Photo credit: abcnews.go.com
Trump Administration Targets Federal Payments to News Outlets
NEW YORK — Federal funding directed towards news organizations such as Politico, The New York Times, and The Associated Press is facing scrutiny from budget-conscious factions within the Trump administration. Recently, President Trump referred to these payments as potentially “THE BIGGEST SCANDAL OF THEM ALL.”
This latest issue marks a continuation of Trump’s contentious relationship with the media, which has been a frequent point of contention for the president and his supporters. Just last week, the Department of Defense restricted access to Pentagon workspaces for several major media outlets, including NPR and NBC, while Trump has remained critical of CBS’ “60 Minutes” following an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris last fall. Concerns are also mounting over Trump’s intentions regarding Voice of America, a media outlet whose charter protects its editorial independence.
This recent focus on media funding aligns Trump’s ongoing criticism of the press with his long-standing stance against government expenditure, repackaging them into a single narrative aimed at discrediting news organizations while lacking substantial evidence.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt revealed that over $8 million has been allocated for Politico subscriptions. She stated that Elon Musk’s efficiency team is actively working to terminate these payments. This prompted a significant response on social media, with many users investigating further instances of taxpayer money being used for news subscriptions.
Trump echoed these sentiments on his Truth Social platform, questioning whether outlets like The New York Times were recipients of government funds and alleging that the payments contribute to favorable coverage of Democrats. He expressed that these practices could be the largest scandal accumulated thus far.
During a national prayer breakfast at the Capitol, Trump emphasized the administration’s commitment to examining media expenditures, asserting, “We’re catching them left and right,” suggesting a climate of accountability for media spending.
In response, Politico’s leadership issued a statement clarifying that the company does not receive government subsidies, describing their transactions as standard business practice. CEO Goli Sheikholeslami and Editor-in-Chief John Harris stated, “Let’s be clear: Politico has no financial dependence on the government and no hidden agenda. We cover politics and policy — that’s our job.”
Historically, it has not been unusual for government entities, both federal and state, to subscribe to various media outlets to stay informed on critical issues. For instance, the U.S. State Department often relies on international news reports for insights into global affairs.
Moreover, Politico Pro provides government and private sector clients with tools to monitor legislation and regulation, although the specifics regarding subscription numbers and pricing have remained undisclosed.
The New York Times reported generating less than $2 million in government subscription revenue last year, highlighting that its discounted subscription services, which include access for over one million military personnel and their families, are simply a way for public servants to access necessary information.
Elon Musk, a well-known critic of mainstream media and owner of a competing platform, remarked on social media about the Associated Press receiving substantial government funds for years, labeling it an extreme misuse of taxpayer resources.
Meanwhile, AP spokeswoman Lauren Easton defended government contracts, noting that the AP has consistently served clients across both political parties and that numerous international news organizations maintain similar arrangements for nonpartisan content. However, specific earnings from federal contracts have not been disclosed.
Separately, Musk’s emphasis on scrutinizing the USAID agency has raised alarms about a potential $268 million funding cut intended to support approximately 6,200 independent journalists globally, including those in war-torn regions like Ukraine. Reporters Without Borders highlighted that depriving these funds could lead to a detrimental impact, creating openings for misinformation and authoritarian influence.
Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders’ USA branch, emphasized, “Denying the money will create a vacuum that plays into the hands of propagandists and authoritarian states.”
Source
abcnews.go.com