public boards to review the open meetings laws once a year, Bordewyk writes. “Keeping an eye on government and informing readers about public meetings are among the most important jobs for community news media organizations.”

Government transparency often centers on open records and open meetings laws, Bordewyk notes, acknowledging that laws can be confusing and lead to misunderstandings. So why not require an annual refresher course? It’s a great idea, one that should be pursued by other state press associations if it’s not already on the books.

At the same time, newspapers should not wait for the often lengthy and zigzag path of a worthy idea to reach the finish line. Why not initiate meetings with local officials to review and explore the intricacies of open meeting and data practices laws.

Newspapers certainly should stand on the letter of the law when seeking access to public information and meetings. Two other points should be stressed.

First, advance requests based on the spirit of openness – no matter what the law dictates. Challenge public officials to place themselves in the position of friends and neighbors seeking answers from City Hall. Would they be satisfied with “no comment”?

Second, underscore the value of setting benchmarks for community conversation. Meeting in secret or withholding information only fuels rumors. If gossip has reached the newspaper, those affected can rest assured it has circulated broadly, especially fueled by social media. At a minimum, hearsay exaggerates the facts. At worst, the whispers promote blatant falsehoods.

The opportunity to deliver facts straight from the source is one of the strongest arguments editors can present to those otherwise hesitant to share information. Citizens still may dismiss statements as a “company line,” but parameters have been set for community discussion.

The premise of openness should be delivered to the private sector as well. Companies and individuals are not subject to the same laws as public bodies, but they ought to be aware that their news is equally important to the community and often travels more quickly than a city council vote.

Conflicts over the public’s right to know often focus on a specific meeting or particular document. Officials also should be reminded of the value of everyday openness.

I vividly recall the “news” passed along by my photographer when I sat behind the editor’s desk. Word had reached his son’s elementary school that a teacher at the middle school had lost all his fingers in a lab experiment. We promptly tracked a story for that day’s edition. The superintendent set the record straight. The teacher lost a fingertip and all was handled very calmly and professionally.

Our first inquiry, however, went to the school principal. She refused comment, charging us with sensationalism. A few minutes later she called and canceled her subscription without even seeing our report. I’ll stand by our decision to pursue and publish the story. I’m certain we prevented a lot of misinformed table talk at dinners that evening.

I applaud Bordewyk and his association for securing legislation to require all public boards to review the open meetings laws once a year. In tandem, I encourage newspapers to pursue meetings to orient public officials on the laws. Nothing is more important in newspaper missions than to preserve and advance the public’s right to know.

Editors too often find themselves demanding information in confrontation. Seize the opportunity to structure these meetings as an effort to reach a common understanding.

Jim Pumarlo is former editor of the Red Wing Republican Eagle (Minn.). He writes, speaks and provides training on community newsroom success strategies. He is author of “Journalism Primer: A Guide to Community News Coverage,” “Votes and Quotes: A Guide to Outstanding Election Coverage” and “Bad News and Good Judgment: A Guide to Reporting on Sensitive Issues in Small-Town Newspapers.” He can be reached at jim@pumarlo.

Top U.S. colleges are trying harder to recruit and retain rural students; admission offers rose by 12.9% over last year

The STARS College Network works to help rural students get into
selective colleges and succeed as undergraduate students. (Adobe Stock photo)

Rural students often graduate from high school with better grades and test scores than their suburban and urban counterparts, but that rarely leads to them graduating from top U.S. college programs. To address this disparity, the STARS College Network has been working to engage and support rural undergraduates "to feel more at home at selective colleges," reports Rebecca Koenig of EdSurge. 

The STARS program brought together "16 public and private institutions committed to improving their efforts at attracting and retaining students who grew up in rural communities," Koenig writes. "Programs at member colleges include hosting summer learning opportunities and on-campus recruitment events for high schoolers and sending more admissions staff out to high schools in small towns."

The network began in 2023 and has flourished. "The consortium announced that it is doubling its membership — to include 32 colleges and universities," Koenig explains. "This growing interest is a recognition of the fact that although federal data shows 90 percent of students from rural regions graduate from high school, only about half go directly to college."

During middle school and high school, many rural students are less likely to be exposed to higher education opportunities. Historically, more selective colleges did not actively recruit in smaller communities. "Students at rural high schools may lack access to adequate counseling about college options and financial aid," Koenig reports. "Or they may not be offered classes that selective institutions look for among applicants, such as calculus."

Rigorous recruitment efforts by STARS College Network schools created a substantial increase in college offers to rural students. Koenig adds, "STARS schools extended more than 11,000 offers of admission to the Class of 2028, which was a 12.9% increase over the number of admissions offers made to rural students in their applicant pools last year."

STARS colleges see rural student retention as equally important to admission. Each school has a structure designed to help rural students transition to bigger city and school life. Avery Simpson is a STARS mentor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She told Koenig: “Coming from a rural community, sometimes we forget we’re capable of doing what other people can do. . . . I can see the impact I’m making on these students, and I can see myself in these students.”

To view the STARS College Network list of participating institutions, click here.

In a surprising move, giant publisher Penguin Random House is actively fighting book bans

A wall of banned Penguin Random House books.
(Photo by Nate Langston Palmer, WSJ)

When it comes to fighting book bans, book publishers have hugged the sidelines and quietly funded industry groups that champion First Amendment rights. But for one publishing giant, stepping into the book boxing ring has meant standing up for free speech and its authors, reports Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg of The Wall Street Journal. Penguin Random House "now fully embraces the fight against book bans, entering a sensitive debate that is playing out in school boards and statehouses across the country. At risk: potentially alienating a large chunk of customers on an issue at the crux of culture wars that have polarized the nation in ways not seen in decades."

