Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(168,372 posts)
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 11:57 AM Yesterday

Noem faces GOP heat over $220M ad that boosted 'your name recognition'

Source: The Hill

03/03/26 11:46 AM ET


Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday was met with skepticism from Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), who argued during a hearing that a more than $200 million ad campaign was primarily “effective in your name recognition.”

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) last February announced the ad campaign, which features Noem telling migrants to go home or face deportation. A firm with ties to Noem and her former spokeswoman received the contract, which was awarded after skirting the competitive bidding process. The exchange Tuesday marked unusual pushback from a member of the president’s party against the spending of a Cabinet official, with Kennedy suggesting the video was done to promote Noem rather than the Trump agenda and put the president “in a terribly awkward spot.”

“The president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” Kennedy asked. Noem told the audience at last year’s Conservative Political Action Conference that President Trump had asked her to craft the ad to thank him for his work at the border. “He said, ‘I want the first ad, I want you to thank me. I want you to thank me for closing the border.’ I said, ‘Yes, sir. I will thank you for closing the border,’” Noem said last year.

“To me, it puts the president in a terribly awkward spot. I’m not saying you’re not telling the truth,” Kennedy said during the questioning. “It’s just hard for me to believe, knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them’ that he would have agreed to that.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5764784-kristi-noem-kennedy-ad-campaign/





Waste. Fraud. Abuse.
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Noem faces GOP heat over $220M ad that boosted 'your name recognition' (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Yesterday OP
Hey Rs, stop going after the little guys and hold TSF to account. Nt spooky3 Yesterday #1
WHy would the government run ANY ads to promote itself? Bluetus 23 hrs ago #2
"But you don't pay for PSAs. They have always been part of the public interest." BumRushDaShow 22 hrs ago #3
True. And that can be a gray area. Bluetus 22 hrs ago #4
It's not a gray area. BumRushDaShow 21 hrs ago #7
Do you have a point you are trying to make? Bluetus 20 hrs ago #8
I am in complete agreement about the purpose of PSAs BumRushDaShow 20 hrs ago #9
I don't have a big issue with the taxpayers funding some work on messaging Bluetus 19 hrs ago #10
Oh I agree BumRushDaShow 19 hrs ago #11
As they say, we are in "violent agreement". :) Bluetus 19 hrs ago #12
It's what fascist dictatorships do......... AZ8theist 21 hrs ago #6
DHS has so much money that 220 million looks like pocket change to her. patphil 21 hrs ago #5

Bluetus

(2,631 posts)
2. WHy would the government run ANY ads to promote itself?
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 12:22 PM
23 hrs ago

Many agencies run PSAs that provide helpful public service with safety messages or programs that are available to help people with needs. But you don't pay for PSAs. They have always been part of the public interest. That certainly applies to over-the-air media, but it ought to apply equally to ALL media channels.

It sounds like we need comprehensive new laws that define the responsibility of media companies of all types to provide public service as a condition of their right to operate in the public space. And that ought to have very strong guidelines of how PSAs can be presented to be a legitimate public service and not gaslighting.

And not a single taxpayer dollar for agencies or individuals to promote themselves. After all, there are plenty of free opportunities for agencies to make their case on the Press the Meat programs.

I am surprised by, and appreciate, Kennedy's point of view on this. But he didn't take it nearly far enough.

BumRushDaShow

(168,372 posts)
3. "But you don't pay for PSAs. They have always been part of the public interest."
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 01:29 PM
22 hrs ago

The government contracts (pays) companies to create those PSAs and that includes putting out RFPs for "Voice Actors" etc.

Bluetus

(2,631 posts)
4. True. And that can be a gray area.
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 01:34 PM
22 hrs ago

But generally speaking, agencies don't pay for the PSA placements.

BumRushDaShow

(168,372 posts)
7. It's not a gray area.
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 02:50 PM
21 hrs ago

The taxpayers pay for the creation of the PSAs and stations are welcomed to use them (and log their use per the FCC). However many broadcasters would prefer to use that time for paid advertisers but will use the PSAs for "filler" when there is no other spot scheduled.

Bluetus

(2,631 posts)
8. Do you have a point you are trying to make?
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 03:42 PM
20 hrs ago

I simply said that PSAs are normally aired for free. And that PUBLIC SERVICE messages are the only kind of advertising any government agency should be doing. Anything beyond that steps into the world of fascism and authoritarianism.

BumRushDaShow

(168,372 posts)
9. I am in complete agreement about the purpose of PSAs
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 03:47 PM
20 hrs ago

(I worked for 4 years at my college radio station and actually used to generate/record PSAs on carts for the station and when I was on the air, would air them and had to log them in a logbook).

My only issue was your one sentence in your original post -

But you don't pay for PSAs.


And for federal PSAs, it comes out of taxpayer money for the benefit of the country.

Bluetus

(2,631 posts)
10. I don't have a big issue with the taxpayers funding some work on messaging
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 04:36 PM
19 hrs ago

But that is a slippery slope. If HHS is going out with a message to get your flu shot, I don't mind that involving a professional agency that can help the PSA be effective.

Same for seat belts, smoking, drug abuse, food safety,, wild fires and a wide swath of public service messages.

That is fundamentally different from Noem promoting herself or Trump pushing her to put out an ad saying "Biden let murderers and rapists in willy nilly, but I alone have closed the borders." If we ever get past Trump, we need a new era of laws that set some boundaries, and these laws need to apply to all the major media, not just the 3 networks that were important 60 years ago.

BumRushDaShow

(168,372 posts)
11. Oh I agree
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 04:46 PM
19 hrs ago

That is why she was read the riot act from of all people, Sen. John Kennedy (R) of LA. And he can be a nasty ass too.

She WASTED almost $300 million of taxpayer money on spreading BULLSHIT.

patphil

(8,942 posts)
5. DHS has so much money that 220 million looks like pocket change to her.
Tue Mar 3, 2026, 02:45 PM
21 hrs ago

I'm gonna miss her smirky smile and Barbie cosplay wardrobe when she's finally gone.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Noem faces GOP heat over ...