NPR was built, in part, to explain the U.S. government to its citizens. It does much more than that, but as a Washington, D.C.-based news organization serving a network of local radio stations across the country, NPR is particularly good at documenting the impact of the political machinery in the nation's capital.
So when President Donald Trump and his incoming administration began upending portions of the government on the day he took office, three and half weeks ago, NPR had to change its reporting tactics.
Covering the paralyzation or drastic reduction of entire government departments requires a different approach.
Yes, the journalists at NPR knew dramatic changes were coming. The newsroom realigned its reporting staff in anticipation of the new administration's priorities. But even Trump's Republican allies appear astonished by their boss' speed and breadth. So it's not surprising that NPR is adjusting and working to find its groove.
Since Trump took office, we in the Public Editor's office have been deluged by letters from alarmed audience members who question some of NPR's choices. Listeners were upset to hear DOGE described as a federal department. They take umbrage at descriptions of Elon Musk as a government employee with any authority.
Most of all, those who write to us and post on our social media accounts are concerned that NPR isn't covering these stories deeply enough. Some audience members want to hear more alarm and excitement. And some want the journalists to take sides.
Finally, there are the people who do not want to hear Trump's voice on the air. They want to wall off political coverage, so that they can enjoy the rest of the news.
We've heard shades of this discontent before. When listeners were alarmed that the voting team was addressing doubts and misinformation about the security of our elections. Also, when quoting Trump made him sound more reasonable than he actually is.
As we explored these disparate critiques, we interviewed several NPR news executives who are directing the coverage. And we did a close analysis of the coverage of all the stories that ran on Morning Edition and All Things Considered over the course of a week to see if audience members were getting the breadth of coverage they deserved. We also talked with several journalism experts.
Stories about Trump's attempts to dismantle the government dominate NPR's coverage. Since the inauguration, more than 65% of Morning Edition and All Things Considered have been devoted to documenting the administration's moves, covering the reaction and explaining the impact. While NPR coverage occasionally wobbled with poor word choices or bad headlines, the journalists quickly corrected their course.
Read on to hear the concerns of some listeners, as well as our specific response.
Here's a sample of the letters we've received, followed by specific reporting and analysis.
How should reporters describe DOGE?
Charles Pfeffer wrote on Feb. 3: Listening to today’s story about USAID I was troubled at the reporter’s reference to “Department of Government Efficiency” DOGE as a Department. As you know, this is not an official government department or agency.
Mark Eisenman wrote on Feb. 3: I take issue with your referring to DOGE as a “department”, as if it has ANY legitimacy! The media NORMALIZE this made up NONEXISTENT entity, that has NO federal employees and is a private intruder in our government. NPR and all its reporters need to give the listener context. By simply referring to DOGE as ‘department’ you have whitewashed a huge problem with the current administration.
On the same day these letters came in, NPR Managing Editor for Standards Tony Cavin advised the newsroom to refer to DOGE as a "unit" or an "entity." Although the official name of this newly created thing is the Department of Government Efficiency, it is not an actual department. If it were, Cavin pointed out, it would be led by a secretary confirmed by the Senate.
Government language is often misleading. The Inflation Reduction Act, for example, was mostly a massive energy bill that also included components focused on reducing the government budget deficit and allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices. The U.S. Patriot Act expanded the government's authority to spy on people. No Child Left Behind expanded standardized testing.
NPR is usually deferential to such titles, describing what the legislation or policy actually does as a way of ensuring that the public is not confused by the title. By now, DOGE and its leader Elon Musk have received so much attention that most news consumers are familiar with it. It's more important to explore the questions around the legality of DOGE's actions, which NPR is doing.
When it comes to DOGE, leaving out the word "department" or indicating that it isn't a true federal "department" is a good first step. Stories should describe the unorthodox nature of Musk's role, and, when appropriate, the legal challenges and concerns.
On top of that, NPR can explicitly discuss these language issues, bringing them to the surface to explain why hosts and correspondents are making specific choices.
"I think it is worth educating people about how language is changing and how the administration is utilizing language and weaponizing language," University of California, Berkeley, assistant professor Shereen Marisol Meraji said. As a former host of NPR's Code Switch podcast, she spent a lot of time looking at questions of language and labels.
