Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 1001 posts

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#811

Post by just-ok »

sigmar wrote: post #773
just-ok wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has NPR evolved since its inception? Sure. But "nor has it ever been" is... misleading at best: > Funding for NPR comes from [...other sources...] and annual grants from the publicly-funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Hmm, let's look into said Corporation: > On February 26, 1970, the CPB formed National Public Radio (NPR) > The CPB's annual budget is composed almost entirely of an annual appropriation from C…

Not sure if you realize that "State-affiliated" has a very different meaning than "received government funds"

Of course, but NPR's origins are from a government-controlled organization.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#813

Post by relaxing »

AlbertCory wrote: post #754
d23 wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR is not nor has it ever been state-affiliated media in any reasonable sense of the word. Is it a full stop, bald-face lie.

[flagged]

Here you go: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/25/1059262052/a-u-s-weapons-sale...

Criticism of the DNC specifically (and Biden): https://www.npr.org/2022/12/08/1141499760/concerns-arise-ove...

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#814

Post by whydoyoucare »

TobyTheDog123 wrote: post #582
whydoyoucare wrote: post #560

If NPR is really concerned about getting balanced news to the masses, then their decision to quit twitter, in the lack of an alternative and equivalent platform, seems short-sighted and more like a temper tantrum of a kindergartner, than that of a thoughtful and mature news organization. It also reinforces the conspiracy theories that they were never truly independent. By making a stinker about this issue, they are t…

I'm one of the people who thinks "government-funded" is a fair label (though "state-affiliated" isn't as it implies editorial control). However, not putting up with someone's (or a company's) antics is not a temper-tantrum, nor a factor in if their decision was "adult" or not. If an organization is offended by a company's decision, then what's wrong with their decision to leave? Why would they tarnish their brand by…

While I don't have proof, I believe the screaming of NPR about this issue was deliberate (yet again) attempt at painting Musk as the "Evil Overlord" about to destroy the very fabric of fairness, democracy and society.

And I never implied NPR cannot or should not leave if they disagree. The BBC example was simply drawing parallels with someone who made no stink about this and chose to stay. To my knowledge, there was no attempt from NPR to have that label corrected, which seems to be the first logical step.

Off topic, I never found NPR to be neutral or unbiased. They are great pretenders of neutrality though.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#815

Post by fortuna86 »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #168
throwawaylinux wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because the bulk of NPRs funding comes from the dues of member stations most of which are non-profits and receive funding from a myriad of sources. From wikipedia: Although NPR receives less than 1% of its direct funding from the federal government, member stations (which pay dues amounting to approximately one third of NPR's revenue), tend to receive far larger portions of their budgets from state governments, and…

https://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finance... 31% of their funding comes from member stations. 13% of member station funding comes from government sources. In total that would make about 31% * 13% = 4%.

> 13% of member station funding comes from government sources

What is the source of this number? Also is 4% as opposed to 1% a change that alters any of the underlying fundamentals ?

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#816

Post by fortuna86 »

starbase wrote: post #213

Here's what NPR's own website says about their federal funding: "Federal funding is essential to public radio's service to the American public and its continuation is critical for both stations and program producers, including NPR." "Public radio stations receive annual grants directly from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB)" "The loss of federal funding would undermine the stations' ability to pay NPR for…

Yes, every organization when faced with potential budget cuts refers to all of their budget as "essential". This should not be surprising.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#817

Post by ashwagary »

hilbertseries wrote: post #504
DrThunder wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't. Just because you say you do doesn't make it so. When a big part of your funding comes from the people that can vote to cut it at any moment you do not have true independence. This is as silly as the argument saying the 1st amendment isn't violated by social media when you have the government literally asking these companies for censorship.

NPR continuing to publish programming critical of Trump during the Trump presidency, is a pretty strong indication they have editorial independence.

Threats were made by the Trump admin when NPR had unfavorable reporting.

'Trump proposes eliminating federal funding for PBS, NPR' https://thehill.com/homenews/media/373434-trump-proposes-eli...

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#818

Post by cauch »

AlbertCory wrote: post #780
detaro wrote: post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then lets run the same statistics for administrations from the other side. After all, state-controlled media would have to follow switching government lines on this, so it'll show Republicans loving NPR and Democrats hating it during the previous administration, correct?

So you're agreeing on their political affiliation? Let's just get that out of the way first.

To get that out of the way, you can follow the smart process proposed by the person you answer to: If indeed the organization is biased because government funded, it means that they will never publish stories that the government is not happy with. So, under Biden, they will not publish stories that Democrats don't like, and under Trump, they will not publish stories that Republicans don't like.

If it is not the case, then they are not biased because government funded. They may be politically biased for other reason, but it does not matter if they are government funded or not, and it is stupid to give them a label "government funded" to warn about bias if "government funded" has nothing to do with this bias. Especially because it means that non-government-funded organization can be as biased but not have any label.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#819

Post by AlbertCory »

relaxing wrote: post #813
AlbertCory wrote: post #754

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Here you go: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/25/1059262052/a-u-s-weapons-sale... Criticism of the DNC specifically (and Biden): https://www.npr.org/2022/12/08/1141499760/concerns-arise-ove...

That's really the best you can do? One story that amplifies NPR's dislike of Saudi Arabia ("Yemen" is hardly the centerpiece of Biden foreign policy), and another claiming there's dislike of the Democratic primary calendar?

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#820

Post by relaxing »

PathOfEclipse wrote: post #774
daemoens wrote: post #727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the NPR receives almost no money from the federal government. Read the article. It receives less than 1 percent of its $300 million annual budget from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

From Wikipedia: Although NPR receives less than 1% of its direct funding from the federal government, member stations (which pay dues amounting to approximately one third of NPR's revenue), tend to receive far larger portions of their budgets from state governments, and also the US government through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 1/3 isn't 100%, but it's also far from insignificant.

Hold on, 1/3 of what? What funding paid the dues back to CPB?

My local affiliate breaks their funding down as 50% member support, 40% corporate/charitable underwriting, 10% state/local govt funding. Maybe other NPR affiliates also get federal grants, but this one doesn’t.

Seems like we’re back to a pretty small fraction of funding for the US State to exert hard control over the content produced.

Post reply on HN