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

211–220 of 596 posts

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#211

Post by chii »

nemomarx wrote: post #176
footlose_3815 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ramping-up authoritarianism. Since he had a whole party who was shielding him from every single law he broke, even up to corrupting the supreme court. He's now completely unfettered. As far as I'm concerned, his actions frequently have no legitimacy, and he's too shortsighted that he wouldn't expect the same treatment when he leaves office if democrats grew spines. The 2026 midterms will be essential in checking his…

Do you expect free and fair elections in 2026?

i do, and i expect the gun toting NRA people to actually enforce elections, if there's even a whiff of trying to maintain power. Otherwise, they'd be gun toting hypocrites.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#212

Post by wing-_-nuts »

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…

>It's pretty clear at this point that it's others behind the curtain running this show.

Honestly, the fact that he's now surrounded on all sides by Curtis Yarvin acolytes should have us deeply concerned. I fear someone with that ideology who's maliciously competent coming to power.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#213

Post by lucky_cloud »

bluGill wrote: post #84
JSR_FDED wrote: post #8

When I first moved to the US (Bay Area) and discovered NPR in my first week there I almost couldn’t believe that there was such a source of high quality and thoughtful programming. The value destruction of the last few months has been astonishing.

NPR gets the vast majority of funding (last I checked) from members. So make sure you donate at their next pledge drive.

Same for PBS and its member stations.

The only truly worrying part of the EO for me is the "The heads of all agencies shall identify and terminate, to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, any direct or indirect funding of NPR and PBS."

Some of the most interesting work we've done has been almost completely funded by the Department of Education.

The station I work for has many sources of revenue but I suspect this will harm some smaller stations.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#214

Post by next_xibalba »

kaishiro wrote: post #168
next_xibalba wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What in the world are you on about? They published an interview with an author who had - admittedly - controversial takes looting. You make it sound like they were telling people to go smash windows. It's telling that you chose not to link the actual piece: https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/08/27/906642178...

The “admission” was not part of the original publication. They added both that note and changed the title well after the fact.

https://archive.is/2020.08.27-191914/https://www.npr.org/sec...

The mere fact that they platformed such an extreme, insane viewpoint is the issue. If you can find a similarly sympathetic platforming of a far right nutter by NPR, maybe I’ll take you seriously. Show me one NPR story about the J6 riots that contorts this far to justify and I’ll concede the point entirely.

I listened to NPR for over 20 years and the bias became gag worthy toward the end.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#215

Post by alabastervlog »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #163
alabastervlog wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Fox News of the left When I watch Fox News it's usually pretty easy to spot several things that are simply made-up per day. Including entire stories. You hear much of that on NPR? [EDIT] FWIW I think NPR news is god-awful, because they focus way too much on horse-race politics crap and Monday-morning quarterbacking campaigns, I suppose because they're so scared shitless by accusations of bias that they prefer t…

The things is that when "news" is compared, the divisions tend to be much smaller (but still definitely there). But people don't think of NPR news and Fox News news. They think of (and what they actually pay attention to) are the opinion shows that dominate the ratings. That is where the gulf is huge and things are totally out of control. It's much more tame in the 10 minute segments of running down headlines for the…

The news portions of Fox News make shit up. They run things on the ticker that aren't real.

It's also largely opinion shows, which are entirely political. NPR is very much not that.

When people make these kinds of comparisons, I wonder if they actually watch Fox News (and if they fact check it, if they do, or just assume "oh yeah all this is true and the only reason nobody else except far-right sources mention it is because of bias") or if they're going by reputation and making assumptions. It's wildly bad as a news source, in fact.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#216

Post by BanazirGalbasi »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #125
cyberlurker wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you share what the courts have done? What I’ve witnessed is cowardice to hold officials accountable or in contempt for unconstitutional acts.

the scotus (and, notably, conservative lower federal judges) has ruled pretty firmly against trump on the abrego garcia case.

What action has been taken as a result of that ruling though? The Supreme Court might as well give the president a big thumbs down if nothing actually happens.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#217

Post by stackbutterflow »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #89
arcbyte wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this as a firm conservative. The courts have so far been outstanding, despite all the inappropriate pressure. I have no doubt they will continue to be. I'm also quite impressed with conservative voters who are speaking out to their conservative representatives. Ultimately though, despite many many calls not to do so, Congress has goven the executive branch unheard of powers. Executive power needs to be reigned…

The funny thing is, that the GOP is not "conservative," in any way, whatsoever. They are extreme. The definition of "conservative" means "not-extreme." It is not just "not-liberal." It means being thoughtful, cautious, sticking with the mainstream, learning from the past, not discarding learned wisdom, etc. Things like anti-abortion, hate-brown-people, put-women-back-in-the-kitchen-or-the-bedroom etc. stuff is often…

The definition of conservative is conserving the monarchy during the french revolution.

From the start it was and remain to this day an ideology for those currently in power to conserve their power.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#218

Post by vel0city »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #181
vel0city wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The courts have so far been exceptionally weak. Hey, you're not allowed to send those people on the plane! The plane already left even though I told you not to send it? Well, you gotta get them back! You're not sending them back? I'll just keep telling you that you have to do it, that'll really show you! Oh, pretty please, would you return that man you illegally sent to that torture prison? No? Oh, ok, well would you…

The courts have successfully enjoined a large number of actions, required the release of many people from domestic ICE custody, and ended the transfer of anyone new to El Salvador. As I'm always reminding people, the news is a highly optimized machine to deliver you the worst thing that happened today - if you're reading it as though it's a representative sample of everything that's happening, you're going to get a m…

So, is Abrego Garcia back in the US and actually having a real trial? What of the other 200+ people who were illegally taken? Still there despite many court orders to return them?

The courts have asked for those people to be released from ICE custody, they haven't complied with a lot of those requests. The courts have asked for them to stop abducting people off the streets without cause but they continue doing it.

Its not a misleading perspective when it's the actual facts and reality. You're acting like well he only send a few hundred people to a torture prison so far, no big deal I guess. He's only deporting some US citizens without due process. He's only arguing having court cases for some crimes is too cumbersome so we should ignore due process for those crimes.

When will they end up charging you with a crime that's too cumbersome to prove in court and thus you no longer get due process? When your imprisonment gets publicized for how terrible it is, will you also be happy to have people shrug off that reporting as a "misleading perspective"?

Every one of those things should be klaxons sounding in the streets.

We'll see if there really aren't any more transfers to El Salvador.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#219

Post by shadowgovt »

chii wrote: post #199
shadowgovt wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 authorit…

> Multiple states want his ass on a platter for crimes in their jurisdictions outside of his function as President if this were truly the case, then the orange man will fight to remain in power indefinitely. There should and need to be a civil war 2.0 if this happens - lest the bastion of western democracy falls (and it will, if that comes to pass). Then china is the least of the USA's problems. But perhaps this is t…

Correct. This is why I take his "jokes" about a third term quite seriously.

It is not even necessary he be, formally, a Russian foreign asset; his actions would be beneficial to Russia whether or not they actively supported him. It cannot be overstated: he is a man who believes in will-to-power logic, has consistently operated on the principle of "whatever they let me get away with is good," and has no incentive to ever stop being President.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#220

Post by faster »

afavour wrote: post #29
bhouston wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I would imagine Project 2025 is a good source here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 Every American owes it to themselves to familiarize themselves with the project and its aims, because a number of its authors are the ones wielding power right now.

Here's a dashboard. https://www.project2025.observer/

Not a substitute for reading the doc but good for a quick overview.

Post reply on HN