“I don’t know that that’s actually going to happen,” Vance told reporters on October 9. He also said he would not watch if officials broadcast the execution.

His remarks came one day after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced plans to make Hasan’s December 3 execution by firing squad available for public viewing. The Pentagon had confirmed the livestream plan, but Vance’s comments raised questions about whether it would proceed.

The debate concerns the proposed broadcast, not an announced change to the execution itself. President Donald Trump has supported the death sentence and the use of a firing squad, but his position on the livestream has remained unclear.

Vance questions the broadcast

Vance said the controversy over the execution should not overshadow the crimes Hasan committed. He reminded reporters that Hasan killed 13 people and wounded 32 others in the 2009 shooting at Fort Hood, Texas.

However, the vice president expressed doubt about making the execution available to the public. He said he would not watch if the Pentagon went ahead with the broadcast.

Vance’s comments do not amount to a formal cancellation of the plan. The White House referred questions about the livestream to the Pentagon, leaving the department responsible for clarifying whether the proposal would proceed.

Trump separately reiterated his support for Hasan’s execution by firing squad. However, he did not clearly settle the question of whether the public would be able to watch it live.

Catholic leaders and lawmakers object

The proposed broadcast has drawn criticism from both Republicans and Democrats. Some lawmakers have questioned whether showing an execution to the public would serve a legitimate purpose or turn capital punishment into a spectacle.

Archbishop Paul S. Coakley, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, also called on the government to reconsider the plan. He described the proposed livestream as a promotion of a “culture of death.”

The Catholic Church opposes capital punishment, making the proposal especially contentious among Catholic leaders and officials who support the death penalty in some circumstances.

Critics have also raised concerns about how a public execution could be used by extremist groups for propaganda. Others have questioned whether broadcasting the event would provide meaningful transparency or simply expose viewers to graphic violence.

These objections concern the public broadcast and its possible consequences. They do not change Hasan’s conviction or automatically alter the military’s execution arrangements.

Pentagon faces questions over public access

Hegseth announced the livestream as part of the Pentagon’s plan for Hasan’s execution. However, questions remain about how the broadcast would work, who would have access and whether television networks or online platforms could carry the footage.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr said the decision over whether to air the execution would be left to the Pentagon. Legal experts have questioned whether the FCC could prohibit broadcasters from showing the event, particularly given the legal issues surrounding government control of broadcast content.

The proposed livestream also raises questions about the limits of public access to military executions. Military authorities have not routinely made such proceedings available to a broad public audience.

The Pentagon has not publicly resolved all the operational and legal questions surrounding the proposed broadcast. Vance’s remarks add political uncertainty, but the department’s formal position will determine whether the plan changes.

Hasan remains scheduled for execution

Hasan, a former Army psychiatrist and US Army major, was convicted by a military court in 2013 for the Fort Hood shooting. The attack killed 13 people and wounded 32 others.

His scheduled December 3 execution would be the first US military execution since 1961. It would also be the first execution by firing squad in the US military since 1945.

The execution remains a separate matter from the proposed livestream. Vance questioned the broadcast but did not announce that the death sentence would be withdrawn or postponed.

For now, the key unanswered question is whether the Pentagon will proceed with its plan to make the execution available for public viewing. Until officials clarify that decision, the livestream should be described as proposed rather than guaranteed.

Reporting Credit: Office of the Vice President of the United States; US Department of Defense; Federal Communications Commission; US Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The post Vance Questions Pentagon Plan to Livestream Nidal Hasan’s Execution appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

BBC Director-General Tim Davie and News and Current Affairs CEO Deborah Turness both announced their departures on Sunday after mounting pressure over the editing of a Trump address featured in a BBC documentary.

The controversy centers on a segment of Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech — delivered shortly before his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol — which critics claim was edited in a misleading way that omitted his call for supporters to “peacefully” demonstrate.

Leadership Accountability and Institutional Responsibility

In a letter to BBC staff, Davie, who led the corporation for five years, said his decision to step down was made independently.

“Overall, the BBC is delivering well, but there have been some mistakes made and as director-general, I have to take ultimate responsibility,” Davie wrote. He added that he would coordinate with the BBC Board to ensure “an orderly transition to a successor over the coming months.”

Turness, who had led BBC News since 2022, also cited the growing impact of the controversy. “The situation has reached a stage where it is causing damage to the BBC — an institution that I love,” she said in a message to staff. “In public life, leaders need to be fully accountable, and that is why I am stepping down.”

She emphasized, however, that “recent allegations that BBC News is institutionally biased are wrong,” acknowledging that “mistakes have been made” but rejecting broader claims of systemic prejudice.

Political Fallout and Trump’s Reaction

The issue gained international traction after Trump shared a link on his Truth Social platform to a Daily Telegraph article criticizing the BBC’s edit. In his post, Trump thanked the newspaper “for exposing these Corrupt ‘Journalists,’” calling the editing “a terrible thing for Democracy.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt weighed in on X (formerly Twitter), posting an image juxtaposing headlines about Trump’s criticism of the BBC and Davie’s resignation, captioned “shot” and “chaser.”

