3 ms·

> Federal funding is essential to public radio's service to the American public and its continuation is critical for both stations and program producers, includ

> 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. > On average, less than 1% of NPR's annual operating budget comes in the form of grants from CPB and federal agencies and departments. https://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finances https://www.npr.org/about-npr/178660742/public-radio-finance... "Less than 1%" is still more than 0. Sounds like NPR is, in part, Government-funded Media, making the Twitter label accurate, at least on face value. If they don't want to be labeled as such, they can't accept government funding. I'm sure if the US government attached strings to their money, NPR would roll over and do whatever is asked.

Timon3 4y ago
> I'm sure if the US government attached strings to their money, NPR would roll over and do whatever is asked. What do you base this on?
- infamouscow 4y ago
  The US government doesn't hand out tax payers money without stipulations attached.
  - Timon3 4y ago
    Is it only the US government, or all governments? Wasn't the COVID stimulus tax payer money handed out without stipulations?
    - infamouscow 4y ago
      I can't speak to other governments, but in the US there are two related programs with plenty of requirements, conditions, and stipulations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paycheck_Protection_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paycheck_Protection_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARES_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARES_Act
      - Timon3 4y ago
        Okay, but the funding for NPR must also have some stipulations, since a normal American can't just access it. There's probably something on the CBP grants page[1], I didn't look too deep. So if the whole point is that the money comes with stipulations, this seems to be fulfilled without a need for hidden content control through the state. Shouldn't we, as per Occams Razor, not assume that NPR really has creative control? https://cpb.org/grants https://cpb.org/grants
        infamouscow 4y ago
        I agree in principle, but this rationale isn't applied consistently. It's applied selectively and it's hypocrisy of the selective application that I'm trying to tease out. As a thought experiment let's imagine a parallel universe where we replace NPR with RT. Now imagine a Russian HN where two people are having a similar discussion about RT being Russian state-sponsored media. In that context would Occam's Razor apply? And if not, why? Pointing to Western fact-checkers isn't going to convince a Russian living in Russia any more than an American pointing to fact-checkers from RT is going to persuade an American. They've been indoctrinated by the public school system from an early age. In this imaginary universe Russia still doesn't have a 1A, but even without one, it doesn't follow that RT wouldn't be able to exert the same creative control as NPR. Any fact that could be seen to reflect poorly on the government is very easy to omit without compromising control and ensures no direct or indirect evidence of collusion. Another option would be to rely on a neutral third party. The problem with that is if the majority of institutions are already captured, a third party reporting the truth has to overcome an overwhelming counter-narrative of "fact-checkers" and imbeciles parroting rhetoric like "surely all of these people can't be wrong" and other appeals to authority. I'm not entirely convinced this is true, but suppose so. How would you go about proving or disproving the validity of this capture from within the system?
SkipperCat 4y ago
I think you are incorrect. The government hands money out all the time with no strings attached. Mortgage interest deduction, electric car tax credits, charitable donations. I've never heard anyone ever report that NPR has answered to the Federal government in any manner regarding their reporting.
- theandrewbailey 4y ago
  > The government hands money out all the time with no strings attached. Mortgage interest deduction, electric car tax credits, charitable donations. I see strings: the government wants you to buy a house, buy an electric car, and give to charity. You can't claim those tax deductions and credits until you've done those things.
- CommanderData 4y ago
  > with no strings attached. How much are they willing to bite the hand that feeds them. It might be a small percentage but it makes part of their budget.
- kjghkjghkjgh 4y ago
  What other news organizations receive government funding like NPR's?
  - SkipperCat 4y ago
    Probably every state college newspaper.
    - kjghkjghkjgh 4y ago
      Aren't those state funds and not federal funds? It's a false equivalence regardless since college newspapers have a single campus audience while NPR is mainstream press. I don't believe the authors at college newspapers are typically paid either
      - SkipperCat 4y ago

Timon3 4y ago

> I'm sure if the US government attached strings to their money, NPR would roll over and do whatever is asked. What do you base this on?

infamouscow 4y ago
The US government doesn't hand out tax payers money without stipulations attached.
- Timon3 4y ago
  Is it only the US government, or all governments? Wasn't the COVID stimulus tax payer money handed out without stipulations?
  - infamouscow 4y ago
    I can't speak to other governments, but in the US there are two related programs with plenty of requirements, conditions, and stipulations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paycheck_Protection_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paycheck_Protection_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARES_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARES_Act
    - Timon3 4y ago
      Okay, but the funding for NPR must also have some stipulations, since a normal American can't just access it. There's probably something on the CBP grants page[1], I didn't look too deep. So if the whole point is that the money comes with stipulations, this seems to be fulfilled without a need for hidden content control through the state. Shouldn't we, as per Occams Razor, not assume that NPR really has creative control? https://cpb.org/grants https://cpb.org/grants
      - infamouscow 4y ago
        I agree in principle, but this rationale isn't applied consistently. It's applied selectively and it's hypocrisy of the selective application that I'm trying to tease out. As a thought experiment let's imagine a parallel universe where we replace NPR with RT. Now imagine a Russian HN where two people are having a similar discussion about RT being Russian state-sponsored media. In that context would Occam's Razor apply? And if not, why? Pointing to Western fact-checkers isn't going to convince a Russian living in Russia any more than an American pointing to fact-checkers from RT is going to persuade an American. They've been indoctrinated by the public school system from an early age. In this imaginary universe Russia still doesn't have a 1A, but even without one, it doesn't follow that RT wouldn't be able to exert the same creative control as NPR. Any fact that could be seen to reflect poorly on the government is very easy to omit without compromising control and ensures no direct or indirect evidence of collusion. Another option would be to rely on a neutral third party. The problem with that is if the majority of institutions are already captured, a third party reporting the truth has to overcome an overwhelming counter-narrative of "fact-checkers" and imbeciles parroting rhetoric like "surely all of these people can't be wrong" and other appeals to authority. I'm not entirely convinced this is true, but suppose so. How would you go about proving or disproving the validity of this capture from within the system?

SkipperCat 4y ago

I think you are incorrect. The government hands money out all the time with no strings attached. Mortgage interest deduction, electric car tax credits, charitable donations. I've never heard anyone ever report that NPR has answered to the Federal government in any manner regarding their reporting.

theandrewbailey 4y ago
> The government hands money out all the time with no strings attached. Mortgage interest deduction, electric car tax credits, charitable donations. I see strings: the government wants you to buy a house, buy an electric car, and give to charity. You can't claim those tax deductions and credits until you've done those things.
CommanderData 4y ago
> with no strings attached. How much are they willing to bite the hand that feeds them. It might be a small percentage but it makes part of their budget.
kjghkjghkjgh 4y ago
What other news organizations receive government funding like NPR's?
- SkipperCat 4y ago
  Probably every state college newspaper.
  - kjghkjghkjgh 4y ago
    Aren't those state funds and not federal funds? It's a false equivalence regardless since college newspapers have a single campus audience while NPR is mainstream press. I don't believe the authors at college newspapers are typically paid either
    - SkipperCat 4y ago