"The Trump administration has invented a whole new language, essentially," she said.
When journalists repeat government language without questioning or contextualizing it, they are participating in the dissemination of propaganda. NPR's advice to its journalists around DOGE and other language challenges is clearly designed to avoid that. It will be critical to sustain this level of awareness as we get further into Trump's second term.
Is this a coup?
Daniel Ochsner wrote on Feb. 5: Please stop treating the situation with Elon Musk staging a coup as if it were simply an unusual form of governance. Stop treating Trump’s ILLEGAL acts as if they’re curious topics for pundits to argue over.
Beth Kendrick wrote on Feb. 2: Why is NPR not reporting on the coup that is unfolding at our Treasury Dept, FBI and other federal agencies? We need this information about what is happening to be reported and aired … where are you?
This is not a coup. There is no dispute that President Trump was legitimately elected. Musk is, according to Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, officially "a special government employee," a legitimate job classification. In his capacity, he has the authority to hire a cadre of people, and has done just that.
There are legitimate questions about the legality of many of the new administration's actions. NPR is documenting those questions, the court rulings and the response to those court rulings. But using the language of a coup would be alarmist and counterproductive. It would undermine NPR's credibility overall, especially with the segment of its audience comprising Americans who support Trump.
Where is the outrage?
Allan Walker wrote on Feb. 4: I have supported public radio for decades, so it pains me to say this: NPR is failing to meet this moment. The U.S. federal government and our institutions are under attack in an unprecedented manner (an attack telegraphed during Donald Trump’s campaign), and yet NPR’s coverage of the last two-and-a-half weeks has … not given these events the coverage and analysis they deserve. Take, as just one example, the story “Elon Musk is barreling into government with DOGE, raising unusual legal questions.” There is so much more at stake than the phrase “unusual legal questions” implies. Why is this administration’s attacks on our norms and institutions not being given the focus (or, for example, special coverage) they very much deserve? We are in a very unusual moment in history, and I wish NPR would rise to the occasion.
This two-way interview between host Steve Inskeep and reporter Bobby Allyn is a broad-reaching review of Musk's actions, and it includes voicing alarm about DOGE's legality. The headline is fuzzy and nonspecific, and that's unfortunate. That said, the story covers a lot of ground:
- It documents Musk's history, his standing as a government employee and the specific parameters around his role and the mounting legal cases.
- It discusses how lawmakers are responding to DOGE's "access and control over the federal government."
- It includes a quote from former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter: "I've never seen something like this happen before. I've never seen the White House send their people into the agencies this way in such an intrusive manner in either a Democratic administration or a Republican administration, including the first Trump administration."
Some of the experts we interviewed shared the concern that NPR's coverage is not conveying the gravity of the moment. Frank Sesno, a George Washington University communications professor who formerly directed CNN's Washington coverage, told us, "One of the big challenges that everybody in journalism is going to face is what happens when the fundamental compact of understanding that there is an obligation to be accessible and transparent and accountable no longer exists. And how do we explain that to the audience?"
These dramatic changes to the federal government are happening in stages and it's not always immediately clear what the implications are, for example, when one group of employees is told to stay home or funding for certain programs is paused.
"I recognize the challenge as a member of the audience, because I am a member of an audience also, you know, along with being an editor," chief Washington editor Krishnadev Calamur told us. "It's a lot to process as an editor and certainly as a member of the audience. And I think one thing we're trying to do is overall look at this entire situation and try and figure out how we can explain to the audience what is happening holistically, so that it doesn't always feel like we're threading together or just collating disparate bits of information that have no overarching theme. I recognize that it is a work in progress."
When NPR succeeds in both reporting recent developments and conveying overarching themes, it is because the reporting is comprehensive, the scripts are sharply written and the headlines are precisely crafted. Also, the tone of the delivery is deliberate.
Indignation and anger actually undermine effective communication, Meraji told us. She's an assistant professor at UC Berkeley's School of Journalism and a former host of NPR's Code Switch podcast. "It's just that outrage is actually not working if you look at the data in terms of getting people to listen to one another," she said.