The incident has become the latest flashpoint in the former president’s ongoing campaign against major news outlets, which he frequently labels as “fake news.”

Mounting Pressure and Broader Scrutiny of the BBC

The controversy escalated after The Telegraph published portions of an internal review compiled by communications consultant Michael Prescott, who was hired to advise the BBC on editorial standards and impartiality.

The review not only raised concerns about the Trump documentary but also criticized the broadcaster’s coverage of transgender issues and alleged bias against Israel within its Arabic-language service.

The BBC — founded in 1922 and funded primarily through a public license fee — has long faced political and media scrutiny due to its dual role as both a national institution and an independent news organization. Every UK household with a television pays £174.50 (about $230) annually to support the broadcaster’s operations.

A National Institution Under Pressure

The BBC’s vast programming spans entertainment, sports, and educational content across television, radio, and digital platforms. Yet its news division remains its most controversial arm, frequently accused of bias from across the political spectrum.

Conservative politicians often allege a left-leaning agenda, while some liberal critics claim the broadcaster has drifted toward conservative viewpoints.

In recent months, the BBC has also faced criticism for its coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza. In February, the broadcaster removed a documentary after reports surfaced that its child narrator was related to a Hamas official.

Political Reactions in the United Kingdom

The leadership departures triggered swift responses from across the UK political landscape. Kemi Badenoch, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, accused the BBC of “institutional bias” and called for “genuine reform of the culture of the BBC, top to bottom.”

Meanwhile, Lisa Nandy, the minister responsible for media under Britain’s centre-left Labour government, thanked Davie for his service and reaffirmed the government’s support for the broadcaster.

“Now more than ever, the need for trusted news and high-quality programming is essential to our democratic and cultural life,” Nandy said. “The government will continue to ensure the BBC remains at the heart of national life for decades to come.”

Future of the BBC and Public Trust

The resignations mark a pivotal moment for the 103-year-old broadcaster, whose reputation for impartiality and public trust has been a cornerstone of its global influence.

Analysts say the twin resignations underscore the challenges facing publicly funded media in an era of political polarization, misinformation, and social media scrutiny.

As the BBC begins its search for new leadership, questions remain over how it will navigate the delicate balance between accountability, transparency, and editorial independence in a rapidly evolving media environment.

Source: AP News – Top BBC bosses resign after criticism of the broadcaster’s editing of a Trump speech

The post BBC Director-General and News Chief Resign Amid Controversy Over Trump Speech Editing appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a sharp rebuke Friday, PBS CEO Paula Kerger called former President Donald Trump’s latest executive order cutting federal funding to PBS and NPR “blatantly unlawful” and a direct threat to public access to educational programming.

Kerger said the order endangers PBS’s mission to serve the American public—a role it’s played for over five decades.

“We are currently exploring all options to allow PBS to continue to serve our member stations and all Americans,” she added.

Trump signed the order late Thursday, accusing PBS and NPR of spreading “radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.’” The directive instructs federal agencies and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) to halt all funding to the public media giants and investigate any indirect public support they might receive.

The White House amplified the move on social media, stating that taxpayer money should not fund what it labeled biased media content.

In response, the CPB, which channels federal funds to local PBS and NPR stations, argued that it isn’t a federal agency and therefore not subject to the president’s directive. Just days earlier, Trump attempted to remove three of the CPB’s remaining five board members—a move the CPB swiftly challenged in court, saying it would paralyze the organization’s ability to function.

While PBS and NPR are national networks, most of the public funding flows directly to hundreds of local affiliate stations, many of which operate in small or rural communities. These stations often rely heavily on a mix of public funds, donations, and philanthropic grants to stay on the air. Experts warn that Trump’s proposal could cripple the smaller stations most dependent on federal support.

Although public broadcasting has faced repeated budget threats from Republican leaders over the years, local support often helped it weather those storms—few lawmakers want to be blamed for killing off a station in their own district. But many insiders view this current effort as the most serious existential threat the public media system has ever faced.

The funding cut is the latest in a string of aggressive moves by Trump’s administration to clamp down on institutions he perceives as hostile or left-leaning. Since taking office for a second term in January, Trump has removed leadership from major cultural institutions, including the Kennedy Center and the National Endowment for the Humanities, slashed arts and education grants, and sought to punish universities and law firms promoting diversity initiatives.

Just two weeks ago, the White House previewed a $9.1 billion package of proposed cuts—one that includes defunding the CPB altogether. That proposal has yet to be formally introduced in Congress.

Trump’s administration is also targeting U.S.-funded international news agencies like Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, once seen as global models of independent journalism. Efforts to dismantle these outlets have sparked legal battles, with federal courts pushing back and suggesting that the administration may be exceeding its authority by withholding congressionally approved funding.

Source: AP News – PBS chief decries Trump’s executive order directing federal funding cuts to PBS and NPR as unlawful

The post PBS Chief Blasts Trump’s Order to Cut Public Media Funding appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.