Is NPR Really Politically Biased? Public Editor Brands Criticism a Reflection of Geographic Blind Spots

Kelly McBride defends NPR’s coverage, saying critics confuse East/West Coast focus with political slant—and that cherry-picking doesn't represent the full picture

Natalie C. Frank, Ph.D July 12, 2025

Flickr [CC BY 2.0]

WASHINGTON, D.C. — NPR public editor Kelly McBride has challenged recent claims of political bias, suggesting what some view as a partisan slant is actually a geographic tilt, a reflection of where NPR journalists are based, rather than where their allegiances lie.

During a segment on the public radio show “1A,” McBride was responding to a Florida listener, Kendra, who accused NPR of producing “terrible,” “partisan,” and “hacky” programming, blaming it for instigating President Trump’s attempts to defund the network.

“The programming is terrible. It’s partisan. It’s hacky,” said Kendra.

Countering that critique, Indianapolis educator Erin Timbers praised NPR as “unbiased news,” relied upon by high school students for its clear coverage and balanced reporting.

McBride defended NPR’s overall integrity, noting critics tend to zero in on spotlight stories covering marginalized groups, such as trans communities, immigrants, and minority populations, instead of assessing NPR’s broader content.

“To the extent that there is a bias, I don’t think it is a political bias. I think it is a geographic bias, and I think that NPR has worked very hard to compensate for that,” she said.

She emphasized NPR’s vast output, about 1,800 stories each week, and argued that one cannot claim bias based solely on selective examples. A truly accurate evaluation, in her view, requires looking at the full sample of reporting.

“When you look at the amount of content that NPR puts out in a given week … if you’re going to look at bias, you really have to look at a representative sample. And when I do that, I do not find bias the way that the president and other critics find,” McBride stated.

The debate intensified when White House deputy press secretary Harrison Fields accused McBride of “unabashedly” deflecting legitimate concerns, labeling NPR’s journalism as democrat propaganda unworthy of federal backing:

“NPR has a clear record of flagrant bias, so it’s no surprise that its public editor would unabashedly deny this fact. The American people should not be responsible for funding Democrat propaganda, and the President is cutting the cord on the reckless abuse of taxpayer dollars.”

In May, President Trump issued an executive order to cut federal funding for NPR and PBS, accusing them of propagating “radical woke propaganda.” That same month, NPR and three Colorado public stations filed a lawsuit arguing the action violated the First Amendment and the Constitution.

Geographic bias, McBride argues, is a natural consequence of journalists working on coasts and in major metropolitan centers—a spatial influence, not necessarily ideological. She asserts NPR invests in building regional bureaus and increasing coverage in underrepresented areas to balance the equation.

Critics, meanwhile, continue to see the network’s focus on specific communities as evidence of strong political leanings. They call for reform or alternative funding models, wary of what they view as unchecked federal support for allegedly partisan media.

Supporters, on the other hand, see NPR’s comprehensive, multifaceted journalism as a force for good, with McBride’s nearly 2,000 weekly stories offering a trust-worthy snapshot of the world—if you consider the entirety, not just the highlight reel.

Policy experts say the key question will be whether this geographic vs. political framing holds sway in the court of public opinion. Will the narrative shift, and with it, influence funding debates? Or will the perception of bias withstand the numbers?