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

Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

cpb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 596 posts

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#71

Post by Brohampton »

mikepurvis wrote: post #37
bhouston wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain and reference sources? Otherwise it is a pretty vague comment.

Mass deportations was right there in Project 2025, the "plan" about which Trump claimed to have no knowledge during the campaign: https://www.aclu.org/project-2025-explained Dude can barely string two sentences together— can't tell when a photo has been annotated and has no idea what Signal is. Thinks "groceries" is an old-fashioned word. It's pretty clear at this point that it's others behind the curtain running thi…

By that logic wouldn't any of the presidents since Regan be fulfilling project 2025s "Mass deportations". Trump admin is behind even the previous admins total deportations at this point in the term. And they're being extremely lenient to businesses who hire illegal immigrants (which breaks the law) and even encouraging it.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#72

Post by mike_hearn »

hadrien01 wrote: post #2

I suppose this is in response to this executive order: ENDING TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZATION OF BIASED MEDIA https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/05/endi... I would add that PBS has this to say about public media funding: > The U.S. is almost literally off the chart for how little we allocate towards our public media. At the federal level, it comes out to a little over $1.50 per person per year. Compare that…

PBS would say that.

Back here in reality the BBC is trusted by only about 40-44% of the British population, and actively distrusted by around a quarter. The true number who trust it is probably lower, as those polls suffer volunteering bias and other problems that push responses to the left when there's no ground truth to weight to.

There's a profound moral problem with forcing people to pay money for media they actively distrust or despise. There's certainly no link between "health" of a democracy and the funding level of state-funded media, unless you're the sort of person who defines a healthy society as one where everyone believes the government all the time.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#73

Post by erkt »

Not much of a quote.

> “CPB is not a federal executive agency subject to the President’s authority. Congress directly authorized and funded CPB to be a private nonprofit corporation wholly independent of the federal government.

“In creating CPB, Congress expressly forbade ‘any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over educational television or radio broadcasting, or over [CPB] or any of its grantees or contractors…’ 47 U.S.C. § 398(c).”

I listen to NPR every day, have for over fifteen years. There is a lot more yelling at the radio these days. They are very open with their bias. They only promote programing that services the lefts cultural position. There is not a shred of balanced coverage here. They treat their economic and moral theory as accepted and undisputed fact. This isn't news anymore.

Congress is forbidden from exercising editorial control, but is China? Love when they choose to push articles like this, or focus on Tik tok "stealing data" rather than "shamelessly influencing our children" with that data. https://www.npr.org/2025/01/15/nx-s1-5260742/tiktok-china-re...

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#74

Post by Eextra953 »

Another lame attempt at ruling by decree. The CPB was deliberately designed with guardrails to avoid partisanship - the president appoints board members, and no more than five from the same party.

If you've listened to NPR or watched PBS, you know they're about as neutral as you can get while still covering both mainstream sides.

This style of governance is so lazy - instead of working through Congress to change the law, he tries to bully an independent board into doing what he wants. It's also so easy to oppose, the board can just ignore it.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#75

Post by cyberlurker »

next_xibalba wrote: post #67
cyberlurker wrote: post #14

Is it unusual for an executive order to claim something like this without any citation or reference? > The CPB fails to abide by these principles to the extent it subsidizes NPR and PBS. > 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.

To wit, during the BLM riots of 2020, NPR published a piece on how looting was a legitimate form of protest. I mark that as the moment they lost both my trust and my attention. A very sad, eye opening moment for me.

If true, that is insane and if presented as factual those involved should be fired. But throwing the baby out with the bath water is not sensible.

Oh and to my original point, why is this not cited or linked to in the executive order? I think it would strengthen it if anything.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#76

Post by alabastervlog »

ty6853 wrote: post #24
wffurr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do the courts enforce their rulings if the executive branch is wholly beholden to the president? It’s already a big problem for the DoJ. See https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-situation--formalis...

