Public universities donate millions to anti-Trump news site

A news outlet promising academic neutrality has received millions of taxpayer-backed dollars while publishing articles often attacking Donald Trump, according to a new report.

The Conversation, a nonprofit website republishing academic commentary as news, says it provides a “fact-based and editorially independent forum, free of commercial or political bias.”

However, the College Fix found otherwise.

Between Jan. 9 and Feb. 14 this year, the outlet published 53 articles about the former and current president as he prepared to return to the White House. Roughly 60% of those were negative, while none were explicitly positive.

The report found the frequent use of terms such as “dictator,” “authoritarian,” “bully” or “fascist.”

In one example, the Conversation highlighted its role in educating the public about how “autocrats” operate, directly referring to Trump.

“The Conversation U.S. has published several articles – many from Donald Trump’s first term as president – that spell out how autocrats, and those who want to be autocrats, behave and why,” The Conversation editor Jeff Inglis wrote.

Colleges help prop up this outlet. The Fix obtained records showing universities collectively contribute more than $2 million per year, accounting for about a quarter of The Conversation’s funding.

Michigan State University and West Virginia University each gave $45,000 in 2025. Previous years show payments in the $35,000 to $45,000 range from schools such as Boise State University and Arizona State University.

In total, at least 52 public universities have donated to the site.

When asked for comment, executive editor Beth Daley told the College Fix that The Conversation “is a nonprofit organization, with its funders (universities, foundations, individuals) listed on its website.”

She added the outlet has a “commitment to editorial independence” and a “non-partisan mission.”

But media experts say the outlet should take the criticism seriously.

“The Conversation plays a role in the journalistic sphere by providing a platform for college and university analysts/commentators who don’t write for traditional media outlets,” DePauw University Professor Jeffrey McCall said.

“But given the supposed non-partisan philosophy of ‘The Conversation,’ it would behoove them to provide a balanced range of input and perspectives, and to avoid abstract and hostile language such as ‘fascist’ and ‘bully.’

“Any bias at ‘The Conversation’ is a reflection of the mindset held today on most college campuses. That doesn’t excuse any possible bias, but it would seem to explain it.”

McCall concluded by saying if the outlet cannot live up to its stated mission, “it should rebrand as a left-of-center news outlet and transparently acknowledge to the public its true mission.”