The Static Signal: Trump’s Latest Cut at Public Broadcasting

If the truth sounds biased, maybe that says more about the listener.

On May 1st, 2025, former President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing the defunding of public broadcasting institutions, namely the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which serves as the primary funding engine behind both PBS and NPR. The move comes under the pretense of fighting “institutional bias” and “liberal propaganda” within American media—a refrain that has become increasingly common in partisan rhetoric. Yet the actual mechanics and implications of this action reveal something deeper: a political effort to choke off one of the last bastions of publicly accountable journalism.

What the Executive Order Actually Says

The executive order directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to begin the process of zeroing out discretionary funds earmarked for CPB, despite those funds already being approved by Congress in prior budget cycles. The White House claims authority to divert or withhold appropriated funds by labeling public media “non-essential” and “inconsistent with the administration’s communications objectives.”

However, this move enters murky constitutional waters. The power of the purse belongs to Congress—not the Executive. While presidents may propose budgets, only Congress can appropriate funds. Once appropriated and signed into law, presidents are constitutionally obligated to execute the budget as written. Any attempt to unilaterally withhold or divert funding already approved could trigger legal challenges under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

This is not theoretical. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruled in 2020 that the Trump administration’s previous withholding of Ukrainian military aid violated this same statute. Legal scholars expect a similar challenge if implementation of this order begins.

Are PBS and NPR Actually Biased?

Trump’s justification hinges on the idea that public broadcasters hold an institutional bias against him. But that criticism falls apart under scrutiny. The CPB was designed specifically to create a firewall between journalism and government interference. In fact, PBS and NPR are governed by independent boards, receive a relatively small portion of their funding from federal sources (around 15%), and follow rigorous editorial guidelines aligned with journalistic best practices.

Congress has, for decades, treated CPB funding as nonpartisan support for educational and civic programming, especially for rural, low-income, and underserved communities. Many lawmakers—even some conservatives—view PBS and NPR not as political adversaries, but as neutral conduits of fact-based reporting, history, science, and cultural programming. Accusing them of bias is like accusing a thermometer of favoring cold fronts. If their reporting is critical, perhaps it’s simply because the facts are, too.

Why This Matters to Your Local News

The loss of federal funding to public media isn’t just an attack on “Sesame Street” or “All Things Considered.” It’s a threat to your local news.

Many morning and evening newscasts on your local cable or antenna stations rely on reporting and resources from national public news services like NPR, PBS, and wire agencies such as the Associated Press and Reuters. Local newsrooms, already strapped for budget and staff, often syndicate coverage from these national outlets to deliver fact-based, timely, and verified news. Remove those sources, and what’s left is a vacuum—one that can be quickly filled by opinion-heavy infotainment or algorithmically driven content designed for engagement, not accuracy.

Moreover, public media is often the last outlet covering local issues with any depth—school board meetings, town halls, state legislation. When NPR affiliates or PBS stations go dark, we lose not just national stories, but the connective tissue of civic life in small towns and counties across the country.

A Dangerous Precedent

Defunding PBS and NPR sends a dangerous message: that journalism is only acceptable when it flatters those in power. But the role of journalism isn’t to comfort presidents. It’s to inform citizens. This executive order doesn’t just aim to cut funding—it aims to delegitimize the very idea of independent, publicly accountable media.

That’s not a budget issue. That’s a democracy issue.