CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter joined The Situation Room on Wednesday morning to freak out over President Trump’s rescission package that asks Congress to revoke funding for PBS and NPR. According to Stelter, not only would such a move cause local affiliates to “suffer as well,” but he also hyped PEN America saying the real reason for the move was about “discouraging real news.”
Co-host Pamela Brown wondered about the rescission’s chance of success, “So then are there any Republicans who have signaled that they will support keeping this funding? How do we expect this to play out?”
Stelter hyped one Republican in particular, using her to try to shame others:
That's definitely the key question, and some public media executives are cautiously hopeful that they can sway a few Republican moderates, especially in the Senate. We know the House is going to take up this proposal next week, but, in the Senate, that's the big question mark. Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski is already on the record saying that she will fight to preserve the funding for Alaska's radio and TV stations. She has already publicly opposed Trump on this issue. Are there three other senators who might join her? That is a big question. Like I mentioned, it's the smaller stations that will be hurt the most, but even big stations like New York City, say they would suffer as well. New York Public Radio telling listeners overnight, quote ‘To put it bluntly, this kind of funding from the feds is what keeps the lights on, keeps our signals on the air and keeps the entire public media system working as a whole.’”
A proper media analyst would wonder why public media keeps predicting such calamitous outcomes while they simultaneously claim that taxpayers only provide a tiny fraction of their funds. Nevertheless, Stelter rolled right along:
So those are the arguments that lawmakers are now going to be hearing both from public media officials, as well as possibly from listeners and viewers. We know that Trump and his allies have said that this broadcasting is biased, that it should not be getting federal funds for biased content. PBS and NPR disagree with that, but they say ultimately this is not an issue of saving money. As PEN America said in a statement today, this is about intimidating journalists and trying to discourage real news. So those are the battle lines. The battle lines are now drawn in this one.
Somehow, the actual quote from PEN America was worse than Stelter’s paraphrasing:
‘This request isn’t about fiscal responsibility, but about punishing independent journalism. It’s a blatant attempt to sway or silence media outlets that don’t align with the president’s preferred narrative, a tactic he’s already used repeatedly,’ said Tim Richardson, program director for journalism and disinformation at PEN America. ‘Simply put, it’s viewpoint discrimination aimed at undermining editorial independence protected by the First Amendment. This request would disproportionately harm rural states and local communities that rely on public media as a trusted source of information. Congress must reject this attack on truth and a free press, and stand up for the millions of Americans who depend on PBS and NPR for credible reporting and vital cultural programming. We call on all Americans to let their congressional representatives know that they value the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and to urge Congress to reject this rescission package.’
If Richardson wants to play the Constitution game, maybe Stelter could ask him to point the section of the Constitution that authorizes the foundation of domestic public media outlets.
That would also be the same PEN America that reported 2,532 books were banned during the 2021-22 school year only to have the Heritage Foundation report that 74 percent were actually available in the school libraries they were supposedly banned from. Additionally, it is frustrating to watch Stelter, who never hesitates to point out what he sees as problems with conservative media or bias at places like Fox News, just rhetorically shrug his shoulders and suggest bias at NPR and PBS is just a matter of opinion.
Here is a transcript for the June 4 show:
CNN The Situation Room
6/4/2025
11:55 AM ET
PAMELA BROWN: So then are there any Republicans who have signaled that they will support keeping this funding? How do we expect this to play out?
STELTER: That's definitely the key question, and some public media executives are cautiously hopeful that they can sway a few Republican moderates, especially in the Senate. We know the House is going to take up this proposal next week, but, in the Senate, that's the big question mark. Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski is already on the record saying that she will fight to preserve the funding for Alaska's radio and TV stations. She has already publicly opposed Trump on this issue. Are there three other senators who might join her? That is a big question. Like I mentioned, it's the smaller stations that will be hurt the most, but even big stations like New York City, say they would suffer as well. New York Public Radio telling listeners overnight, quote "To put it bluntly, this kind of funding from the feds is what keeps the lights on, keeps our signals on the air and keeps the entire public media system working as a whole."
So those are the arguments that lawmakers are now going to be hearing both from public media officials, as well as possibly from listeners and viewers. We know that Trump and his allies have said that this broadcasting is biased, that it should not be getting federal funds for biased content. PBS and NPR disagree with that, but they say ultimately this is not an issue of saving money.
As PEN America said in a statement today, this is about intimidating journalists and trying to discourage real news. So those are the battle lines. The battle lines are now drawn in this one.
BROWN: They certainly are. Brian Stelter, thanks so much.
