Key Takeaways:

• Trump and Musk have amplified false claims about Politico receiving substantial funding from USAID.
• Politico clarified it has never received government subsidies, with payments only for subscription services.
• White House plans to cancel government subscriptions to multiple media outlets, including Politico.
• Disagreements on media funding highlight underlying political tensions and conspiracy theories.

The political landscape is heating up as former President Trump and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) draw attention to a conspiracy theory alleging that mainstream media outlets, particularly Politico, have been financially buoyed by U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) funds. Recently, Trump claimed that millions of taxpayer dollars had been diverted to support "fake news," singling out Politico, which he asserted received $8 million. This assertion has faced significant backlash and fact-checking, revealing the intricacies behind federal spending on media subscriptions.

According to reports including CBS News, the figure cited by Trump mischaracterizes actual payments made by federal agencies. The USAspending.gov platform indicates that while government bodies collectively spent more than $8 million on subscriptions to Politico, only $24,000 of that amount came directly from USAID for the current fiscal year. The remaining funds reflect standard subscription model payments—similar to those made to various news outlets, including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

In a memo to staff, Politico’s CEO, Goli Sheikholeslami, and Global Editor-in-Chief, John Harris, emphasized that the organization had "never been a beneficiary of government programs or subsidies," rejecting Trump's assertions. They pointed out that most of Politico's funding stems from private sector subscriptions. This clarification follows a wave of right-wing commentary surrounding Politico, particularly after the company reportedly faced payroll issues, further fueling speculation and conspiracy narratives.

The White House, through press secretary Karoline Leavitt, has announced efforts to terminate these media subscriptions as part of a broader campaign to cut perceived wasteful spending attributed to agencies like USAID. Leavitt remarked, "I can confirm that the more than $8 million in taxpayer dollars have gone to essentially subsidizing subscriptions to Politico," thereby catching the attention of both media and political watchers alike.

With Trump's recent comments suggesting a larger scandal, the situation raises significant concerns regarding the intersection of political agendas and the media landscape. Social media has acted as a catalyst, enabling unfounded theories to circulate rapidly. Critics point out the potential consequences of such actions by Musk and the Trump administration, who appear set on reevaluating government contracts to major media outlets without comprehensive scrutiny of their implications.

As the administration continues to challenge traditional funding for mainstream news organizations, it remains unclear whether future actions will affect other media entities similarly. Across the spectrum, Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike have used subscriptions to news organizations for their office's information needs, illustrating that the discourse surrounding Politico is part of a larger debate about media funding and political bias in reporting.

For further detailed coverage, you can read more on South China Morning Post, Newsweek, and Vox.