There's been a lot of focus on the fact that NPR's audience skews to the political left. That phenomenon is bigger than NPR. It runs across the entire media landscape in the United States. Still, NPR aims to serve everyone.
"We're cognizant of the fact that there's some people, and we've had them on our air, there's lots of people in this country who are quite pleased with what's happening, and their hair is not on fire," said Eric Marrapodi, vice president for news programming. "This is exactly what they voted for. So it's important for us to present the news in a way that is reflective of the entire country."
That doesn't mean turning away from events of the day or sugarcoating the impact. But it does mean that hosts and reporters are documenting events and providing context in a straightforward way.
We talked to Sesno the day after Trump first mentioned the idea that the United States should take over the redevelopment of Gaza. He listened to NPR that morning.
"I thought it was very matter of fact, that still captured the outrageous nature of the event," he said. "But I mean, you can't be bland. … They've got to capture the unprecedented and untested nature of this."
That morning, NPR's reporting documented the president's proposal to move Palestinians out of Gaza and rebuild the waterfront strip of land, they gave voice to the international opposition to the idea, and they noted that such a plan would be challenged as illegal under international law. And finally, they noted that it was the fourth territory that Trump had suggested the U.S. take over (Greenland, Panama Canal and Canada.) That was less than 12 hours after Trump first floated the idea.
Too much Trump
Bernadette Buchanan wrote on Jan. 21: I really love NPR. However, I cannot deal with Trump on every title. Can we just have a corner for just his stuff and people can click in there if they want to know what he is spouting today. There are so many other topics that need to be discussed that are actually happening. … Please. For the love of God. Just create something like “Presidential Corner” and people can go there and see all those blood pressure rising topics.
Laura Heshorin wrote on Jan. 27: I am an avid listener and very much appreciate all that you do. I appreciate the accurate reporting, detail, and analysis. I have a favor to ask. Could you please stop playing snippets of Donald Trump’s voice? I understand you need to report the news. I do not want this man’s face or voice in my home. I would appreciate being able to hear the news without having to listen to him. Thank you for understanding.
We included these last two questions in this week's newsletter to demonstrate the range of audience responses to the onslaught of government news. It is not possible to compartmentalize the coverage or eliminate Trump's voice. He's the president of the United States and he keeps saying and doing things that merit scrutiny.
Consumers who are overwhelmed do have options. Rather than turning on the radio, skip the news shows and go straight to podcasts and curate your own news feed.
NPR does strive to sprinkle bright spots into Morning Edition and All Things Considered. You'll find even more of these stories on the weekend installments of these shows. But for the foreseeable future, Trump's forceful attempts to reshape the American government, as well as the ensuing fallout, are going to dominate the news.
Recognizing that many people are limiting or avoiding news, and that some want everything in one place to digest at one time, NPR has created a Friday morning Week in Review conversation with senior political correspondent Domenico Montanaro. "We did that last week, and it got a huge audience response," Marrapodi said.
Weekend Edition Saturday host Scott Simon regularly does a Week in Politics conversation with senior political correspondent Ron Elving.
Finding these roundups is challenging, though, particularly on NPR's app. In addition to covering the news, NPR has to figure out how to deliver the right products to the right consumers. If you want politics all the time or most of the time, you simply have to turn on the news.
But consumers who want small portions have to work harder. Marrapodi promised that more improvements are coming. This is the place where NPR must step up and innovate. A significant portion of the audience wants a regular and efficient digest of the developments of this administration. In addition to creating such a thing, NPR must figure out how to deliver it to the people who want it. — Kelly McBride, with research from Amaris Castillo and Nicole Slaughter Graham
The Office of the Public Editor is a team. Reporters Amaris Castillo and Nicole Slaughter Graham and copy editor Merrill Perlman make this newsletter possible. Illustrations are by Carlos Carmonamedina. We are still reading all of your messages on Instagram, Facebook, Threads and from our inbox. As always, keep them coming.
Kelly McBride
NPR Public Editor
Chair, Craig Newmark Center for Ethics & Leadership at the Poynter Institute
Copyright 2025 NPR
