[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning again, everyone. We'll talk now about the issue you may have heard about regarding Twitter and public radio. NPR announced last week that it has stopped posting on Twitter after Twitter CEO Elon Musk put a label on NPR's Twitter feed that called the network state-affiliated media. That's the same label Twitter puts on government-controlled media or propaganda outlets. Russia's RT News Service, for example, carries that label, state-affiliated media. Musk then changed NPR's designation to government-funded media and tweeted an opinion, "Defund NPR."

In development since then, Canada's public broadcasting system, the CBC, also left Twitter yesterday over the same new label, government-funded. The BBC got a label called publicly-funded and is remaining on Twitter but has publicly objected. All the public networks involved say, basically, that the label undermines their credibility by creating a false impression that it is not independent. NPR says it only gets 1% of its funding from the federal government, and that goes into the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which then goes to NPR.

For our part, WNYC issued a statement on Friday that it will remain on Twitter. Remember, WNYC is a local New York station, NPR is the network from which we get our national news. WNYC issued a statement on Friday that it will remain on Twitter for now because none of our own Twitter feeds have been mislabeled by Musk, and the station feels Twitter helps us reach many diverse audiences, who get a lot of news from Twitter, so leaving at this time would be a disservice to the public. The statement reminds the public as well that New York Public Radio gets just 4% of its funding from government sources.

Some other local public radio stations, we note, are leaving Twitter, such as Minnesota Public Radio and Cincinnati's three public radio stations. Other news organizations are pointing out that Elon Musk's other companies, such as Tesla and SpaceX, get lots of government subsidies, but he doesn't label them in any way that reflects that. This is obviously close to home. Listeners, we'll invite your thoughts and opinions, and we'll talk it over with our Brooke Gladstone, host and managing editor of NPR's On The Media, which watches the media and is produced here at WNYC. Hi, Brooke, welcome back to the show. Interesting times.

Brooke Gladstone: Interesting times always, Brian. It's funny because, publicly funded media, when I spoke to NPR President John Lansing, he said that he didn't object to that, and why should he if public means public? Public is also a word that means taxpayer-funded, which means the government, but it also means regular people. He wouldn't object to that, but apparently, he wasn't offered that designation and doesn't know if he'd want to bring NPR back to Twitter even if it did.

Brian: Can you give the listeners a little timeline of this? Then we'll do more to break down those different designations, state-affiliated media, which Musk tagged NPR with originally, same as RT from Russia, which is really state-affiliated, then--

Brooke: Or China's Xinhua.

Brian: Yes. Then changed it to government-funded, but the BBC gets the tag publicly funded, which, you just said, NPR's president wouldn't object to. Let's do that right now. I'm trying to figure out how to get into this in the most clear way for our listeners. Maybe you should give us the timeline. Because there was change just in the last few days, right?

Brooke: Change in the last few days. What are you referring to?

Brian: Because there was originally a state-affiliated media tag to NPR.

Brooke: Oh yes, in the last week or so. Twitter labeled NPR's account as state-affiliated media last Tuesday. There's been discussion that he, that is to say Elon Musk, likes to take revenge on news organizations, especially legacy organizations that have been critical of Musk. He's done this in a variety of ways. This particular labeling thing could've been on purpose, it could've also been the fact that a lot of what is happening at Twitter is happening via AI, and that that might've been something that AI did.

That might've been the first salvo, which was not conscious, rather inadvertent. He did go on the BBC to explain that all he wants is transparency and honesty, and then later changed it to government-funded, and then, finally to publicly-funded, getting closer to transparency. He doesn't have perhaps the same grudge against the BBC as he has against NPR, but that's just me.

Brian: Some of the designations here on Twitter's own description page of these labels, it says, "How state-affiliated media accounts are defined. State-affiliated media is defined as outlets where the state exercises control over editorial content through financial resources, direct or indirect political pressures, and/or control over production and distribution. How government-funded accounts are defined." That's a label he's got for NPR now, government-funded. "Government-funded media is defined as outlets where the government provides some or all of the outlet’s funding and may have varying degrees of government involvement over editorial content."

