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

511–520 of 596 posts

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#511

Post by const_cast »

tart-lemonade wrote: post #275
next_xibalba wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That acknowledgement was tacked on well after publication. Even interviewing this person was an absurdity and revelatory of the kind of bias at npr. Truly insane.

> That acknowledgement was tacked on well after publication. The original title was "One Author's Argument 'In Defense Of Looting'". https://web.archive.org/web/20200827191914/https://www.npr.o... > Even interviewing this person was an absurdity and revelatory of the kind of bias at npr. So news organizations should not cover things which may seem sensational, especially those which are being actively talked about in…

Right, these people are essentially arguing in favor of censorship. Basically, we should water down views and filter out extremists. Which is a great way to make insane people seem rational... which I think is a media phenomena we should all be familiar with by now.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#512

Post by const_cast »

xienze wrote: post #140
pjc50 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, one piece of free speech justifies deleting the entire station.

I suppose you’d feel the same if Fox News said J6 was a legitimate political protest, right.

Well, they did say that and continue to say that. And, the president has literally pardoned the insurrectionists... so...

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#513

Post by mrguyorama »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #255
nemomarx wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you expect free and fair elections in 2026?

Yes. It's structurally hard for the federal government to subvert elections since they're run by the states, and Trump hasn't historically shown any interest in doing so for elections he's not personally a candidate in. Musk's trial balloon for stochastic electoral bribery didn't work.

Which party controls the majority of state's governments, I ask you?

There was immense ratfuckery by those states; purging voter rolls of as many people as they could, trying to kill vote by mail, outright threats of poll workers (which very few people were prosecuted for), illegal politicking at the polls, and a literal phone call to induce a governor to falsify their election results.

170 Republican House reps voted to ignore the election of 2020. We are already past "free and fair" elections.

Donald Trump pardoned all the criminals who were attempting to storm that vote and delay/kill it. That was their intended goal. They tried to have Mike Pence abducted

Christ, the 2000 election was stolen by Republicans! The brook's brother's riot was Roger Stone's baby! Al Gore won the state once the ballots were actually counted.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#514

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

kbelder wrote: post #489
xienze wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is to avoid using more charged political terms that are actaully more accurate like fascist, authoritarian, dictator Because those words have been overused to the point of no one caring anymore. For those too young to remember, George W. Bush was _also_ called “literally Hitler”, a fascist, dumbest man alive, you name it. The left’s go-to of labeling every single Republican “Nazi” for decades is partia…

This is true, but attacks on the democratic presidents have been just as moronic.

This is moot to the boy-who-cried-wolf point; the thoughtfulness of criticism towards Republicans doesn't matter right now because criticism towards them in the past has been sufficiently thoughtless. There is a lesson to be learned there.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#515

Post by mrguyorama »

MurkyLabs wrote: post #16
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…

Isn't it crazy that the supposed 'biased media' directly targets PBS who I know from watching children's shows as well as NOVA (it's been going for 51 seasons). These shows don't scream biased to me, they scream educational.

You must understand, the culture war types are so absurdly radical that BEN SHAPIRO's adult cartoon was considered "woke" because it had a gay character who was the butt of every joke, and that was not harsh enough to satisfy them.

They do not want LGBTQ people to be acknowledged in any way, or be allowed to exist.

They would ban the Golden Girls if they could. They WILL try.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#516

Post by sershe »

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…

$100 per person per year is an insane amount of spending on an information outlet controlled by the government.

The value of public broadcasting to me is 0, but I do occasionally get exposed to NPR thru other people listening to it and it appears extremely biased to me. My favorite example was when a woman who is quite "woke" politically turned off some NPR program about the perils of patriarchy that i was involuntarily listening to. I asked why and it was too cringe even for her.

Why would I want to pay for that?

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#517

Post by mlhpdx »

joshstrange wrote: post #233
mlhpdx wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you checked that? As it turns out, public radio is very popular in rural areas. May I also point out that your assumptions and stereotypes only serve to reinforce others’ entrenchments.

> May I also point out that your assumptions and stereotypes only serve to reinforce others’ entrenchments. This is often repeated but I can't see how it could possibly hold true. Demonizing the other side has worked splendidly for republicans. Voters don't seem to care. Sure, they'll act all up in arms about "deplorables" (spoiler: they were then and are now, Hillary would have probably gone further by doubling down…

For the sake of clarity, I’m not being nice and don’t expect it from others. I do however respect your contribution to the conversation and opinions.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#518

Post by 93po »

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.

This is simply not true, at all, and NPR themselves deliberately try to obfuscate the truth.

"NPR's two largest revenue sources are corporate sponsorships and fees paid by NPR Member organizations"

NPR member organizations are government funded, and then that government funding rolls back up to NPR. So, they're mostly funded by ads and the government. Source in other comment.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#519

Post by whodidntante »

thisisit wrote: post #396
whodidntante wrote: post #104

I watch/listen to a variety of news sources - CNN, Fox News, NPR, NYTimes, WSj, as well as a number of smaller podcasts and substacks. There are no longer "unbiased" news sources, all sources have moved to either the left or right. I used to have respect for NPR, today it is, to me, the Fox News of the left, and no different than other sources. I do not have a problem with that, it is what it is. But it should not be…

> There are no longer "unbiased" news sources, all sources have moved to either the left or right. > Try listening to the president of NPR at the congressional hearing and then her interview on NPR done shortly after that hearing. For the former, she was unable/unwilling to express any opinions, nor was she able to recall anything she personally said/posted for the past two years. For the latter, she was fed a series…

I agree there was always bias in the media. I think that back in the day, when things were not as polarized and not everything was corrupted by politics, the biases were not as large or as important - there was a lot more common ground.

Today, there is extreme polarization, and it is probably impossible to provide a single news source that is "objective" or "unbiased".

I am not making an ethnic or political judgement here. And, yes, I know there will be those who say you have to make a judgment because there is only one viewpoint today that is correct, that the other side is just lying and distorting. And which direction this goes depends on who you speak with.

For me, the only way to maximize what little understanding I have of the world is to go to various news sources. And I am not talking about understanding in the sense of listening to different viewpoints (which is part of it), but actually getting all the "facts", and by "facts" I mean actual events/stories. What people leave out is as important as what they put in.

I am well aware of Fox's issues. And NPR seems like the "nice guys". And I learn things from both that I could not get from one alone. And maybe Fox has more sinister lies and misrepresentations than NPR, and it is my job to sort through that. But for me, I feel Fox is pretty far to the right for me, and NPR is very far to the left for me in their viewpoints and in what they choose to present. So, for me, they are similar, for others, maybe not.

I don't care if the CEO is left leaning or right leaning. But both Fox and NPR conveniently leave out a lot of the story that does not align with their views.

And I do not believe either should get government funding. When we had a society with more homogeneous views, maybe it was ok for the government to fund news sources that provided something that fit within the views of the majority of the population. That is no longer possible.

Re: Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order

#520

Post by mrguyorama »

golemotron wrote: post #330

The idea that Congress can set up agencies that are outside the control of the Executive needs to be revisited. It leads to rogue, unaccountable bureaucracy.

The entire point of the constitution is to remove control from the Executive.

The point was to eliminate the concept of a king. The president was meant as a figurehead, with almost no power.

Post reply on HN