The CEO of National Public Radio, Katherine Maher, just testified before Congress amid a push to defund NPR and PBS. It’s hard to imagine how it could’ve gone worse for Maher.
Rep. Brandon Gill, a Texas Republican, confronted the NPR executive with her own statements and completely destroyed her credibility in just a few minutes of questioning. He asked Maher whether she still believes “America is addicted to white supremacy” and “America believes in black plunder and white democracy,” two statements Maher made on Twitter in 2020, which she conveniently claimed to believe no longer.
Much worse, Maher flatly denied ever having called for people to pay for slavery reparations, only to immediately be presented by Gill with a tweet where she explicitly called for America to pay slavery reparations. Then, she tried another dishonest deflection, where she incredulously claimed to have meant — in the statement that just moments before, she supposedly had no memory of ever making —non-financial reparations rather than cash payments.
Maher further claimed never to have read a specific book, The Case for Reparations, only to have Gill present her with a tweet where she explicitly discussed using a day off work to read that book. Yes, seriously.
The NPR CEO further refused to condemn bizarre recent examples of ideological NPR coverage, including the promotion of pro-looting arguments, medical misinformation from “fat positivity” activists, and more.
The five minutes of questioning left Maher with absolutely no pretense of political objectivity or an ounce of credibility remaining. So, it’s entirely understandable why Gill concluded that NPR should be stripped of taxpayer funds.
But one question that’s not getting enough attention is why NPR even takes taxpayer money in the first place. As ex-NPR editor turned critic Uri Berliner argues for the Free Press, it could avoid all this scrutiny if it just declined the taxpayer money and fundraised more from private donors instead. After all, NPR claims it’s just a tiny fraction of its funding, so why bother with all the slings and arrows that come with taxpayer involvement?
“NPR says direct payments from the [Corporation for Public Broadcasting] and indirect federal funding through its member stations account for just 4 percent of annual revenues,” Berliner writes. “That adds up to $13 million—a skimpy slice out of NPR’s 2024 revenues of $336 million.”
Is 4% of its budget really worth all this trouble?
NPR CEO BACKTRACKS ON REPARATIONS STATEMENTS: ‘WE ALL OWE MUCH’
Simply passing up the money seems like a win-win for everyone involved. NPR can continue to pursue its ideological agenda, maybe even rename itself National Progressive Radio, and taxpayers will no longer be forced to fund it. Yet NPR executives such as Maher seem to think they’re entitled to receive taxpayer funding and still pursue a fringe ideological agenda.
That’s not going to fly any longer. NPR can easily solve this whole mess by simply passing on future federal funding. That it so obstinately refuses to do so yet is unwilling to reform or diversify its coverage speaks to the arrogance and ideological capture that brought about these defunding efforts in the first place.
Brad Polumbo is an independent journalist and host of the Brad vs Everyone podcast.