What to do about the looming end of U.S. public broadcasting

This commentary was first published on the author’s Substack and is republished here with permission.

Last May, in another world, I wrote about how I thought NPR should forego public funding for news and substantially revise its own governance to better reflect modern realities. I still think that would have been wise. I would advocate the same steps today, as part of a strategic retreat in anticipation of the Trump-Musk onslaught against public broadcasting in the U.S. That onslaught may have kicked off with a hearing yesterday chaired by the unhinged Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.

But folks responsible for public broadcasting in this country, both nationally and locally, haven’t been receptive to my advice, not publicly or privately. So this week, I want to talk about how the rest of us should react when this next, seemingly inevitable, step in Trump’s war on the press unfolds.

What to expect

First, don’t expect that on this matter the courts will ultimately save us. There may be a court fight on whether Trump and Musk can cut off funding without congressional action, but when it comes to public broadcasting — unlike Medicaid or perhaps the Postal Service, but like foreign aid — they will very likely, sometime this year, have the votes they need to smash the current arrangement.

That will occur, I think, in significant part because the current regime does not have the political will to materially cut federal spending and thus feels compelled to cut immaterial spending (federal aid to public broadcasting costs Americans about $1.50 per person) in a performative manner that, they hope, fools their base.

Arguments about saving the nation’s emergency broadcast system that piggybacks on public broadcasting, or about children’s programming or classical music, that prevailed over past attempts will fall before Trump’s thuggish congressional tactics (crucially backed by Musk’s use of his billions in federal subsidies now redirected to campaign funds).

I’m not sure whether Trump will want to try to force public stations off the air altogether or just eliminate their national news programming. In communities that can’t afford to mount substantial operations of their own, the distinction will hardly matter. In larger, richer (bluer) cities, some parts of local efforts will likely be salvaged, but the alternatives there are also more robust, so the societal costs relatively lower, even if still wounding.

Next, let’s focus on what’s critical to save. Not Downton Abbey or Sesame Street (which backed away from PBS a few years ago) or even Ken Burns, national treasure that he is. That programming will find a place in our enormously varied ecosystem of entertainment and will be appropriately responsive to audience interests and demand. And if classical music is relegated to Spotify and its competitors, well, people will still be able to find it there.

What is most at risk

What we might most seriously lose can be best illustrated, at the national level, by Morning Edition and All Things Considered, the NPR morning and afternoon shows, and PBS’ Frontline, the most important (often the only) serious investigative reporting on linear television. Additional significant losses at both the national and local levels are almost certain.

I hope (and actually expect) that national philanthropy and advertising (no longer needing to masquerade as “underwriting” or “sponsorship”) will be sufficient to keep the flagship radio programs on the air in the nation’s major cities, to enable Frontline to find a home on basic cable or streaming (the broadcast networks being too greedy and too cowardly), and to keep all of them on the internet. I hope also that NPR News, unshackled from Congress and even if diminished in size, will recover some of the voice it lost eight years ago and will resume in earnest the enterprise reporting for which it was known before 2017.

But there will be blood. I am not nearly as sanguine (sorry, couldn’t resist) about PBS News Hour, which waited too long to evolve into a modern broadcast. Most seriously, I expect, as indicated above, that stations in smaller communities may wither or die, adding yet another set of holes in the national fabric of local journalism. If you live in one of these towns and that makes you unhappy, please do take it out on your member of Congress.

What we should learn

More broadly, I think there are a number of lessons here that extend beyond the narrow questions of domestic public broadcasting:

• First, as I have said before, Trump is coming for the press in this country as a whole. There was no collective action when he started with the AP’s Stylebook and coverage of the White House, none when he silenced America’s international broadcasting channels a couple of weeks ago, perhaps on the way to turning them into American Izvestia. Public broadcasting is likely next, but you should have no doubt that the eventual target is the core political and policy coverage of mainstream news outlets, with the possible exception of those in hands he considers friendly.
• Next, and also not a new point, the incipient demise of public broadcasting, even after 58 years of support, should be a reminder that economic dependence on the government is antithetical to the very idea of a free press. What Congress gives, it can take away. What Congress, as currently funded and organized, cannot corrupt, they are ultimately inclined, if they can, to destroy. Waiting and hoping is not an effective counter-strategy.

What to do

What can we do? I still believe it is not too late to undertake collective action, beginning in coverage of the White House itself. It might not even be too late to take public media news off the public dole as a way to save the public broadcasting infrastructure, although time is very short.

Philanthropy, both large gifts and small, also has a significant role to play here. This is the time to support those who are displaying independence; soon it may well be the moment to fill gaps Trump and Musk create. This is an arena in which large numbers of small donations, both nationally and locally, can make a real difference. Advertisers who see it as in their interest to maintain an independent press — who do not think their marketing messages could be effectively conveyed by American Pravda — should also find ways to put their money where their long-term interest lies.

Even loyal readership, listenership and viewership of independent news, especially when combined with sharing what you learn with family and friends, can be an act of patriotic dissent.

Do what you can. Engage with others who are like-minded. Have the courage to openly support those who are helping and to oppose those doing damage. Do it now.

Dick Tofel was the founding general manager and first employee of ProPublica, and its president from 2013 until 2021. He is now principal of Gallatin Advisory LLC and author of the. newsletter Second Rough Draft.