The following piece is an opinion and does not reflect the views of The Eagle and its staff. All opinions are edited for grammar, style and argument structure and fact-checked, but the opinions are the writer’s own.
On July 18, 2025, Congress voted to strip $1.1 billion in federal funding from public broadcasting, effectively killing NPR and PBS stations across the country. Days earlier, CBS canceled “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” after he called Paramount’s $16 million settlement with President Donald Trump a “big fat bribe.” These events together are the most coordinated assault on press freedom we’ve seen in the United States in decades — and it sets a dangerous precedent for student, local, new and young journalists.
Trump celebrated Colbert’s firing on Truth Social, writing, “I absolutely love that Colbert’ got fired. His talent was even less than his ratings. I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next.” His message seems clear: if you criticize Trump, you will be silenced. If that’s the fate that awaits professional journalists with prime-time platforms and union protection, what hope do the rest of us have? The answer is none, unless institutions with power start stepping up to defend press freedom before it’s too late.
Fiscal Republicans have framed the NPR and PBS cuts as part of a broader $9.4 billion in reductions through H.R. 4, also known as the Rescissions Act of 2025. But the reality of these decisions is that they eliminate sources of independent journalism that Trump can’t control. As Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont noted on X: “Stephen Colbert, an extraordinary talent and the most popular late-night host, slams the deal. Days later, he's fired. Do I think this is a coincidence? NO.”
It’s a remarkable pattern. ABC News paid $15 million to settle Trump’s defamation lawsuit for comments by ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos late last year. Just one month later, Meta paid $25 million to settle Trump’s claim that Instagram and Facebook censored him. And, most recently, Paramount paid $16 million over standard editorial practices on “60 Minutes.” And when Colbert criticized that settlement, CBS canceled his show, thus silencing him, within days.
Now, Congress has eliminated funding for public broadcasting — the one major media institution that operated independently from corporate profit and advertiser pressures. NPR and PBS stations have served as lifelines for rural communities for over 50 years, providing emergency alerts during natural disasters and local news coverage that commercial outlets have long abandoned. North Carolina Rep. Alma Adams noted to NPR that during Hurricane Helene last year, “public broadcasting was there when traditional communications failed.”
But time and time again, Republicans in Congress have proven they don’t care about local accountability journalism, but rather, about controlling the narrative. As Trump himself said, NPR and PBS are government-funded “left-wing propaganda.” To translate: NPR and PBS are independent voices that won’t bend to his will.
The cuts in the Rescissions Act will devastate local stations that depend on federal funding. Many will shut down entirely, creating news deserts in rural communities that overwhelmingly supported Trump, along with Republican congresspeople who supported the bill. Trump’s own voters will lose their primary source of local news because he can’t tolerate criticism.
For young student journalists still learning to navigate the ever-changing field, this coordinated attack is an existential threat. The NPR cuts directly impact American University’s NPR affiliate station, WAMU, which relies on public broadcasting infrastructure and programming. WAMU already shut down DCist in 2023, eliminating one of D.C.’s largest sources of local news. The message we are learning is that when powerful figures apply pressure, it is perfectly okay to abandon our work rather than fight back.
Student journalists are arguably already the most vulnerable reporters in America. We are, more often than not, seen as somewhat “in-between.” We’re learning the fundamentals of being journalists while navigating an increasingly hostile environment, where criticism of authority often leads to immediate retaliation. The takeaway from the past few months is that journalists must remain silent, can’t challenge power and certainly can’t criticize their industry when it fails to defend press freedom.
This is the exact opposite of what journalism education teaches. Throughout my time as a student in the School of Communication and a member of student media organizations, I’ve been told repeatedly that journalists hold those in power accountable. Instead of watching our professional role models do so when an administration attempts to silence the field, we’re watching everyone fold to what is looking more and more like an authoritarian regime.
My experience in SOC has been nothing short of exceptional. My professors have consistently encouraged students to combat misinformation and disinformation in the press, hold powerful institutions accountable and do it all in the most ethical way we can. Journalism students already take the required Communication Law course, which teaches First Amendment rights and how to recognize legal intimidation. The foundation for journalism on AU’s campus is strong, but it’s not enough in this environment.
What we need now is for the University as an institution to step up and match the courage and commitment of our SOC professors.
AU must do more than offer excellent journalism education. It needs to actively defend the media environment that its graduates will enter. This means providing financial backing for investigative journalism projects, establishing legal defense funds for students or faculty who face intimidation and creating partnerships with independent media organizations that share a commitment to press freedom.
Most importantly, the University must recognize that supporting SOC means understanding that its journalism students and faculty are both becoming and training the next generation of journalists who will go up against Trump and fight to defend democracy. When they face pressure for their reporting — and they will — they need to know their institution has their back.
The Eagle, AWOL, Blackprint, The Aviary, AmLit and all other campus publications, news, culture or otherwise, serve a vital democratic function right now. And we need support. Institutions that won’t defend press freedom will watch it disappear, and we can’t let that be the lesson that journalists learn on AU’s campus.
Alana Parker is a senior in the School of Public Affairs and the School of Communication and the managing opinion editor for The Eagle.
This piece was edited by Quinn Volpe and Walker Whalen. Copy editing done by Sabine Kanter-Huchting and Emma Brown.