Even judge Xinis [kilmar garcia] was talking a big game, but then folded after promising 'expedited discovery' and the consideration of contempt. She delays week after week and grants the executive the right to hide under the shadows under seal so the public can't know what's happening, even though prior she bragged about forcing them to file these updates with the public. The court folds and folds when they realize…

Some folks speculate that this judge in particular has realized she's either got to keep permitting delays and obvious shenanigans, or she gets to go into the history books as the judge whose case was the breaking point at which the executive went completely, mask-off lawless. Folks suppose she'd prefer someone else get that honor, so is hoping to let the government delay long enough that the case is mooted (because the dude's dead) or another case gets to that point first.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#77

Post by gwd »

hypeatei wrote: post #25
bhouston wrote: post #3

The US is so weird right now. You have a President who is ordering the defunding of tons of groups (universities, media, aid, institutes) while not clearly having that authority and often doing so for what he views as ideological crimes. Also arresting and trying to deport people for things that are not clearly crimes (newspaper op-eds, etc) and without due process. Very strange times. Right now I have some faith the…

> Right now I have some faith the courts in the US will stand up to this I think "the guardrails will hold" thinking is flawed when you have someone who is willing to completely side step the system and push the limits. We're not actually sure what holding someone from this administration in contempt even looks like functionally since U.S. marshals are under the DOJ.

I think the guardrails were designed to hold someone like Trump once; and then afterwards he was supposed to be convicted of his crimes, or at least never elected again. The guardrails are fundamentally held in place by hundreds of thousands of individuals making individual decisions. People who are asked to break the law can expect that in a few years they'll be vindicated, or at least fear that in a few years they would be punished for going along with the illegal orders.

I'm much more worried about the guardrails when people like that get re-elected: suddenly going along with the illegal action is by far the safest thing to do.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#78

Post by shadowgovt »

afavour wrote: post #62
bhouston wrote: post #3

The US is so weird right now. You have a President who is ordering the defunding of tons of groups (universities, media, aid, institutes) while not clearly having that authority and often doing so for what he views as ideological crimes. Also arresting and trying to deport people for things that are not clearly crimes (newspaper op-eds, etc) and without due process. Very strange times. Right now I have some faith the…

> Right now I have some faith the courts in the US will stand up to this and get the US back on track I don't mean to sound hysterical but I don't share your faith for two main reasons: - my faith in the Supreme Court diminishes with every year. It is clear a majority are far more motivated by ideology than a straightforward reading of the law - Trump can just ignore the courts. We're not there yet but all signs show…

The Courts have no enforcement power. If the Executive proves unwilling to accede to court orders, the Courts don't have the legal ability to use violence to compel the Executive.

At that point, it comes down to whether Congress will impeach and remove. If Congress will not impeach and remove, the Courts are defanged and we functionally have (at least) four years of Executive rule with no legal check on that authority. If Congress will impeach and remove, it comes down to whether the Executive complies.

If the Executive does not comply...

... the point is, a lot in the American system actually hinges on the Executive's consent. And the man in the chair right now has no incentive to consent (he knows the moment the chair is no longer his, the weight of the American legal system will come down on his head and he'll at least spend the rest of his life in court cases if not incarcerated. Multiple states want his ass on a platter for crimes in their jurisdictions outside of his function as President).

It's a very dangerous time for the American Experiment, existentially.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#79

Post by laborcontract »

UncleMeat wrote: post #54
laborcontract wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the while, I don't think I've ever loved our country as much as now because I think this is a time where our system of checks and balances can come to shine. I do hope this experience will lead to people re-evaluating their love of FDR. You can like what he stood for, but he was an equal if not (much) greater abuser of the executive office.

FDR's major lasting accomplishments that people praise him for were through legislation. Even things like the threat to pack the court would have happened through legislation. There are some highly visible examples of direct executive action that I hope everyone today sees as authoritarian (japanese internment being the really big one). But FDR's expansion of the executive is the opposite of what Trump is doing. Trum…

The internment of the Japanese cannot be brushed off. That was a gross violation of power that, if Trump were to do something similar, would tear this country apart. On top of that, one of the side effects of the internment is that it's sowed a deep distrust in the federal government and the Census that continues to harm representation to this day.

They used Census data to round people up. It doesn't get much worse than that.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#80

Post by esafak »

josefritzishere wrote: post #28
bhouston wrote: post #3

The US is so weird right now. You have a President who is ordering the defunding of tons of groups (universities, media, aid, institutes) while not clearly having that authority and often doing so for what he views as ideological crimes. Also arresting and trying to deport people for things that are not clearly crimes (newspaper op-eds, etc) and without due process. Very strange times. Right now I have some faith the…

I find that many of us, somewhat passively, including myself, have been using the term "strange" to describe the American poltitical situation. I think this is to avoid using more charged political terms that are actaully more accurate like fascist, authoritarian, dictator... These are dictionary words which are increasingly apropos.

As long as they don't start proudly calling themselves that...
Post reply on HN