Brooke: That's just wrong.

Brian: Go ahead. Elaborate.

Brooke: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides the majority of the funding that goes to public broadcasting, both TV and radio, is forward-funded in order to shield itself from, or rather, to be shielding the media outlets from any possibility that that money will have an impact on their content, although the Corporation for Public Broadcasting also will provide funding for certain programming. I think that my show started with a CPB grant at some point. In that sense, maybe, but far, far less over the years. My version of this show is already 25 years old roughly, and that amount has gone down.

When NPR says less than 1% of its annual operating budget comes from CPB and federal agencies, generally, that money goes to maintenance issues. There are some stations out there, small rural stations basically, that may have as much as 13% of its budget paid for by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. This is to maintain satellites and things like that. Most of that money is not for any kind of programming at all.

That local service might not exist, because their margins are so slim, if it weren't for this funding to help basically keep the place running in some cases. Certainly not true at WNYC, and even less true at NPR, which collects money from dues and grants and doesn't need CPB money to keep itself going, although, of course, everybody is in arrears at the moment, but that happens.

Brian: Listeners, again, your questions are welcome about this and your opinions. Should WNYC leave Twitter? 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, or what the heck, tweet @brianlehrer.

Brooke: Can I say one other thing that-

Brian: Yes, of course.

Brooke: -isn't very clear? NPR is leaving Twitter. NPR is not forcing its reporters to leave Twitter. Those are going to be personal decisions. It turns out that, in terms of usefulness, being on Twitter is much more important for individual reporters to help build a brand and a presence than it is for whole news organizations, so individual reporters might lose more by not being on it, not least the fact that it is a source, frequently, of breaking news, but also in order to create their own presences, so to speak, in the wider world. You can still probably find your favorite NPR reporters who have been on Twitter still on Twitter. There are specific reasons why some of the local stations have left. I can go into that if you like.

Brian: Go ahead.

Brooke: We spoke to Mike Savage at WEKU. He left Twitter a few days prior to NPR. He called it a potentially watershed moment for journalistic organizations to decide which platform is appropriate for their news. He says that he's concerned that people who go on Twitter who might encounter a station that is called State-funded and isn't familiar with public radio may actually believe it and may cause those people to pass judgment and pass the content over. As far as he's concerned, that is a label that's not vetted, that's not correct, that creates a problem. I don't know if WEKU has been hit with it, but he has decided pretty much that Twitter is not a respectable place to present yourself.

Brian: I know WEKU, that's Eastern Kentucky University, right?

Brooke: Yes.

Brian: I actually almost went to work there one time.

Brooke: You're kidding.

Brian: They offered me a job years ago, and I almost moved to Eastern Kentucky to break into public radio at WEKU. They're affiliated with a state university. Maybe that's one reason that they think that they would get falsely misconstrued as somehow an arm of the government. I can't speak for them, but maybe that's why they're more concerned about it in their case than WNYC is in our case where we don't have any of that, even indirect government affiliation.

Brooke: That is true, but so many public stations are affiliated with universities, and that would explain, for instance, why some big stations like-- now, let's see. I think WBUR Boston has left and PBS has left, WESA in Pittsburgh, KUOW in Seattle, KUNR in Reno. I know that BUR is certainly not dependent on a local college.

Brian: Clearly.

Brooke: PBS either.

Brian: How do you understand WNYC's decision to stay on Twitter?

Brooke: I'm not sure. I can understand why NPR stalked off in a huff. I think it would've really mightily pissed me off as well. I think that what's the motivation to leave? I think that WNYC has such a broad community. It's much bigger than Eastern Kentucky. It has a national audience as well as a local one. It has an audience of tremendous diversity. WNYC is always trying to be present where there are people who might enjoy the service, who would otherwise not bump into them.

