Sydney Lohr 

Since 1970, PBS has brought engaging and educational television to homes across America. From Sesame Street to Arthur, its programs have shaped childhoods and delivered a strong cultural influence across generations. But today, a crucial question emerges: what happens to Big Bird if federal funding disappears? 

When the House approved President Trump’s cuts to public broadcasting back in July, major debate erupted whether PBS could stay afloat without federal support. While the network isn’t entirely government-funded, local stations depend heavily on that money. For millions of viewers, especially those in rural areas, losing government funding could mean losing access to free educational television.  

How PBS Gets Its Funding 

Unlike other TV networks, PBS does not rely on commercials for its funding. Instead, it is supported by viewer donations, corporate sponsorships, foundation grants, and federal funding. Even though federal support accounts for just 15% of PBS’s overall budget, for local stations, this percentage often determines whether they can stay on air or shut down. To put it in perspective, this funding makes up less than one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget, yet it provides millions of Americans with access to educational television. 

Trump-Era Controversy 

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which provides federal support to PBS and NPR, has been under scrutiny since President Trump took office in 2017. During his first term, the administration proposed eliminating federal funding for the CPB entirely, but the proposal failed after Congress reached a budget deal that spared CPB from federal defunding. However, the debate resurfaced after Trump took office again earlier this year, with proposals to cut $1.1 billion from CPB’s budget. These cuts would have had a significant impact on local stations that rely on federal support to stay afloat. As of July 2025, federal funding for CPB has been eliminated, leaving PBS and other public broadcasting outlets to seek other sources of funding while facing an undetermined future. 

The response to the proposals and subsequent defunding has been overwhelmingly strong. PBS leaders, station managers, and educators have expressed concern that eliminating federal funding could force stations to cancel children’s programming, art shows, documentaries, and local educational content. For many communities that rely on free public broadcasting, this could mean fewer educational resources for people of all ages. Supporters for the cuts, particularly those in the White House and among some Republicans, argue that public broadcasting should not be funded with taxpayer dollars, claiming it can promote biased or unnecessary content. Critics also note that public broadcasting may be less essential today, given the immense availability of educational content on social media and streaming platforms that do not require government funding. Still, Americans who hold sentimental ties to PBS or depend on it in underfunded areas view its programs as vital educational and cultural resources. 

Impact on Programs and Communities 

Across the country, PBS stations are already feeling the impact of federal funding cuts. Local stations have been forced to reduce hours, lay off staff, or cancel programs that have educated and entertained generations. Shows like Sesame Street, Arthur, and Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood reruns are in jeopardy. Documentaries, arts programs, and local news segments that serve rural communities are also at risk. Families in low-income communities are particularly vulnerable, as families in these regions often rely on federally funded broadcast television like PBS for educational content that might not be available elsewhere. Beyond content loss, many also see this as a cultural setback. PBS programs have been cherished for decades because of their ability to shape childhoods and foster curiosity across all ages.  

Takeaways 

The future of PBS currently remains uncertain. Federal funding cuts have put treasured programs at risk, leaving educators, families, local stations, and communities uncertain about what comes next. While supporters of the cuts argue that taxpayers should not fund biased media, many Americans see PBS as more than a TV network, but as an indispensable educational resource. PBS serves as a source of programming that reaches children and adults who might not have access to this resource elsewhere. As PBS adapts to new funding challenges, the question remains: what happens to Big Bird and the millions of viewers who have grown up learning alongside him?