Arizona State U. shells out $125,000 to anti-Trump news site
ANALYSIS
Arizona State University is a regular financial contributor to a news site that is heavily anti-Trump and biased against the pro-life point of view.
The taxpayer-funded university has paid The Conversation at least $125,000 in membership fees according to records obtained by The College Fix via a public records request. The university gave the website $40,000 in both 2023 and 2024 and another $45,000 in 2025. This is the normal membership fee, as previously determined by The Fix.
The Conversation, which promises “academic rigor” with “journalistic flair,” has a history of imbalanced coverage. Prior research from The Fix found about half of the website’s coverage of President Trump is negative with little to no positive stories.
Nearly all the publication’s stories about abortion are from a pro-choice point of view, as The Fix previously reported. The decade-old publication receives around $2 million per year from public universities and other fees from private colleges and other supporters.
The payments ensure articles authored by Arizona State professors are published. Among these include stories about “white nationalism” and why “white people” are “bother[ed]” by Mexican flags flying at immigration protests.
Still, the university says the partnership is not about advancing political ideology.
“Additionally, and to clarify, support for The Conversation is limited to enabling ASU scholars to share peer-reviewed, evidence-based research in an editorially independent forum, not to advance any political ideology,” the university told The Fix when it provided the documents.
The university said the partnership does not dictate what faculty write, nor does it represent a formal endorsement of every article published on the website. “ASU supports academic freedom across the full spectrum of ideas,” a spokesman said, explaining that faculty participation on the site is voluntary.
The Fix also asked if the university has considered other media partnerships that represent a broader range of the political spectrum, as well as if ASU reviews the collective political balance of the articles published by its faculty on the platform to ensure it aligns with the university’s commitment to diverse perspectives.
The media relations team did not address this question.
‘ASU cannot justify this expenditure,’ scholar says
However, a well-published social scientist said the school is wrong to give money to a biased publication.
“ASU cannot justify this expenditure,” Catholic University of America Professor Michael New told The Fix.
“Ideological bias aside, I consider The Conversation a relatively low-visibility website,” New wrote. “I fail to see how this expenditure either raises the stature of ASU faculty or would increase applications to ASU.”
New said there are “far better ways to promote ASU than giving $125,000” to what he considers to be a “niche website.”
Professor New raised additional concerns regarding the platform’s ideological balance, noting that while the website focuses on evidence-based research, it can still reflect specific political leanings on sensitive issues.
“Taxpayer dollars from hardworking Arizona residents should not be going to publications with clear ideological or political point of view,” New said, suggesting that public institutions should remain neutral in their media subsidies.
He would like to see a ban on state funds being used to subsidize private media.
While he said that he does not believe The Conversation to be radical, “it does have a liberal bias on some issues.
Politics are clearly at play, he said.
“You would never see a public university pay a substantial sum of money to a conservative website.”
MORE: Public universities shouldn’t subsidize anti-Trump news sites
Post a Comment