Those who push for book bans often "believe they are targeting titles that are pornographic or otherwise inappropriate for young people," Trachtenberg writes. "The publisher's stance is that teachers, librarians and school administrators, as expert educators, already make decisions about what is appropriate for young readers, and should be left to do their jobs. . . . Despite the risks, Penguin Random House's leadership said that failing to act had moral and financial costs."

To that end, Penguin Random House has used its media might to resist bans, educate consumers and share "censored" content. "Penguin Random House has started hosting anti-book-banning events, giving away several thousand copies of its most-frequently banned titles," Trachtenberg reports. "School boards and school districts removed more than 1,500 book titles from an assortment of publishers from public school classrooms and libraries in the 12 months through June 2023, according to a recent study by PEN America, a literary and free-speech organization that has been vocal in opposing bans."

Trachtenberg reports, "When Dan Novack, Penguin Random House's associate general counsel, learned the law firm Ballard Spahr was working on a book-banning lawsuit against Escambia County School District in Florida with PEN America, he called an attorney there and asked, 'Can we get in? . . . In an early victory, a federal judge ruled the plaintiffs in the Florida case can pursue their lawsuit on First Amendment grounds."

Taking a hard line against book bans has opened Penguin Random House to deeper probes by media and well-funded book ban advocates. Despite the added scrutiny, the company's leadership feels their position supports educators. Penguin Random House CEO Nihar Malaviya told Trachtenberg: "There is always the potential for people to misinterpret our actions. We aren't pushing anything on anyone. We're supporting the experts who make decisions about books."

Do party endorsements change school board elelctions? An analysis of 10 states looks at board elections and outcomes

In 2023, most school board election winners did not have party endorsements. (Ballotpedia graph)

School board elections are primarily non-partisan, but some include candidates with party endorsements, which may provide "helpful information regarding candidates' stances and policy positions," Ballotpedia reports. However, endorsements and party affiliations can shift an election's focus onto narrow issues, which can change voter experience and election outcomes.

Ballotpedia covered every 2023 school board election and endorsements in 10 states: Colorado, Kansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin, which held 5,254 elections for 8,758 school board seats.

Democratic candidates had the most endorsements, and "among the top 10 endorsers, seven were liberal, and three were conservative," Ballotpedia reports. "The top liberal endorsers had a 68% win rate in contested elections, on average, compared to a 48% win rate among the top conservative endorsers."

"Most winning candidates received no endorsements," Ballotpedia analysis showed. "Of the 8,758 seats up for election, candidates with no endorsements won 73%, followed by liberal candidates with 15%, and conservative candidates with 11%."

Separate from endorsements, candidates can have party affiliations. Of the 10 states covered, Ballotpedia "identified that Democratic and Republican wins primarily came from districts where those parties made up a majority or plurality of voters. This remained the case both in Pennsylvania, where school board elections are partisan, and in Kansas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota, where candidates' party affiliations do not appear on the ballot."

To read more analysis accompanied by descriptive graphs and national maps by Ballotpedia, click here.

Humanities are getting cut from public university offerings, and rural areas can be affected more than others

WVU student poster protesting the cuts.
(Photo by Elaine S. Povich, Stateline)

English, history, philosophy, political science, economics, sociology and Spanish are just some of the subjects on public university chopping blocks, most of whom see the cuts as necessary to meet budget shortfalls and respond to a labor market that does not stress the humanities, reports Elaine S. Povich of Stateline. "Reductions are expected to grow across the country, particularly in rural areas where campus budgets are lower, enrollments are more likely to be falling, and where the pressure for career-oriented majors may be greater. But critics argue that such changes in emphasis will sap states of intellectual firepower, leaving them with fewer leaders and citizens who are well-rounded."

"Humanities courses such as languages, history, arts and literature are particularly vulnerable nationwide. Schools are more inclined to emphasize business, science, math and technology studies, which could lead to more high-paying jobs," Povich explains. "State budget reductions and schools' funding shortfalls also have contributed to cuts, particularly in rural states. State spending on higher education fell in 16 of the 20 most rural states between 2008 and 2018, when adjusted for inflation, according to a Hechinger Report analysis of data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research and policy institute that advocates for left-leaning tax policies."

While statistics show fewer college students are working toward humanities degrees, those who are feel shortchanged and question administrators' intentions when even other majors are cut. A group of West Virginia University students, "led by senior math major Matthew Kolb, of Follansbee, West Virginia, protested on campus this fall, joined by some faculty members whose jobs are being cut," Povich reports. "But it was no use; the school announced that it would eliminate 8% of its majors and the Ph.D. program in mathematics. The school also is cutting faculty in career-oriented departments such as mining engineering and petroleum and natural gas engineering."

WVU English professor Adam Komisaruk says, "The larger question is what state universities want to be."  He told Povich: "Is our mission as a university simply to respond to market forces and popular prejudice and to make educational decisions based on supply and demand? Or are we committed to providing a robust and diverse exposure to modes of thought that will allow our students to become knowledgeable, responsible, ethical, and engaged members of society?"

"Rural students can be particularly affected by university cuts, said Andrew Koricich, executive director for the Alliance for Research on Regional Colleges and an associate professor at Appalachian State University in North Carolina," Povich reports. "As West Virginia is a mostly rural state, a higher proportion of its students come from rural areas." He told Povich: "A lot of states are shifting more toward looking at higher education not just as a public good but as a cost-benefit calculation. Then it becomes a value judgment whether rural students deserve the same education as urban institutions and students."