I think it just has larger aspirations and believes that having the institution on Twitter will help. NPR has made the calculation that it is established enough and it doesn't need that avenue to pull new audiences in. In fact, I believe that NPR said that maybe only 3%, 4% of its listeners come from Twitter if that much, connect from Twitter for stories. It's not a huge number and I don't know what it is at WNYC.

Brian: Listener tweets, "How does Musk label Fox News, billionaire-funded lie machine?

Brooke: We should look that up. Get those people in your control room to do that.

Brian: Obviously, that person is paying attention to the other headline story today about Fox News admitting that it's spread lies about Dominion Voting Systems in that settlement. Jay in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hi, Jay.

Jay: Oh, hi, Brian. I think WNYC should leave Twitter. I personally have left Twitter a couple of months ago and whenever Elon took over. I just feel like it's a toxic environment and we shouldn't be feeding the beast. We shouldn't be giving it any more legitimacy because it's not an organization that we should be associating ourselves with. It's just something whose time has passed and Twitter is no longer Twitter so why support it?

Brian: Jay, thank you very much. Brooke, I guess Jay's call raises the question, what is Twitter at this point? It's a private company. Musk can do what he wants. He can label users as he chooses, but it's also a platform that gazillions of people use, oblivious or irrelevant to whatever Elon Musk does in the front office. We had a conversation on the show earlier in the year that focused largely on so-called Black Twitter.

A lot of prominent Black opinion makers decided when Musk was doing some other things that were really controversial and seemed against the public interest to stay on Twitter because there is real information being disseminated and opinions and community being created in ways that you just can't replicate anywhere else right now. Ignore Elon Musk and continue to create our Twitter communities on the platform was the decision that some of our callers and guests at that time had come to. It raises the question of, what is Twitter? Is it Elon Musk or is it all the communities that have sprung up there?

Brooke: I thought Jay gave the best argument and the most common argument for leaving it. It's less useful as time goes on as Elon Musk messes with it more. The big problem is that there really isn't a good alternative. I got slammed a little bit by Mastodon by suggesting it wasn't the most useful or comfortable interface for creating these kinds of communities. Although there are a lot of people who are on there, and it is an alternate social media platform, I don't think it quite does the trick.

Now, in terms of how many users are on Twitter, I think that that is a really tricky number, but just to take apart the gazillion that you mentioned a little bit that, there is, for instance, a whole lot of bots as we know. What is called a real person on Twitter is a monetizable daily active user. Thank you for that wonderful description of those of us who are on Twitter, who are real people, monetizable daily active user. I'm not actually on daily. Of those, I think that the US has the most number. The numbers vary enormously.

It has more than a quarter of a million apparently in the world, and maybe 80 million users and 41.5 monetizable daily active users in the US. It is not that huge number is what I'm saying. Sounds huge, but not compared to Facebook with billions. What is it with Twitter? It's a place where a lot of smart people say things. It isn't just a troll's playground. When you said, what is Twitter? It's a number of different things that are in conflict with each other and the balance may be shifting because there is a troll-like person now running the platform, but it is a work in progress.

Brian: Listener tweets, "I've decided to stay on Twitter because it is still the best way for this straight white male in his 30s to see views and perspectives from marginalized communities. Brian mentioned a good point on air. It is a way for WNYC to reach wider audiences," but Vincent in Warren, New Jersey may have a different point of view. Vincent, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Vincent: Hey, Brian. How are you? Hi, Brooke. How are you guys?

Brooke: Hi.

Vincent: Thank you for taking my call. Basically, I told your screener, I don't want to use the word liberal or democratic voices, but Musk is constantly screaming about transparency, the First Amendment, but this just reeks of silencing those voices with those labels in a very subtle way because he knows people are going to leave because they don't want those labels. That's my opinion.

Brian: Interesting. I guess there's no way we could prove that theory, but did Musk want-- there was going to be the word "Trump" in this question. Did Musk hope and plan for NPR and Minnesota Public Radio and the CBC and all those others you mentioned who are now leaving Twitter because of these labels, hoping they would leave the platform while he restored Donald Trump's access despite Trump having previously been removed by the old owners for inciting violence on January 6?

Brooke: I don't think so. I don't think he wants anybody to leave. People are monetizable. Let us not forget. He is currently trying to squeeze as many dollars out of Twitter as he possibly can, selling those talking about labels. Famously, he made headlines for making the-- what is it called? Being a valid user, validated user. That was something that you just got awarded if you could prove that you had a number of followers, that you really were who you are and that you were also maybe important. Now, he just sells that designation for $8 a month, I think. That enables all sorts of fakers and copycat sites to come in with a validated label. This is simply to make money. He says he didn't want a walled garden, but really, this is just about something that he can squeeze a few bucks out of.

Brian: He's flying by the seat of his pants, because there was that original change to the verified user and that didn't work, so he stopped that for a while and then reinstituted it with a different kind of change, as you were just describing. He started this series of events last week calling NPR state-affiliated, the same thing that he calls RT in Russia and Chinese government-affiliated news agencies, and then changed it after the backlash, so he's not vetting his own decisions before he puts them out there, apparently.

Brooke: He's a risk taker.

Brian: To this idea that Musk is engaging in a double standard. I looked at the Tesla and SpaceX Twitter feeds, and there is no designation of government support. I also looked at some of their own web pages and found, for example, on the Tesla's side, a page called the Electric Vehicle & Solar Incentives. It goes down all these incentives that you could get under the Inflation Reduction Act and other things, for buying Tesla products.

Brooke: He would say probably those are not media organizations. I think it's fair to say that government support probably affects how fast he makes his cars, what the cost of his cars are, at least to the degree that he makes money. If the government asks him to do something, he'll pay attention. Certainly that money is buying his ear, just as it does in politics, even if it doesn't change the production line. He could do that. He could certainly do that. He would probably say almost every big business in the country, the oil business, agriculture, everybody gets government money, so it doesn't count. To the extent that NPR gets money, that 1%, hell, it's probably a lot less than Musk gets.

Brian: It'll be interesting to see if Musk now goes down the road of labeling in individual public radio stations like us, with that same government-funded tag that for some reason he put on NPR itself, but not on the affiliates. One of the reasons that this station's management decided to stay on for now, besides the fact that it serves a public purpose is that Musk hasn't mislabeled us. Even that response by our president LaFontaine Oliver, who knows, that might draw Musk into doing it inadvertently.

Brooke: If this was an AI mistake, initially that he decided to go along with, he may not-- he does hold long grudges, but he seems to have a relatively short attention span when it comes to other things.

Brian: Although maybe AI gave the state-affiliated label but then he changed it to government-funded, which is also inaccurate, but in the way that he was-- in the implication--

Brooke: But then, publicly-funded is for The Beeb and for NPR and for us. He didn't extend that. I guess we should ask for it.

Brian: There are a lot of people. I want to acknowledge a lot of people calling in saying they would like the show to leave Twitter, or they at least want other venues for posting public comments during the live show. Certainly, you can always use our website comments page @wnyc.org. We are having discussions in the background about other alternatives to at least institute in addition to Twitter at very least. Let's end on a lighter note, Brooke. Laura in Westchester is going to get our last thought. Laura, you're on WNYC. Hi, there.

Laura: Hi. Thanks so much. This is a really great conversation. Personally, I loathe Elon Musk. His personality is-- I can't. Whether he pays his taxes or not is all I care about for his status as a billionaire. However, Twitter is the one place that you can find birdwatching. It's so much passion and so much daily all day long insight. How would we ever know about Flaco, and his flight from the Central Park Zoo, and his goings on every day in Central Park? We know he's up to date on catching rats. His latest nickname is The Czar rat catcher of Central Park. It does fill a very important purpose in that way. As a community, birdwatching is so important. I love it, and I don't know where else to go for it, so I have to stay.

Brooke: There you go.

Brian: One for bird-watching Twitter. Laura, thank you very much. Brooke Gladstone, thank you for everything you do and for coming on to do this over with us today.

Brooke: My pleasure, Brian. Bye.

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.